IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Running on empty, Next gas station how many miles?
Talia Invierno
post Oct 17 2003, 07:56 PM
Post #1


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Joined: 5-June 03
Member No.: 4,689



I've noticed fuel economy doesn't seem to be a priority among many Dumpshockers when modifying their vehicles.

How do you deal with the costs and availability of acquiring fuels of various kinds?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Shadow
post Oct 17 2003, 08:12 PM
Post #2


Why oh why didn't I take the blue pill.
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,545
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Gloomy Boise Idaho
Member No.: 2,006



Probably because most of the games take place in the city, and gass stations/recharging station arn't to far away. Not to mention Sunlink and City Grid backup systems for just cruising around so that you don't have to burn fuel.

Generally speaking though in my game, I factor fuel into the lifestyle for the mont. Unless they do a lot of cruising then I might make them pay for it, about 4nuyen a gallon.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Talia Invierno
post Oct 18 2003, 03:36 PM
Post #3


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Joined: 5-June 03
Member No.: 4,689



Judging from the replies on this board, a good third of the runs involve going well outside The City ... which should theoretically bring up the question.

And then there's those who listed aircraft as their favourite mode of transportation - surely fuel availability and cost would be relevant?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RangerJoe
post Oct 18 2003, 03:56 PM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 749
Joined: 22-June 02
From: Parts Without
Member No.: 2,897



A good point. You'd be surprised how far you can and cannot go over open/wild terrain with only three 55-gallon fuel drums in the back bed.

"Wilderness" runs like these make for some great role-playing opportunities when "city" runners are expected to cut it as "wilderness" runners. ("But you said there was a sign indicating the next gas station was in 35 miles. We've gone 35 miles! What do you mean it's not there anymore? He sign was how old?")

As a related comment, it would be rather interesting, I think, if riggers could attempt a control roll to "improve economy." Sure, the actual energy output of an engine is limited by a number of technical factors, but surely through smart materials/subtly altering the vehicle's profile/reducing energy flow to a variety of non-essential systems/etc. a rigger could squeeze a few more clicks out of a T-bird that's running on vapors, no?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Crusher Bob
post Oct 18 2003, 04:04 PM
Post #5


Runner
******

Group: Members
Posts: 2,598
Joined: 15-March 03
From: Hong Kong
Member No.: 4,253



For a car this can be pretty easy doing things like shifting gears at the most economical time, running at the most economical speed, avoiding breaking (and thus the need to rev the engine again) and so on. With aircraft there are a few less tricks. For planes, they typically have an optimun angle of attack, engine RPM, and altitude for fuel economy. I am not really sure about choppers, though there may be a few tricks. For vectored thrust vehicles, it would involve staying close enough to the ground ( ~ less than 10 feet) to get a 'lift effect' from air 'reflecting' off the ground.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Oct 18 2003, 06:31 PM
Post #6


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 16,950
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



I get 1,300 klicks from a single tank; as long as I keep it topped off when I can, I have nothing to worry about.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Seville
post Oct 19 2003, 01:08 AM
Post #7


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 73
Joined: 18-October 03
Member No.: 5,737



I have never gotten as satisfying a glare from one of my players as when I told him that, after his character "drove non-stop west from Denver, and won't stop for any reason," he ran out of gas on Highway 24 somewhere in the Rocky Mountains. Maybe it was worse because I decided that in my SR world, the ski resorts had long since closed up when the caucasians got out of Pueblo. So out of gas, in a snow storm, in the middle of the Rockies, because he decided not to check his economy.

It was really satisfying.

On a side note, any pilot is trained to be very aware of his or her fuel. You can't pull over on the side of the road in a plane. The only time a plane has too much fuel is when its on fire.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Oct 19 2003, 01:19 AM
Post #8


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 16,950
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



Or when it's too heavy to land on a short strip.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
thunderchild
post Oct 19 2003, 01:19 PM
Post #9


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 262
Joined: 26-February 02
From: A wreched hive of scum and villany.
Member No.: 1,479



I house ruled that all 2060 cars had a readout of "projected milage at worst fuel consumption based on current petrol level" but i also enforced it with an iron fist.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Athenor
post Oct 19 2003, 01:33 PM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 223
Joined: 26-February 02
Member No.: 1,067



When I've run, the playerws have been really good about their upkeep on all their equipment; they are far too paranoid to do anything less.

In my mind, the economy stuff is there more for long-haul smuggling or fleeing attempts. After all, even though Seattle is huge, it is relatively well-stocked for commuters.

One thing I do enforce heavily, though, is fuel economy on drones. Cuz those suckers can't go anywhere near as far, and they do have an idle economy.

Athenor
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Talia Invierno
post Nov 3 2003, 07:54 PM
Post #11


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Joined: 5-June 03
Member No.: 4,689



Upkeep, standard city driving included in lifestyle, and drone fuel economy have been mentioned - but this still doesn't cover the cross-country trips and possible dearth of accessible fuelling stations. (They could well be armoured and otherwise protected even more heavily than banks!)

Pilots and truckers may be trained to be aware of their fuel - but where and how do T-bird smugglers and other illicit types get it? and how much do they pay? I'd assume that isn't covered in upkeep or lifestyle! (That VTOL took up how much of our fuel reserve?) Is there (or should there be) a distinction between price or availability of multifuel v. standard IC? If not, why would anyone choose the multifuel option?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nezumi
post Nov 3 2003, 08:49 PM
Post #12


Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet;
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,546
Joined: 24-October 03
From: DeeCee, U.S.
Member No.: 5,760



I never really bother with gas. I'm not keen on getting my game down to the level of 'okay, now I'm tying my shoes... now I'm doing my belt and zipping up my pants...' MAYBE if they said something stupid like Seville's player or if they were REALLY going out in the booneys and I had asked for a detailed equipment list... but who enjoys calculating their gas mileage? Might as well ask them to balance their checkbooks.

I'd like to contradict Bob back there about planes. With passenger planes especially, it's pretty easy to save a lot of gas. Extend your flaps and you can slow your engine well below normal stall speed. You'll get there a lot slower, but you'll get a lot farther too, since you're now more of a glider than a plane.

VTOL would be a different matter, since, from what I understand, the ONLY form of force keeping the craft going in the right direction is its own power. A helicopter can 'glide' but only for a few minutes, if its lucky. I don't think a t-bird could even manage that.

I'd assume t-birds and what not use the same power sources as aircraft. While airplane fuel is expensive and not something you see advertised often, I don't think it would be too hard to get. I don't believe it's a restrict substance, and there's going to be plenty of people who are willing to sell it to whoever has money, especially now that society isn't based on gas guzzling like it once was. It'll be a lot harder than buying car gas, but once you get the system set up it shouldn't be much harder than buying anything else illegally. Of course, I know nothing at all about purchasing aircraft fuel, so this is only an educated guess.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Nov 3 2003, 10:12 PM
Post #13


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 16,950
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



A T-Bird can glide much the same way a brick does.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Talia Invierno
post Nov 3 2003, 10:16 PM
Post #14


Shooting Target
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1,677
Joined: 5-June 03
Member No.: 4,689



QUOTE
now that society  isn't based on gas guzzling like it once was.
- nezumi

Interesting statement. On what do you base that?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nezumi
post Nov 3 2003, 10:38 PM
Post #15


Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet;
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,546
Joined: 24-October 03
From: DeeCee, U.S.
Member No.: 5,760



I base it on the fact that most of the basic consumer cars listed in either of the books are electric or use methol. We'd still use oil for plastics and what not, and granted I'm totally ignoring the third world. However, since we've been producing electric cars for thirty years, more or less, I'd wager that the average Joe (here or overseas) doesn't use gas any more. Throw in that engines have been getting more fuel efficient over the last hundred years and I have no question that it'll continue too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RangerJoe
post Nov 3 2003, 11:48 PM
Post #16


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 749
Joined: 22-June 02
From: Parts Without
Member No.: 2,897



An interesting bit of sociology and economics, nezumi. Oil is seldom mentioned as a hot commodity in sourcebooks, no? Though it is certainly present as a fuel source, there seem to be much larger economic issues at stake than oil.

Or, given that in 2000 the Earth had about 40 years of oil (at current consumption rates) of moderately-easily exploitable reserves left, maybe by 2063 society has become less gas-guzzling out of neccessity. *Goes about his geological way*
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
thunderchild
post Nov 4 2003, 02:57 AM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 262
Joined: 26-February 02
From: A wreched hive of scum and villany.
Member No.: 1,479



QUOTE (nezumi @ Nov 3 2003, 10:38 PM)
I base it on the fact that most of the basic consumer cars listed in either of the books are electric or use methol.  We'd still use oil for plastics and what not, and granted I'm totally ignoring the third world.  However, since we've been producing electric cars for thirty years, more or less, I'd wager that the average Joe (here or overseas) doesn't use gas any more.  Throw in that engines have been getting more fuel efficient over the last hundred years and I have no question that it'll continue too.

Apparently you are blind, for somehow you cant see all the SUV's rolling around city streets of the world.

Hummer H2
Chevy Trailblazer
Ford Explorer
the V8 Lexus SUV


even motorcycle manufacturers are sucumbing to the sickness, 20 years ago a 600cc motorcycle was a respectable touring machine and the 1000cc + harleys were considered huge, now according to a good portion of the motorcycling comunity you need a 1800 cc lay-z-boy on wheels Honda Goldwing to go further than down to the pub.

I ride a 250cc for day to day use, my 750cc is FECKING HUGE as far as im concerned and im buying a 1.6 litre Suzuki Sierra for my offroad needs, and as far as im concerned, 1.6 litres is AMPLE for offroading. if you need bigger you need more skill.

In 2060 the tiny cheapo commuter specials will be mostly friendly, but there will always be a group of pricks who need the biggest fossil fuel guzzling engine possible, and they will INSIST on using them for just nipping down to the shops.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Nov 4 2003, 03:11 AM
Post #18


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 16,950
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



Right, but the difference being that the pool of jerks who can afford to do that will be much smaller.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Seville
post Nov 4 2003, 04:14 AM
Post #19


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 73
Joined: 18-October 03
Member No.: 5,737



Some more aircraft fuel management info:

The sensors on some aircraft can be notoriously inaccurate. One of the biggest reasons is that when you have large fuel tanks and mechanical sensors on a fast moving vehicle, the sensors just don't work well when they get low. Now, some planes have other, more accurate measurements, but really, most pilots that I know don't have any great trust for fuel gauges.

Instead, fuel is measured in terms of time as well as gallons (or pounds). A lot of pilots of jet aircraft will set power (i.e. set the throttles) by their fuel-flow gages because it is less variable and responds almost immediately to pilot inputs. This results in most jet pilots will have a relatively good idea of how much fuel they should have burned in x amount of time, how much they should have left, and will trust their own numbers if the gauges seem to be malfunctioning (although one would usually err to the more conservative number). On larger airplanes, such as Fred (the C-5), the flight engineer checks all 12 fuel tanks (hundreds of thousands of pounds of fuel) regularly, and constantly monitors it against the charts for fuel consumption at altitude. On the B-52, the co-pilot does this. On smaller, single engine aircraft, they have forms that say exactly how much they should have a certain point.

Regardless, running out of fuel in an airplane will ruin your day, unless your flying a small prop that can land in a farmer's field. By the way, helo's can't glide, they autorotate to slow their descent rate immediately before impact. T-Bird (although aerodynamically not possible) would likewise glide like a brick.

Finally, all aircraft have a maximum L/D which maximizes endurance (or range, depending on the type of engine). Regardless, every tech order or owners manual will tell you how to achieve max endurance, and you would never put flaps out to get there (too much drag. I don't know, airplanes are crazy things, there might be a plane out there that maximizes endurance at a partial flap setting, but it would be the exception, not the rule). Flaps can increase lift, but usually what they do is lower the stall speed, and change the chordline of the plane for visibility. However, they generally add more drag than they do lift, which is why you need more power with flaps extended. Most planes climb (in terms of altitude vs. distance) flaps, but again, an increase in drag will result in a loss of airspeed, but also an increase in lift at that airspeed, resulting in a steeper climb.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
thunderchild
post Nov 4 2003, 09:02 AM
Post #20


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 262
Joined: 26-February 02
From: A wreched hive of scum and villany.
Member No.: 1,479



QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Right, but the difference being that the pool of jerks who can afford to do that will be much smaller.

~J

somehow i think not.

corp bigwigs who need a weekend vehicle and their will be corp brats who absolutely NEED one incase they venture into somewhere with rough pavement and will do anything to convince their parents of it. Middleclass men who feel they need to own a big petrol guzzler to be sucessful. and everyone else who manages to justify needing a 2 ton war truk to pick up groceries.

They will never go away.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Nov 4 2003, 01:39 PM
Post #21


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 16,950
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



But if the price of maintaining one increases significantly, the middle class men won't be able to afford it unless they desperately need to send the lion's share of their paycheck into compensation for small size elsewhere, leaving the wealthy as the most common owners.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr. Man
post Nov 4 2003, 05:52 PM
Post #22


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 313
Joined: 26-February 02
From: UCAS
Member No.: 1,015



QUOTE (Seville)
The sensors on some aircraft can be notoriously inaccurate.

QUOTE
Instead, fuel is measured in terms of time as well as gallons

QUOTE
the flight engineer checks fuel tanks regularly, and constantly monitors it against the charts for fuel consumption at altitude

QUOTE
On the B-52, the co-pilot does this.  On smaller, single engine aircraft, they have forms that say exactly how much they should have a certain point.

Wouldn't this all (for the most part) be automated or not an issue in SR though? I don't know the rigger rules too well, but a rigger's relationship with their vehicle is generally described as very personal (body parts "becoming" vehicle parts, etc.) If keeping track of fuel in aircraft can be a tricky business today I would imagine it to be one of the first things incorporated into, simplified and made more accurate by rigging.

QUOTE
By the way, helo's can't glide, they autorotate to slow their descent rate immediately before impact.


That reminds me of How to survive a helicopter mishap. Advice that almost certainly applies even to fancy SR 'copters.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
RangerJoe
post Nov 4 2003, 06:26 PM
Post #23


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 749
Joined: 22-June 02
From: Parts Without
Member No.: 2,897



When I think of the rigger's relationship with a vehicle, I cannot help that fuel could only be felt two ways:

1) You know when you're hungry... and when you're really, really, really hungry.

2) Sort of like physical exhaustion with a long run-- not limb pain, but fatigue, to the point that you can run no more.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mr. Man
post Nov 4 2003, 08:17 PM
Post #24


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 313
Joined: 26-February 02
From: UCAS
Member No.: 1,015



Well there obviously has to be a readout on a simulated HUD involved ("I was distracted from flying the plane by my intense hunger" doesn't make a good crash excuse).

I'm just saying that considering the state of sensor technology for things outside the vehicle that monitoring fuel would seem to be comparatively simple.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Nov 4 2003, 08:29 PM
Post #25


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 16,950
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



I'm not sure that it would necessarily translate as hunger; more there would be a new sensation of... not having fuel or something.
Gah. We need VCRs.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st June 2023 - 05:00 PM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.