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.

> That's a lot of mass. Try moving 400 mass which includes a lot of

Depends. You've already got system ships to escort it out to jump point, and
if no one else has FTL warships you've a reasonable chance at the colony
arriving at destination without interference.

And if you're shipping out dissidents, you might not mind very much if an
opposing power blows them up.

G'day again,

--> What would that be? England has a low pop
> growth now. I'd guess that it might be what -

Its about 59.5 million as of July 2000. Gives them roughly 65 million by

2130s so if Albion matches that then in the 2180s it should have about 200
million if its rate of growth doesn't decline, as little as half of that if it
does. The thing with populations is it all depends on the timing of the
changes in technology and growth rates, if they suddenly get a boost when
they've just hit the exponential part of the curve then you'll see a mammoth
explosion in a very short time.

Cheers

Beth

> > What would that be? England has a low pop

No it isn't. The United Kingdom has a population of 59.5 million at the
present (estimated, census is next year). England only has 49.75 million at
the present.

Okay, pendantry over with.

G'day Steve,

> No it isn't. The United Kingdom

I stand corrected;)

Beth