Flight plans

[RogerD]

Re-reading the computer programming rules from LBB2, it occurs to me there could be an interesting plot point here. What is the window in space-time for which the flight plan purchased at the starport or produced by the Generate program valid?

Space combat could really throw a wrench in the flight plan. Maintaining your flight plan could end up seriously restricting your movement or invalidating the flight plan, depending on the answer to this question.

An example tolerance would be 1 space combat turn (1000s), within 100mm (10,000km). Any variance from that would prevent jump or perhaps would increase chance of misjump?

If you wanted to give yourself margin for error, you would have a reason to decelerate before jump, so you can arrive early and wait for the actual jump time...

 

[Spinward Scout]

From Wikipedia for Flight Plans:

Flight planning is the process of producing a flight plan to describe a proposed aircraft flight. It involves two safety-critical aspects: fuel calculation, to ensure that the aircraft can safely reach the destination, and compliance with air traffic control requirements, to minimize the risk of midair collision. In addition, flight planners normally wish to minimise flight cost through the appropriate choice of route, height, and speed, and by loading the minimum necessary fuel on board. Air Traffic Services (ATS) use the completed flight plan for separation of aircraft in air traffic management services, including tracking and finding lost aircraft, during search and rescue (SAR) missions.

So a fueled ship would have enough fuel for months.

And as I was reminded recently:

Space is big. Really big.

The chance of collision would be higher in well used traffic lanes, around free fuel (Gas Giants, Oceans, etc...), and common landing areas, I guess. But anywhere else, the chance is astronomical to run into someone else unless it's intentional.

You can wait to run Generate until just before Jumping, so I wouldn't think the information from it would be necessary in a Flight Plan - just the name of the Destination.

I don't think many Traffic Control Towers are going to care once a ship is outside the 100 diameter limit.

It's a neat idea, tho. Extra fluff for the Players, at least.

 

[kilemall]

The jump is calculated to be at one specific point in space, x minutes from the generate.

It can be right where the ship is if at zero vee, or a point in space x minutes away at present vee.

Increased chance for misjump the further away you are from that point at the time jump is initiated.

 

[Grav_Moped]

The jump is calculated to be at one specific point in space, x minutes from the generate.

It can be right where the ship is if at zero vee, or a point in space x minutes away at present vee.

Increased chance for misjump the further away you are from that point at the time jump is initiated.

And Nav skill allows manual adjustments/corrections for those spatial/temporal variations.

While logic would indicate computers would be better at this, RPG sensibilities suggest there's an intuitive component that machines can't match (otherwise, why put a human into the loop in the first place?)

 

[kilemall]

And Nav skill allows manual adjustments/corrections for those spatial/temporal variations.

While logic would indicate computers would be better at this, RPG sensibilities suggest there's an intuitive component that machines can't match (otherwise, why put a human into the loop in the first place?)

Also a human judgement of risk management- I envision it like a WWII bombing run, navigator takes over the controls to get jump insertion just right, while possibly under fire or escaping a solar flare.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

An example tolerance would be 1 space combat turn (1000s), within 100mm (10,000km). Any variance from that would prevent jump or perhaps would increase chance of misjump?

I run something like that, but a bit more lenient: DM+1 on misjump for every hour off, or unspecified distance from the calculated jump point.

Any decent Pilot or Navigator should be able to hit that on the run without slowing down.

 

[Baroun Tardis]

And Nav skill allows manual adjustments/corrections for those spatial/temporal variations.

While logic would indicate computers would be better at this, RPG sensibilities suggest there's an intuitive component that machines can't match (otherwise, why put a human into the loop in the first place?)

I really like T5's rules for this
The Nav task is (number of parsecs)d6 <= Computer TL or (Int or Edu)+Nav skill
One of the dice is hidden, rolled by the GM

Any ship can reliably generate a plot for Jump-1. You gotta be running at least a TL6 computer, right?
TL-12 ships are reliable at Jump-2. They can make the nav computation just fine.
TL9 and TL-10 ships, those merchant workhorses... they could have issues with J2. A sophont navigator with INT-10 and Nav-2 would make things safer.
Jump-3? Even TL-16 ships have issues. But an Edu-12 with Nav-6 at the console makes things safe.
Jump-4? X-boats rely on using multiple computer cores, with slightly different approaches to the problem and then take the option that the majority of the cores agree on. (Which you can do with the other ships, provided your computer isn't busy with other things)

 

[RogerD]

In the LBB2 computer rules I find it interesting what the other programs pertaining to jump are and the skills needed to write them. You need Generate, Navigation and the Jump program for the distance you want to go. All of them require Computer skill to write of course. All of them also require Navigation. Interestingly, the Jump programs require Pilot as well.

Both Jump and Navigation programs are required for the jump.

Interestingly, the Navigation program is not needed for maneuvering operations. It is only needed for Jump.

Writing the program seems to be the only usage of Navigation skill except that it qualifies you for the Navigator job. The skill description also calls out that it is used for sensors but all sensor operations are automatic in classic traveller.

 

[Spinward Flow]

"Flying through hyperspace ain't like dusting crops, boy!"
- Han Solo, A New Hope

 

[frankm]

It would seem that the further away you are from your initial plot point, the more difficult (impossible?) a jump would be. That's why the navigator, pilot, and engineer have to make rolls to get the energy levels, vector, and timing just right. Still, 'close' in space is a relative term; if jump points were actually points a high traffic trade route might have a serious issue. A negative DM for jumping in combat seems a simple solution to a real problem.

 

[whartung]

I dunno, do freighter and other sea going vessels file "cruise plans" or anything like that? Anything formal out side of alerting headquarters, so they can let someone know that their boat is missing after it doesn't report in for some period of time?

I honestly don't know that the regulatory need is for airplane flight plans. I know the FAA tracks them, dunno if it's just for statistics or what.

 

[Spinward Flow]

I honestly don't know that the regulatory need is for airplane flight plans. I know the FAA tracks them, dunno if it's just for statistics or what.

 

[RogerD]

I dunno, do freighter and other sea going vessels file "cruise plans" or anything like that? Anything formal out side of alerting headquarters, so they can let someone know that their boat is missing after it doesn't report in for some period of time?

I honestly don't know that the regulatory need is for airplane flight plans. I know the FAA tracks them, dunno if it's just for statistics or what.

There are two kinds of flight plans.

The ones I brought up in the original post are the directions that are fed into the navigation program to follow.

Filing a flight plan with the authorities is a different kind of thing, but important. It would be wise to file one with at least the basics of your itinerary as far as you know it and update it as you go. Each starport would track arrivals and report them through the usual courier and X-boat communications routes. Flight plans would be communicated in the same way. When a ship was expected in a system and it turns out they never arrived, that fact would get noted and a search could be performed. For exploratory voyages you would have at least an idea of where to look.

There are some adventure seeds possible here:
* The Beowulf never arrived in Regina, and its last known location was Knorbes and she was expected in Forboldn. Where is she? Does she need rescue or salvage?
* Pirates would love to get the flight plans to plan where to attack the Beowulf. Under false pretenses, they hire the party to hack in to the flight plan database and find her planned path.
* The players want to get away from the authorities. How can they evade the tracking system?
* To approach Ruie legally you have to file a flight plan and wait for it to arrive or you will be boarded, detained and if you're lucky sent on your way.

I'm sure there's more ideas you could come up with. The other kind is actually less exciting from a role-playing POV.

 

[Condottiere]

Depends.

You can probably drop in at Mos Eisley at any time.

Coruscant would need a planned approach and prior notification.

 

[Spinward Flow]

You can probably drop in at Mos Eisley at any time.

Coruscant would need a planned approach and prior notification.

What you're talking about there is the difference between Controlled and Uncontrolled airspace.

Controlled airspace "has a tower" with people in it who are in charge of monitoring and controlling (from the ground) what moves where (and when) within that airspace. This is almost always the case with "congested" locations (such as heavy traffic airports), so ground control handles the job of deconfliction so you don't get mid-air collisions (always bad!). Controlled airspace tends to have an "upside down wedding cake" shape to it.

Uncontrolled airspace is ... everywhere else. There isn't enough air traffic routinely flying through that volume, so the opportunities for a mid-air collision with another craft are minimal.

Spoiler alert:
Pilots actually prefer airports WITHOUT a tower(!) so they don't have to radio ground control in order to "do stuff" in and around the airport ... because there just isn't that much traffic in the area, so no ground control needed.

 

[Condottiere]

Never saw Han file one; but then again, wouldn't trust his bill of lading, either.

 

[RogerD]

Certainly the legal requirement to file a flight plan and the level of enforcement will be different based on lots of factors. Starport type, law level and population are key ones. I would expect you to be able to file one at any class D and up. You might be required to in order to depart an A. Of course you can lie or change your mind if you want to.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Flight plans are "really only necessary" for flying on instruments (IFR), because you can't necessarily "just look out the window" and see other craft (or the ground). For visual flight rules (VFR) where you CAN see the space around your craft directly, you can still file a flight plan, but it's completely unnecessary in almost all cases.

Think of a flight plan as being akin to taking the train "in the riding on rails" sense ... while flying without a flight plan is more like "going for a stroll around the neighborhood" kind of thing without a pre-plot of your route pre-recorded. Flight plans are useful for Search & Rescue efforts, in the event of mishap or when a plane goes missing (to help narrow the search area) but they're not required for VFR condition flying.

Of course, Hollywood writers have completely blown the entire "didn't file a flight plan" plot point totally out of proportion in order to amp up the perceived "drama" that not filing a flight plan supposedly entails. The simple truth is that MOST VFR aircraft flights do not involve a filing of a flight plan, while almost all IFR flights require them (because you can't just look out the window to see stuff and have to fly on instruments only).

Note that instruments only flying can involve anything from darkness of night to foggy conditions that reduce visibility below a certain threshold.

 

[kilemall]

Flight plans are "really only necessary" for flying on instruments (IFR), because you can't necessarily "just look out the window" and see other craft (or the ground). For visual flight rules (VFR) where you CAN see the space around your craft directly, you can still file a flight plan, but it's completely unnecessary in almost all cases.

Think of a flight plan as being akin to taking the train "in the riding on rails" sense ... while flying without a flight plan is more like "going for a stroll around the neighborhood" kind of thing without a pre-plot of your route pre-recorded. Flight plans are useful for Search & Rescue efforts, in the event of mishap or when a plane goes missing (to help narrow the search area) but they're not required for VFR condition flying.

Of course, Hollywood writers have completely blown the entire "didn't file a flight plan" plot point totally out of proportion in order to amp up the perceived "drama" that not filing a flight plan supposedly entails. The simple truth is that MOST VFR aircraft flights do not involve a filing of a flight plan, while almost all IFR flights require them (because you can't just look out the window to see stuff and have to fly on instruments only).

Note that instruments only flying can involve anything from darkness of night to foggy conditions that reduce visibility below a certain threshold.

May I point out that the bulk of the flight threats will be happening outside of visual and at velocities that won’t allow for strictly visual reactions. Once in atmosphere it all slows down, but I would still expect a good deal of instrument flight.

 

[Spinward Flow]

May I point out that the bulk of the flight threats will be happening outside of visual and at velocities that won’t allow for strictly visual reactions. Once in atmosphere it all slows down, but I would still expect a good deal of instrument flight.

In an orbital context ... if you can SEE another craft, you may be too close (unless you intend to dock with the other craft).

In the context of orbital flight, it's safer to assume that everything is "instruments flying" in almost all circumstances. Visual flight verification is an important factor in docking maneuvers, however.

A lot of that is a function of SPACE IS BIG and space weather is a very different beast than atmospheric weather.