Alternate Starport Codes Jeff Zeitlin (22 Aug 2020 18:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Thomas RUX (22 Aug 2020 23:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Jeff Zeitlin (23 Aug 2020 22:24 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes kaladorn@xxxxxx (23 Aug 2020 04:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Jeff Zeitlin (23 Aug 2020 23:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes kaladorn@xxxxxx (25 Aug 2020 00:17 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Jeff Zeitlin (25 Aug 2020 11:02 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Phil Pugliese (25 Aug 2020 03:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Thomas Jones-Low (25 Aug 2020 04:16 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Rupert Boleyn (25 Aug 2020 04:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes kaladorn@xxxxxx (25 Aug 2020 05:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Kelly St. Clair (25 Aug 2020 07:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Timothy Collinson (25 Aug 2020 09:46 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Alex Goodwin (25 Aug 2020 15:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Timothy Collinson (25 Aug 2020 15:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Alex Goodwin (25 Aug 2020 15:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Timothy Collinson (25 Aug 2020 15:59 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Postmark (25 Aug 2020 19:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Jeff Zeitlin (25 Aug 2020 15:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Timothy Collinson (25 Aug 2020 16:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Alex Goodwin (25 Aug 2020 16:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Jeff Zeitlin (25 Aug 2020 17:06 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes kaladorn@xxxxxx (25 Aug 2020 18:39 UTC)
[TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) Kelly St. Clair (26 Aug 2020 05:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs Kelly St. Clair (26 Aug 2020 05:28 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs Kelly St. Clair (26 Aug 2020 05:36 UTC)
Last Century Game (was: UWPs) David Johnson (27 Aug 2020 00:40 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game (was: UWPs) kaladorn@xxxxxx (27 Aug 2020 02:56 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game (was: UWPs) David Johnson (28 Aug 2020 03:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game (was: UWPs) kaladorn@xxxxxx (28 Aug 2020 04:19 UTC)
(missing)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game (was: UWPs) Thomas RUX (28 Aug 2020 13:39 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game (was: UWPs) David Johnson (29 Aug 2020 03:37 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game (was: UWPs) kaladorn@xxxxxx (29 Aug 2020 05:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game (was: UWPs) David Johnson (29 Aug 2020 18:17 UTC)
(missing)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Kelly St. Clair (30 Aug 2020 20:02 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts kaladorn@xxxxxx (30 Aug 2020 20:44 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Jeff Zeitlin (30 Aug 2020 21:11 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Phil Pugliese (30 Aug 2020 21:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts David Johnson (30 Aug 2020 22:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Rupert Boleyn (31 Aug 2020 00:39 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Thomas Jones-Low (30 Aug 2020 20:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Jeff Zeitlin (30 Aug 2020 21:12 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts David Johnson (30 Aug 2020 23:07 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Phil Pugliese (30 Aug 2020 23:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Rupert Boleyn (31 Aug 2020 00:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Rupert Boleyn (06 Sep 2020 02:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Kenneth Barns (06 Sep 2020 11:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Timothy Collinson (06 Sep 2020 11:40 UTC)
Re: [TML] Balkanization and other Book 3 Gov'ts Jim Catchpole (06 Sep 2020 12:15 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game (was: UWPs) David Johnson (01 Sep 2020 01:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game Hubert Figuiere (28 Aug 2020 15:39 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game Phil Pugliese (28 Aug 2020 16:11 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game Timothy Collinson (28 Aug 2020 16:39 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game Jeff Zeitlin (28 Aug 2020 16:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] Last Century Game kaladorn@xxxxxx (28 Aug 2020 17:43 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs kaladorn@xxxxxx (26 Aug 2020 06:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs Phil Pugliese (26 Aug 2020 17:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs kaladorn@xxxxxx (27 Aug 2020 02:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) kaladorn@xxxxxx (26 Aug 2020 06:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) Christopher Sean Hilton (27 Aug 2020 16:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) Christopher Sean Hilton (27 Aug 2020 16:37 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) kaladorn@xxxxxx (27 Aug 2020 17:03 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) David Johnson (28 Aug 2020 03:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) Timothy Collinson (28 Aug 2020 10:30 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs Thomas Jones-Low (28 Aug 2020 12:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs Christopher Sean Hilton (28 Aug 2020 15:46 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs kaladorn@xxxxxx (28 Aug 2020 16:19 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs Timothy Collinson (28 Aug 2020 16:50 UTC)
When RPG's become CRPG's... Phil Pugliese (28 Aug 2020 22:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] When RPG's become CRPG's... Thomas RUX (29 Aug 2020 23:02 UTC)
Re: [TML] When RPG's become CRPG's... Thomas RUX (29 Aug 2020 23:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] When RPG's become CRPG's... Phil Pugliese (30 Aug 2020 00:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] When RPG's become CRPG's... Thomas RUX (30 Aug 2020 02:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] When RPG's become CRPG's... Phil Pugliese (29 Aug 2020 23:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] When RPG's become CRPG's... Hubert Figuiere (30 Aug 2020 00:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] When RPG's become CRPG's... Thomas RUX (30 Aug 2020 02:56 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) David Johnson (29 Aug 2020 03:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) kaladorn@xxxxxx (29 Aug 2020 05:08 UTC)
Sig file (was: UWPs) David Johnson (30 Aug 2020 03:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] Sig file (was: UWPs) kaladorn@xxxxxx (30 Aug 2020 04:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] UWPs (was: Alternate Starport Codes) Timothy Collinson (31 Aug 2020 10:13 UTC)
Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes kaladorn@xxxxxx (25 Aug 2020 05:50 UTC)

Re: [TML] Alternate Starport Codes Thomas RUX 22 Aug 2020 23:52 UTC

Hello Jeff Zeitlin,

> On 08/22/2020 11:52 AM Jeff Zeitlin <xxxxxx@freelancetraveller.com> wrote:
>
>
> It's been noted that the meanings of the lower classes of starport code in
> the UWP has varied over time.
>
> Based on my recollection of the generalized meaning of each code, and
> taking into account at least one major change that has occurred, I propose
> the following mild modification of the UWP starport codes:

The only Starport Type code that, as far as I can tell, has varied is for Type X. The variation occurred in CT LBB 6 Scouts and carried over to MT and TNE.

T4, T20, and T5 returned to the Starport definitions originally printed in CT LBB 3 1977/1981.

GT Core Rule Book p. 123 converts CT Type X to Class 0 and refers you to GURPS Space p. 171, which is actually found on p. 97.

MgT Core Rule Book 2e appears to be based on CT LBB 3.

>
> I should note that given my "druthers", I would _not_ assume that a
> shipyard was part of the starport. However, the standard does, so...
>
> (This should probably be read in association with my article "Extending the
> UWP: Starports", Freelance Traveller, May 2013rp, and
> http://www.freelancetraveller.com/features/rules/expuwp/starports.html)

Thank you for the link and nice work.
>
> CODES FOR DESIGNATED MAIN STARPORT IN A SYSTEM:
> A: Best class of starport. All facilities for both goods and passengers are
>    available, at the best quality. The associated shipyard is capable of
>    building jump-capable ships. Both orbital and ground components exist.
>
> B: Very Good starport; all facilities for both goods and passegers are
>    available, but only at "good" quality, not necessarily the best (think
>    local 'chrome diner' rather than Chateau Nez-retroussé, for example).
>    The associated shipyard can build spacecraft, but not jump-capable
>    ships. Both orbital and ground components exist.
>
> C: Adequate starport. Most basic facilities for goods and passengers are
>    available, but probably of indifferent quality (e.g., McDonald's, not
>    the local 'chrome diner'), and some of the more specialized services
>    (e.g., special environment handling) are not available. Refined fuel may
>    not be available. There is no associated shipyard, and an orbital
>    component may not exist.
>
> D: Minimal starport. Basic facilities for goods and passengers may have
>    some omissions, which must be filled in by visiting ships, if they're
>    needed at all. There is no associated shipyard, refined fuel won't be
>    available, and even unrefined fuel may only be available through "raw
>    sourcing" (e.g., sucking it up directly from a lake in the
>    extraterritoriality zone, rather than from cleaned tanked water).
>
> E: Marked Landing Area, known to be solid enough to support a starship. No
>    facilities. No associated shipyard. No formal availability of fuel, but
>    if there's a lake, river, or seashore in the extraterritoritality zone,
>    feel free.
>
> X: INTERDICTED. Landing forbidden. Facilities unknown or irrelevant. Should
>    be accompanied by a TAS Red Zone indication.

Comparing the Spinward Marches Sector Map on the inside cover of the MT Players Manual shows Victoria as a red zone with a starport type X and travellermap.com shows Victoria having a type D which is using T5.

>
> NEW CODE:
> 0: No defined landing area, but world is not interdicted. No facilities.
>    Use this code instead of X if the UWP does not include a TAS Red Zone
>    indication.

I agree that 0 would be appropriate there is no indication that a port of any type is present.

>
> NEW CODES FOR SUBORDINATE STARPORTS IN A SYSTEM:
> 1: Equivalent to Class A or B. May not have a shipyard, but will have
>    repair facilities matching those of the main starport. This replaces the
>    "spaceport" code of F.
>
> 2: Equivalent to Class C. This replaces the "spaceport" code of G.
>
> 3: Equivalent to Class D or E. This replaces the "spaceport" code of H.
>
> Z: Subordinate starport known to exist, but access forbidden, regardless of
>    main port classification. (e.g., in systems with Naval bases, the
>    presence of a separate base starport is noted with this code; if the
>    base uses a segregated area of the main port, the main port code is
>    reported.) NOTE: THIS IS NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR THE "SPACEPORT" CODE OF
>    Y; I NOW CONSIDER THAT CODE TO BE MEANINGLESS - USE CODE 0 INSTEAD.

I'm still pondering this section.

Tom Rux