population modelling, a la Brian

Brian Spake <My replies denoted by --> >: 

Looking at the Future History of the GZG universe, I think that the rush
=
to colonization was a land-grab/power projection move.

--> That is a possible interpretation. 

It was only 6 years from the launching of the trans-solar probe to the
fi=
rst colony ships (only 2 from the first manned trip). 2062-2069.

--> Probably because by then we had "system space" travel well in hand,
so
all that was required was fitting a warp drive to a ship, not such a big
deal. I'm surprised it was six years! 

It was only 1 more year until all of the major powers (and some minor
powers) had launched colony ships (LLAR being the exception). 2070.

--> Consisting of what? Colony ships by name. Neither of us can really
say
if this was 10 guys and a hab bubble whose sole purpose was to claim the
land or a 10,000 person fledgling colony with full support. What would
the
outer limits here be? I don't know. I suspect the first colony ships
might
well be in the 100-500 person range. That'd be my guess. You wouldn't
want
to risk large numbers of science types - the people you'd send to these
early colonies and you wouldn't have enough experience to make
colonizing
very safe and sure. So I suspect these were more "political" than
practical,
more like a live-in research base. 

Then it is 6 years until the first combat starship (the HMS Thunderer)
is
launched. 2076.

--> Again, probably had system combat ships, just did a refit. Or maybe
the
new drive required them to fit out a new hull. Six years is reasonable
in
that case, but it isn't blisteringly fast. 

Even by 2102, the European Space Force consists of mainly in-system
ships and "very few" FTL-capable ships.

--> Still a suggestion that FTL travel in this period was no joke
technically or economically. 

I imagine that these colony ships are either:
A) Reusable as components for the colony
 or
B) Leave all but the bridge and engines at the colony for resources.

--> But the point is, even if they were, they represent (I'd guess) a
large
investment on behalf of the colonizing power - both in terms of
resources
and in terms of economics. If we assume that one mass devoted to cargo
holds
25 cargo spaces/points and that a marine takes 4 CS in "up and awake"
mode a
1 CS in cryo sleep, you're still talking about 40 Mass to move 1000
people
with very little or no large scale kit. And I'm not even sure these
numbers
are in line with the rules of the game (FT construction rules). And if
we
figure that the populations mass is probably at best 10% of the mass of
a
colony project, then we're looking at 400 mass to establish 1000 people.
That's a lot of mass. Try moving 400 mass which includes a lot of stuff
and
tell me the enemies you have won't be interested in that.... <heh heh>.
So
you have to protect it. Not only do you need the mass for people and for
kit
(and you need to pay for it) but your Navy has to run escort duty (as
you
said, it is a time of turmoil....). 

The colonists would have traveled in cryogenic sleep to save space.
Also,
artificial gravity for decks was not implemented until 2104 (MSS
Windsor).

--> Sure, though not sure what that means to this discussion. I always
assumed cold sleep for colonists. I started figuring out the cargo space
it
took to move a division (5000 men plus vehicles and supplies for a month
or
two) and came up with some very very large numbers. This told me a lot
about
the chances of moving 1,000,000 people to a colony. VERY expensive and
requires a lot of cargo mass. Very lucrative target (lots of $ tied up
in
bloated defenceless ships). 

It only takes 37 years for the population of Albion to match that of
England. (That's what 2 generations?).

--> What would that be? England has a low pop growth now. I'd guess that
it
might be what - maybe 90-100 million by then? Isn't it around 60 or 70
now?
That's a lot of people. But I understand this was a massive effort in
terms
of what it took the NAC to undertake it, which suggests if they were
putting
say 50% of their colonization efforts here, then the rest combined would
only equal it. 

--> This depends on England of that period. It could even have a smaller
pop
than today. 

If you look at the money, manpower, and expense that went into the=20
"space race" to the Moon, it is not hard to imagine what would be spent
to claim the stars before the other powers do.

--> But claiming the stars only takes a token presence by the military.
Small colonies. You don't NEED to have millions of people on a world to
claim it. 

This colonization time is a time of strife on the Earth. Big powers are
eating up small powers and grabbing all the land they can. There is war
on
most
of the continents. There has even been use of nuclear weapons (against
Israel). This would provide great impetus to multiply a power's holding
among the stars (numbers survival strategy).=20

--> Au contraire, mon frere. I think we've seen that in times of strife,
people want everything for themselves. You think the NAC public would
pay
for big space programs? They'd be concerned about national defence,
dealing
with population issues, handling rioting soccer hooligans, etc. People
have
shown that when things are happening in the world, they can be amazingly
focused in the here and now. Now, would it be a priority for the gov'ts
to
stake their claims and make claims about how many colonies they have?
Yeah
sure, that's national pride. But they can be small and fulfill the same
goal. And politicians (if they're afraid of being killed by war) may be
spending the money on bigger fleets, more wazoo war tech, or bunkers....
not
colonies that cost them money but don't protect THEIR arses. 

In addition, colonies can:
 - Provide rare materials

--> Potentially yes. Including rare diseases and such so this is both a
benefit and a risk. 

 - Provide food away from the irradiated areas on earth

--> Depending how many Garden worlds there are. If shipping the
colonists is
expensive, shipping their food will be too. The cost of the good would
be
high enough that it would be questionable how much of this reaches
anyone
but the rich on earth. 

 - Provide relief from overpopulation

--> See my comments on mass. Given the fleet sizes in the game, we can
makes
some assumptions about how much could be involved in colony ship
protection
and work backwards to some ideas about the amount of freight transfer
(of
all types, only some of which will be colonists) could occur - the
numbers
don't favour high rate colonization I don't think. Getting billions of
people off earth is a non-trivial feat. 

 - Increase the taxable population

--> Hmmm - taxing colonies just getting started? Not in any simulation
I've
ever played. They usually require the input of money/support for the
first N
(at least 10) years. This is long term goal and most modern political
systems are myopic. 

 - Provide military bases (and support for forward forces)

--> No argument here. Though I don't need a population for this really. 

 - Provide tariff income (company store scenario)

--> Oh good, now we rook the colonists too. And who were we sending out
there voluntarily?

 - Increase the power's status in the UN (We represent over 100 worlds!)

--> It would do that if a bunch of these colonies didn't tell them to
sod
off as I suspect is likely. But lets say they probably are in favor of
this.

 - Provide maximum security prisons

--> Hmmm. Yes, and I'm thinking that this might be problematic in many
nations. Not all, mind. 

 - Provide sweatshops (you don't work? You don't eat!)

--> Ah more forced emigration. Clearly the ESU should dominate space. 

 - Provide new medicinal resources

--> Agreed. 

--> Most of these don't require a large off earth movement of population
though. I can tax people on earth or off. I can establish presence
without a
huge population. I can do the science perhaps better without a colony in
the
way. I don't have to defend a colony that is small with as much force.
Hence
it is cheaper. 

--> There is no fact, barring Jon speaking and he is very quiet (I think
he
just likes to watch a good row myself). There are only multiple opinions
-
but all sides seem to have some good points and counterpoints. The
GZGverse
is an individualized beast apparently. 

------------------------------------------
Thomas R. S. Barclay
Voice: (613) 722-3232 ext 349
e-mail: tomb@bitheads.com

------------------------------------------