Schlepping: Type-8 vs Type-9

[Brieus]

Since I've been doing more schlepping than usual with the colonization thing, I figured I'd do some empirical testing on efficiency of T-8 vs T-9. I've got mine set up with comparable jump ranges, thanks to the Titan SCO drives, and Guardian FSD boosters.
My T-8 carries 384 tons, vs 724 in the T-9, so 51% of the capacity. The installation I'm working on now would require 9 trips with the T-9 vs 18 trips with the T-8. Not counting the stuff I need to get from a planetary port and there's no way I'm landing a T-9 if I can help it.

From my system to the source system that has almost everything, it is 2 jumps out, 3 jumps back. It takes ~15 minutes to make a round trip with the T-9, so 135 minutes. 10 minutes with the T-8 for 180 minutes. So theoretically I'd save almost an hour using the T-9, but that doesn't count the time spent in the hospital after I have brain aneurysm from flying that POS pizza box.

btw, I've figured out if I blast past the construction platform, then throttle down for auto-dock, I haven't run into the rotary impeller. Yet.

P.S. It's Mel 111 Sector RT-R b4-1 if anybody feels like wasting a little time

Mel 111 Sector RT-R b4-1 - star system | Elite:Dangerous | INARA

The companion site for Elite:Dangerous with the game database, market data, trade routes, outfitting, engineers, blueprints, crafting, Thargoid war, squadrons, logbooks, galleries, galaxy information and much more...

inara.cz

 

[BL1P]

Landing at a Outpost is also faster than landing at a Station. (for me anyway)
Which depending on what you are doing can make a mssive diffrence.
Might not be helpful for you atm but might be nice info for future.

 

[DjVortex]

My T-8 carries 384 tons, vs 724 in the T-9, so 51% of the capacity.

Btw, the Type-8 can carry 406 tons and the Type-9 can carry 790 tons. I'd wager that you'll get more transported per hour if you dedicate all the optional module space to cargo racks, even if it means 10 Ly less jump range because of the lack of the FSD booster.

Maybe you might want to redo your test in that manner.

If you have access to the Imperial Cutter, try it too. It's a very temperamental ship (much more so than the Type-9) but it's more maneuverable. (And if you don't yet have access to it, well, there's an idea for your next goal... )

 

[PilotB]

Since loading screens, supercruise and charge times don't change too much between mediums and large ships. I find it 2-3 times more efficient to use a large over the t8 for loading until you get to a point where jump range starts being a factor.

 

[Surprize960]

So theoretically I'd save almost an hour using the T-9, but that doesn't count the time spent in the hospital after I have brain aneurysm from flying that POS pizza box.

As always, the answer is the Corvette, the best freighter in the game

34 LY laden 45 LY unladen, 600 tons unshielded.

 

[Nidoboros]

As always, the answer is the Corvette, the best freighter in the game

34 LY laden 45 LY unladen, 600 tons unshielded.

Get you a not even fully engineered Cutter that is 41 LY laden, 57 unladen, 688 tons with shields.

 

[Surprize960]

Get you a not even fully engineered Cutter that is 41 LY laden, 57 unladen, 688 tons with shields.

Mine has 712 . But the Corvette simply flies light years better than the Cutter, especially with SCO. (That‘s what the OP was getting at, I think).

 

[Mr Lindsay]

For Colonisation I do think using a mix of ships is a good way to do it. I've been using both my Type-8 (at 320T, FSD Booster) and my Cutter (at 720T, no FSD Booster).
I use the Cutter for all the High Volume stuff, where I know I'm going to be able to collect a full load every time, and switch to the Type-8 for hopping around for all the fiddly little quantities, or where the best place to collect from is a Medium Pad.

Makes cargo running a bit more interesting when you have things to think about when deciding which is the most efficient way to get a particular commodity, rather than doing it all with a single-ship that only gives you one 'correct' answer.

 

[Cmdr Snuffler]

I'm doing the cg at the moment. ⁷With gank proof ships, t8 320t and t9 with 610t, the t8 is faster as I can dock at an outpost rather than a planet port.
Plus t9 is more prone to being hit my fsd disabling torps...so for me, the current cg, in open...t8 all the way.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

Btw, the Type-8 can carry 406 tons and the Type-9 can carry 790 tons. I'd wager that you'll get more transported per hour if you dedicate all the optional module space to cargo racks, even if it means 10 Ly less jump range because of the lack of the FSD booster.

Maybe you might want to redo your test in that manner.

If you have access to the Imperial Cutter, try it too. It's a very temperamental ship (much more so than the Type-9) but it's more maneuverable. (And if you don't yet have access to it, well, there's an idea for your next goal... )

Never run unshielded... T8 384 tonnes, T9 752 tonnes.
If you don't have the cutter already there's absolutely no point in grinding for it.

 

[Neilski]

Since I've been doing more schlepping than usual with the colonization thing, I figured I'd do some empirical testing on efficiency of T-8 vs T-9. I've got mine set up with comparable jump ranges, thanks to the Titan SCO drives, and Guardian FSD boosters.
My T-8 carries 384 tons, vs 724 in the T-9, so 51% of the capacity. The installation I'm working on now would require 9 trips with the T-9 vs 18 trips with the T-8. Not counting the stuff I need to get from a planetary port and there's no way I'm landing a T-9 if I can help it.

From my system to the source system that has almost everything, it is 2 jumps out, 3 jumps back. It takes ~15 minutes to make a round trip with the T-9, so 135 minutes. 10 minutes with the T-8 for 180 minutes. So theoretically I'd save almost an hour using the T-9, but that doesn't count the time spent in the hospital after I have brain aneurysm from flying that POS pizza box.

LOL. I actually fly my T9 a lot, and I've become used to its... characteristics. A space freighter doesn't need to feel like a fighter plane after all
Does your T9 have 7A DD drives? They do help to mitigate the sloooowness.
To my great surprise, for reasons I can't quite understand I kinda prefer my T9 to my Cutter...

 

[DjVortex]

Never run unshielded... T8 384 tonnes, T9 752 tonnes.

What do you need shields for?

NPC interdictions are very easy to evade even in a Type-9. If you for some reason are playing in open, to gankers the shields are just a very minor slowdown (I highly doubt you'll be escaping a ganker with a Type-9 no matter how many shields you have). And if you are constantly colliding with things, well... git gud?

 

[Walter2]

Colonisation without an FC sounds like hard work. It's never parked too far away from the source of commodities/construction for an unshielded, unarmed T9 (max 786t of cargo + 7A DD drives and Engine focused PD to keep them going) to hop between the two with minimal danger: protection supplied by System Authority/Construction site (although they are rather more interested in protecting their resources rather than you).
You soon get attuned to the T9's stately flight. Never had any problems (17 structures, including a Coriolis) - once you get clos enough to the landing site for the defences to take charge.

 

[Brieus]

Btw, the Type-8 can carry 406 tons and the Type-9 can carry 790 tons. I'd wager that you'll get more transported per hour if you dedicate all the optional module space to cargo racks, even if it means 10 Ly less jump range because of the lack of the FSD booster.

Maybe you might want to redo your test in that manner.

If you have access to the Imperial Cutter, try it too. It's a very temperamental ship (much more so than the Type-9) but it's more maneuverable. (And if you don't yet have access to it, well, there's an idea for your next goal... )

W/o the FSD booster, it takes 3 jumps out, and 4-5 returning.
I also always run shields because I bump into stuff pretty frequently.

LOL. I actually fly my T9 a lot, and I've become used to its... characteristics. A space freighter doesn't need to feel like a fighter plane after all
Does your T9 have 7A DD drives? They do help to mitigate the sloooowness.
To my great surprise, for reasons I can't quite understand I kinda prefer my T9 to my Cutter...

7D clean drives. When I was whipping around the star lining up for a new jump, I was getting a lot of overheating. Also, I was going for cheap the total cost now is 112 million. A 7A drive alone costs 51 million.

Can we link a Coriolis comparison?

Coriolis EDCD Edition

A ship builder, outfitting and comparison tool for Elite Dangerous

coriolis.io

If that doesn't work:

Coriolis EDCD Edition

A ship builder, outfitting and comparison tool for Elite Dangerous

s.orbis.zone

Coriolis EDCD Edition

A ship builder, outfitting and comparison tool for Elite Dangerous

s.orbis.zone

 

[Cmdr Snuffler]

What do you need shields for?

NPC interdictions are very easy to evade even in a Type-9. If you for some reason are playing in open, to gankers the shields are just a very minor slowdown (I highly doubt you'll be escaping a ganker with a Type-9 no matter how many shields you have). And if you are constantly colliding with things, well... git gud?

Solo/PG build vs Open build are very different beasts.
When in solo or PG you can get away with skimping on armour and shields. 0 shields, 0 MRPs, 0 HRPs with lightweight armour. Max possible cargo capacity. Job done.
When in open, more so in high traffic systems (like a CG), a solo/PG build would get absolutely shredded by a Cmdr pirate or ganker...in seconds. If you go shield-less then you risk your PP being targeted. A T-9s PP pops quite quickly with no MRPs.
If you go with MVP shield, then yes I agree with you, it's only a tiny slowdown. Simple solution, don't go MVP shield. Think bigger. Both my T-8 and T-9 have over 1000mj of raw prismatic shields, which is absolutely plenty. That combined with 2500-3000 raw hull with good resistances and MRPs means that I have to really mess up to see the rebuy screen.
This was put to the test last night in the CG when I was interdicted by a Cmdr and his friends. I kept low waking for giggles and to see how persistent that would be. They interdicted me 5 times in a row and eventually got my shields to 5% before I'd had my fun and high waked away. They even hit me with an FSD disabling torp, while I was messing around...still couldn't down my shields.
Go-go-gadget Prismatics!
As for hitting things, shields also allow you to come in very hot to a landing pad. I can take a full boost hit and still not lose my shields.
Conns for having shields include:
Less cargo space
Slightly small jump range as you can't downsize your PP as much as you could without shields.

As I only play in open, it's a no brainer, I'd take survivability and less cargo space over more cargo and a paper thin ship.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

What do you need shields for?

NPC interdictions are very easy to evade even in a Type-9. If you for some reason are playing in open, to gankers the shields are just a very minor slowdown (I highly doubt you'll be escaping a ganker with a Type-9 no matter how many shields you have). And if you are constantly colliding with things, well... git gud?

Smaller ships are able to interdict a T9.
I've run CGs in open and the T9 has survived every gank attempt.
There is always pad 40/some muppet boosting through the slot/an Asp/the attempted scan & shoot bug...

 

[Shir]

I don't do much driving while delivering cargo with the T9 so I don't mind the poor handling, it's just one initial turn while boosting and then straight ahead. Don't mind landing on planets either.

With the sco drive on it, I almost never get interdicted, and if I do I just boost away cause it's small ships that will interdict you unless you have specific missions that send enemies.

When using the carrier, supercruise only takes seconds. So for me the T9 has been way better than the T8. If not using the T9 i would use a Cutter. But I really like the T9, it feels like driving a huge freighter.. just think of all the space movies..!

 

[Neilski]

7D clean drives. When I was whipping around the star lining up for a new jump, I was getting a lot of overheating.

Ahh. See below for heating-related thoughts. (Overheating takes ages to actually cause any damage, as you probably know, even if it makes irritating noises.)

Also, I was going for cheap the total cost now is 112 million. A 7A drive alone costs 51 million.

Fair enough. However, that money can be raised quite literally within minutes (e.g. I get offered 50 M all the time at my local station, just to source 250 gold or similar, i.e. a sub-15-minute round trip), so you may want to reconsider the benefits of the better drive.

Can we link a Coriolis comparison?

Here's my current T9 (pending upgrade to the Prismatic shields I recently unlocked): https://s.orbis.zone/qXrc
However, I'd recommend reviewing it within EDSY instead (https://edsy.org/s/v6FzsEt) because EDSY gets so many things right - e.g. the handling data - which Coriolis gets wrong.

When I use EDSY to compare the handling for my own T9 (7A G5 dirty + drag) to what it would be if I changed only the thrusters to match your T9 (7D G1 clean + thermal spread), I get a really massive variation in the numbers: with 4 pips to ENG, mine has roll/pitch at 32.5 degrees/second, while with your thrusters I get only 22.5 degrees/second. That's enough to make it feel like a very different ship. I'm not so sure I'd be flying my T9 quite as much as I do if it handled like yours
Although Coriolis gets the handling calcs wrong, so I can't directly check your T8's performance, my best guess from some quick exploration with EDSY is that your T8 (5A G3 DD) has around 38 degrees/second of pitch (and much faster roll). Nippier, for sure, but the gap has been closed rather a lot.

A few thoughts on your T9 build:

• I notice that you've used thermal spread in a few curious places, probably because the ship runs hot
  • you'll probably find it much easier to do thermal tuning with the help of EDSY, because it gets the thermals correct (Coriolis barely does this at all, and what it does do it seems to do incorrectly)
  • NB: sadly, you can't export from Coriolis to EDSY (the other direction works fine) but if you use EDDiscovery (a great app) then you can trivially load up any of your ships in either Coriolis or EDSY at the click of a single button, using your journal data to make for a perfect transfer
• for example, instead of using G1 OC + TS on your PP, I'd have gone with G5 Armoured + TS - this gives similar power output but with ~32% thermal "efficiency" instead of ~38%, which will help to cool things down (but maybe you chose a lot of G1 engineering because you haven't got the mats for G5?)
• you're using the pre-eng IR+FB SCO drive - a beautiful drive for jump distance but it runs very hot, even with thermal spread, and that makes it a tough choice for a T9 (I use the normal SCO drive on mine, with IR G5 + MM, which gives a wee bit less jump range than the pre-eng drive but runs a fair bit cooler)
• I'm a bit confused by the weapons you've fitted, plus the bi-weave shield. Do you bother to deploy the hardpoints much? And do the turrets succeed in killing anyone? (If you do engage in combat, I'd have thought it'd be worth engineering the weapons, but the usual approach is of course not to bother with weapons on a T9 hauler.) If not, you'd probably benefit from a regular 5A shield in place of the 5C.
• I'd be inclined to tweak the PD so that you can boost at the maximum rate (6 seconds)

 

[GTwannabe]

T-9 is too slow entering and exiting port and it can be mass locked by a ham sandwich.

 

[Brieus]

Btw, the Type-8 can carry 406 tons and the Type-9 can carry 790 tons. I'd wager that you'll get more transported per hour if you dedicate all the optional module space to cargo racks, even if it means 10 Ly less jump range because of the lack of the FSD booster.

Maybe you might want to redo your test in that manner.

If you have access to the Imperial Cutter, try it too. It's a very temperamental ship (much more so than the Type-9) but it's more maneuverable. (And if you don't yet have access to it, well, there's an idea for your next goal... )

406 tons capacity means 1 fewer trip, but it would take 4 jumps on the way back. Each round trip would go from 5 total to 6 total jumps. An increase of at least 20% in transit time.