From:   IN%"traveller@engrg.uwo.ca" 18-MAY-1994 21:05:32.05
To:     IN%"traveller@engrg.uwo.ca"
CC:     
Subj:   TML biweekly: Msgs 7591-7614 V44#17

Return-path: <jamesp@engrg.uwo.ca>
Received: from engrg.uwo.ca (nova.engrg.uwo.ca) by delphi.com (PMDF V4.2-14
 #6563) id <01HCHYIABJ008WXQ9Q@delphi.com>; Wed, 18 May 1994 21:05:28 EDT
Date: Wed, 18 May 1994 21:00:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Admin)
Subject: TML biweekly: Msgs 7591-7614 V44#17
To: traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Submissions)
Errors-to: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca
Reply-to: traveller@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Submissions)
Message-id: <9405190102.AA07660@engrg.uwo.ca>
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Approved: by traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (TML Admin) Wed May 18 21:00:03 EDT
 1994
Precedence: bulk

TML biweekly    Wed May 18 21:00:03 EDT 1994    Volume 44 : Issue 17

Today's topics:

BUN# =AMN= =DATE====== =FROM==========  =SUBJECT/BODY==========================
 605  7591 16-May-1994 David Johnson    Shall Not Perish 18: Regency Army << Ge
 605  7592 17-May-1994 David Hoey       Re: Misc. Questions << > All I need is 
 605  7593 16-May-1994 David Johnson    Shall Not Perish 19: SW Navy & Army << 
 605  7594 16-May-1994 Rob Dean         Re: Deep Space Stations << Chuck Hamilt
 605  7595 16-May-1994 J Roberson       Life & Death << >Imagine you are in a s
 606  7596 16-May-1994 Mark Cook        Re: TML: A House Divided? << In Archive
 606  7597 16-May-1994 Steve Gibbons    TML split << Greetings Gentle-sophonts,
 606  7598 16-May-1994 Leonard Erickso  Deep Space refueling <<  
 606  7599 17-May-1994 Steven M Bonnev  Air / Planetary Defense << Alistair Lan

This is a passively moderated mailing list. All messages sent to the
submission address will be distributed. The biweekly digest is currently
distributed each Wednesday and Sunday at 9:00pm.

Submissions: traveller@engrg.uwo.ca -or- uunet!engrg.uwo.ca!traveller
Administrator: traveller-request@engrg.uwo.ca (James Perkins)

The TML is made possible by facilities provided by the University of
Western Ontario. All opinions and materials below are the responsibility
of the originator.

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

Bundle: 605
Archive-Message-Number: 7591
Date: Mon, 16 May 94 15:07:52 CDT
From: djohnson@geds01.jsc.nasa.gov (David Johnson)
Subject: Shall Not Perish 18: Regency Army

Gentlesophonts:

Okay, we've started with the Regency Navy, now let's take a look at the
Regency Army.  By `army' I mean `mobile' ground forces available for off-
world actions.

I'm using the article "Troops in the Fifth Frontier War" from *JTAS* #10
as a reference for determining troop availability.  Thanks also to Steve
Bonneville for `grepping' data on Deneb high-tech worlds in TML msg
592/7421 from May 4th.

At TL 16, only worlds with Pop 7+ will have mobile troops.  The only Regency
world that meets this criteria is Vincennes.  At Pop A, Vincennes can
support three (3) `army'-sized (combat factor 5C) units (3 x 5C-16).

For convenience let's identify these units as follows:

1st Vincennes Army (TL 16)
2nd Vincennes Army (TL 16)
3rd Vincennes Army (TL 16)

TL 15 worlds also must have pop 7+ in order to support mobile troops. In
the Regency, Magash (pop 9), Starn (pop 9), Dekha (pop A), Rhylanor (pop 9),
Mora (pop A), Glisten (pop 9), Trin (pop A in the Rebellion era - but
destroyed by the Virus in TNE) and Lintl (pop A) meet this requirement.
Dekha, Mora and Lintl will support three armies like Vincennes:

1st Dekha Army (TL 15)
2nd Dekha Army (TL 15)
3rd Dekha Army (TL 15)
1st Mora Army (TL 15)
2nd Mora Army (TL 15)
3rd Mora Army (TL 15)
1st Lintl Army (TL 15)
2nd Lintl Army (TL 15)
3rd Lintl Army (TL 15)

The pop 9 worlds can support four (4) `corps'-sized (combat factor 1C)
units (4 x 1C-15) as follows:

1st Magash Corps (TL 15)
2nd Magash Corps (TL 15)
3rd Magash Corps (TL 15)
4th Magash Corps (TL 15)
1st Starn Corps (TL 15)
2nd Starn Corps (TL 15)
3rd Starn Corps (TL 15)
4th Starn Corps (TL 15)
1st Rhylanor Corps (TL 15)
2nd Rhylanor Corps (TL 15)
3rd Rhylanor Corps (TL 15)
4th Rhylanor Corps (TL 15)
1st Glisten Corps (TL 15)
2nd Glisten Corps (TL 15)
3rd Glisten Corps (TL 15)
4th Glisten Corps (TL 15)

These 16 corps are equivalent to three `armies' (with one corps remaining).
Regency troops at lower tech levels can be developed from the UWP values
using the *JTAS* #10 article.  I'm not sure what the TL cutoff is but
regular `Imperial' troops do not go below TL 13 or so.  Can someone with
*5FW* help us out here?

This basis should provide a similar starting point for development as did
the Regency Navy post: what are the deployment, organization, commanders,
etc. of these Regency Armies?

Happy Travelling,

David Johnson
Houston, Texas, USA


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

Bundle: 605
Archive-Message-Number: 7592
From: David Hoey <dhoey@it.ntu.edu.au>
Subject: Re: Misc. Questions
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 11:27:37 +0930 (CST)


> All I need is the air that I breathe...
> ---------------------------------------
> 
> One of the hazards of space travel is going to be running out of breathable 
>     air. When considering a particular 'scene' for a scenario I was 
>     planning, I realised I had no good idea of how long it takes a person 
>     to use up the available air in a sealed room. So, some questions for 
>     the list.
> 
> Imagine you are in a sealed room. How long does it take a person to die 
>     because the air gets bad - and why? Is it lack of Oxygen, or the 
>     presence of impurities?
> 
> If the room is filled not with air, but with Oxygen only:
> -   what atmospheric pressure should it be at to be safe? I believe that if 
>     the pressure is too high the atmosphere promotes any sort of minor 
>     spark into a serious fire/explosive hazard.
> 
> -   how long before a typical human unfortunate dies from bad air in this 
>     scenario.


At the a high atmospheric pressure oxygen becomes toxic.  This is the reason
Scuba divers use compressed air instead of oxygen.  At normal pressure the
fire risk from an all oxygen atmosphere is very high.  

The breathable air in a room is converted to bad by a person consuming
oxygen which is replaced by carbon dioxide.  Eventually the lowering oxygen
levels will cause a person to die from oxygen starvation.  At which point
I don't know but the amount of oxygen used by a person depends upon their
activity rate.  By doing little the air in a room can be made to last longer.

Away to extend the time a person has in a sealed room is to have someway
to replace the oxygen.  If there was a bottle of compressed oxygen in the
room it could be opened occasionaly to increase the oxygen levels.  This
may have to be done carfeully if there is no gravity in the area.  If a valve
on a bottle of compressed gas is broken, the bottle can smash through brick
walls.


- -- 
**************************************************************************
*  David Hoey          * Computer Science, Northern Territory University *
*  dhoey@it.ntu.edu.au * Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia           *
**************************************************************************

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

Bundle: 605
Archive-Message-Number: 7593
Date: Mon, 16 May 94 21:21:59 CDT
From: djohnson@geds01.jsc.nasa.gov (David Johnson)
Subject: Shall Not Perish 19: SW Navy & Army

Gentlesophonts:

Expanding on the Regency Navy and Army posts, let's look at the Sword
Worlds in detail.  This exercise might serve as an example for expansion
of any Regency subsector military forces.

There are no clear rules (with the exception of possible *Trillion Credit
Squadron*, which I don't have) tying naval forces to any sort of UWP data.
Based upon the `1000 ships per sector' mentioned in the *Rebellion 
Sourcebook* we get an `average' of 62.5 ships per subsector.  Based upon the
world generation rules, in the Spinward Marches we get an average of 26.7
worlds per subsector with a total average subsector population of 46 billion.
This, combined with the average ship figure, works out to an average of
roughly 700,000,000 people per regular naval combat ship.  This is a very
rough number, and specifically does not account for tech level effects, but
I'll use it nevertheless.  I welcome any `less soft' figures though.

This number suggests that only Pop 8+ worlds will be able to support regular
naval forces.  This doesn't quite `jive' with *5FW* (Joyeuse, a Pop 7
worlds raised a fleet) but it's a fair working point.

Combining this with the *JTAS* #10 "Troops in the Fifth Frontier War"
article we get the following forces for major Sword Worlds:

Tizon (pop 300,000,000; TL 10)
 No ships
 One corps (1C-10), two divisions (20-10)
Narsil (pop 20,000,000,000; TL 10)
 29 ships (J1-10)
 Four armies (5C-10), one corps (1C-10)
Anduril (pop 200,000,000; TL 11)
 No ships
 One corps (1C-11), one division (20-11)
Gram (pop 6,000,000,000; TL 11)
 Nine ships (J2-11)
 Five corps (1C-11), one brigade (10-11)
Sacnoth (pop 3,000,000,000; TL 12)
 Four ships (J3-12)
 Five corps (1C-12), one brigade (10-12)
Sting (pop 300,000,000; TL 10)
 No ships
 One corps (1C-10), two divisions (20-10)

Thus, the entire Confederate Navy consists of 42 ships.  The Confederate
Army consists of something around seven armies.  These figures seem a little
low but keep in mind there has been no accounting for what are called
reserve or `colonial' forces in the Imperium.  These are `older' forces
used to supplement the regular forces.  For the Confederate naval reserve
let's assume an additional 42 ships but at one TL below that of the regular
forces: 29 at TL 9 (J1-9), nine at TL 10 (J1-10) and four at TL 11 (J2-11).
These `reserve' forces may have comprised the Joyeuse Fleet of the 5FW.

The Confederate regular army forces are for offworld or `offensive'
operations and do not reflect indigieous defense battalions on each world.

This example could be used to develop naval and army forces for any subsector
in the Regency (or elsewhere).  I hope we see it so applied!

Happy Travelling,

David Johnson
Houston, Texas, USA

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

Bundle: 605
Archive-Message-Number: 7594
From: Rob Dean <robdean@access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: Deep Space Stations
Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 23:16:30 -0400 (ADT)

Chuck Hamilton writes:

> However, how are a planet's big system defense fleets and large planetary
> defense batteries perceived by its Larger Political Entity (Imperium or Con-
> sulate)?  I think they do not like them at all.  First I'll give some
> Traveller facts and then I'll do some interpretation.

You will forgive me, I hope, if I dispute with some of your facts...

> Fact 1: Planetary defense forts are not covered in Traveller literature.  The
> closest thing is "planetary defense battalions" from the boardgame "Invasion:
> Earth", which are not that effective.

Since it is getting late, and I don't want to root through my pile of 
Traveller stuff just before going to bed, I won't try to cite page numbers.
However, we do know that "deep meson gun sites" are the preferred method
of ground-based planetary defense, and that these are supplemented by
ground-based missiles and lasers.  I agree that these devices do not show
up in 5FW, which I _do_ have in front of me as I type.

> Fact 2: System defense boats are the accepted mechanism for system defense.
> But, the quantities for these seem very low.  I think a Traveller News
> Service brief from the JTAS "War" issue read something like "the ten heavy
> SDBs in the Regina system were sent to defend the system gas giant, which
> would be the first priority of an attacking fleet."  This seems like a
> very small number for a world at the edge of the Imperium.

Regina has only 10 SDBs, according to the 5FW map.  However, the numbers of
boats are strongly dependent on population, and Regina is not a high-population
world.  Jewell has 120 TL12 boats, Efate 150 at TL13, Rhylanor has 200 at
TL15, Zivije 120 at TL11, Louzy _500_ at TL8, Rethe has another 500, and
Porozlo has 1000 SDBs at TL10. 5FW does not distinguish between TLs for SDB
efficiency, so those 1000 Porozlo boats are quite a menace to any invading
Zho fleet.  Checking the population levels produces the following:

Population A: 500-1000 SDBs
           9: 100-200
           8: 10-12
           7: 1
          6-: 0

Note that some of the worlds in the population 8 or higher category also
contribute local jump-capable squadrons to the Imperial forces in 5FW.

I don't really think that the Imperium (as depicted) is all that hostile 
to local forces.

This reminds me--someone posted a few weeks ago that they didn't think that
the Imperium allowed multi-planet governmental bodies.  Go back and check
Adventure 7: Broadsword, for an example of a world (Garda Vilis) ruled from
the neighboring world (Vilis).  Also, there are quite a few type 6 governments
in the Spinward Marches.  I play that _some_ of these may be under direct
Imperial control, but the majority are in situations like that of Garda
Vilis.

Rob Dean
(creaky oldtimer making special guest appearance)

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

Bundle: 605
Archive-Message-Number: 7595
Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 10:56:26 -0600
From: RJR96326@vax1.utulsa.edu (J Roberson)
Subject: Life & Death

>Imagine you are in a sealed room. How long does it take a person to die
>    because the air gets bad - and why? Is it lack of Oxygen, or the
>    presence of impurities?

I think you eventually pass out from the unrecycled air - you fall asleep
as your brain gets oxygen starved, and you don't wake up until the New Era
;)

>If the room is filled not with air, but with Oxygen only:

        You will die. Pure oxygen is poisonous to people, especially at
high pressures (this from a Cthulhu adventure I ran based on the bottom of
the South Pacific, but also corroborated by my J-o-T skill).

>- -   what atmospheric pressure should it be at to be safe? I believe that if
>    the pressure is too high the atmosphere promotes any sort of minor
>    spark into a serious fire/explosive hazard.

        See above. I'm not quite sure that oxygen is poisonous at normal
pressure, but I'm sure it is under pressure. And yes, pure oxygen and
sparks do not mix in a pleasant fashion.

>- -   how long before a typical human unfortunate dies from bad air in this
>   scenario.

        Depends on how much such a human had to start with. How big is the
room? When does the air shut off? Are thei spare tanks?

I think you could hedge on this to whatever is appropriate to the
adventure. Just assume that the room had x hours of air left, or had x
hours of backup air, or that x hours of air are in some convenient Vacc
Suits lying in the corner.

>At what tech level can you build guns out of non metallic materials?

Define Gun. You can build a simple gun-like contraption from natural
materials. If you want something more refined then you will have to wait
until the proper process comes along. I would say that only at TL7-8 (I'm
more used to GURPS TLs, but I think those are the corresponding Traveller
TLs for Modern Times) for the ceramic/plastic guns that seem to get past
metal detectors.

> ..   What sort of non metallic materials are possible - plastics, carbon
>    fibre, or what?

I'd bet MacGyver could build a simple Cannon-Locke or Matchlock out of
Bamboo and twine. . .

> ..   At what tech level can you build caseless ammo and weapons to use it?
>    And when does the result become as practical as weapons using cased
>    ammo?

I would say the modern day. Caseless ammo requires being able to
manufacture a round with the powder already on it and not held by a
cartridge. Of course, technically I guess the old ball-and-musket was
"caseless" in a sense. . .
- -----
>I rifled the barrel. Is this ok on a pistol? (I am afraid I don't know
>anything >about real guns).

You mad, impetuous fool! Yes, it is A-OK :)


_________________________________
Eugenics: Chlorination of the Gene Pool.
Consistency is a Flaw.
J Roberson      RJR96326@vax1.utulsa.edu        Priss@io.com





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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7596
From: Mark Cook <markc@CSOS.ORST.EDU>
Subject: Re: TML: A House Divided?
Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 21:18:42 -0700 (PDT)

In Archive-Message-Number 7578, David Johnson
<djohnson@geds01.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:

> I'm going to get to Mark Cook's arguments for the separate list in a moment.
> (Nothing personal Mark, you're just a handy proponent.)

Not a problem.  I'm slipping on my Nomex union suit. :^)

> That said, Mark Cook <markc@CSOS.ORST.EDU> writes:
> 
> > Join both groups.  If the hassle is too much, maybe your enthusiasm isn't
> > enough.
> 
> One might suggest the same about `oldtimers' who find it too much hassle to
> put up with the `noise' of TNE postings.

Granted, but the 'two group' idea would solve the problem for both
groups.  Those that don't like TNE can avoid it easily, and those
that like all the Traveller variations can mail to and read both lists.

> I'm not sure I buy this.  If all these folks were still contributing there
> wouldn't be such a `low signal-to-noise' ratio.

The ratio would be better, but the noise wouldn't be any less.  To me
(and, I suspect, many others), getting 1000 lines of useful material
out of 2000 lines of signal is not much better than getting 200 lines
of useful material out of 1200 lines of signal.

> > It a separate group, it ceases to be a problem for us, and those of you
> > that enjoy TNE (and creamed spinich and enemas and so on...) can stay
> > right here and do exactly what you've been doing all along.
> > 
> > > Seems like a rather lopsided issue to me.
> > 
> > Seems like a pretty selfish one to me.  You'd rather keep us around, even
> > when we don't want to be here, rather than lose part of your audience?
> 
> Hmmm.  There seems to be plenty `selfishness' to go around here.

OK, point taken.  I was out of line with that crack and I apologize.

>                                                                   Look, 
> I'm just as pissed as anyone at what GDW has done to Traveller and I don't
> appreciate these `newbies' bitching about my `whining' all the time either
> but that doesn't mean I want to pick up my toys and go play by myself.

The problem is, Dave, that a lot of folks have alreayd picked up their
toys and left.  This might (no guarantees) get some of them back.  I say
this not because I just want the increased volume, but because many of
them were outstanding contributors.

> > This may cause many folks that dropped out to come back.  The flip side
> > is many are leaving anyway, they just don't have anywhere else to go.
> 
> I doubt it, but I'd like to offer a challenge to allow you to prove me wrong.

Sigh.  I wish it were that easy.  I'd love to prove you wrong, in the
fashion you offer, just to get the old timers back.  Unfortunately, if
any sort of pre-TNE incentive is offered, I suspect that what we're
more likely to see is a gradual return of some of the more interested
folks.  There are many that are still members of the TML today, but
just don't speak up out of lack of interest in the TNE.  If I weren't
so mouthy, you wouldn't ever hear from me. :^)  Scott Kellogg doesn't
post nearly as often as he used to before TNE (although his posts are
every bit as worthwhile and valuable as they used to be.)  Surprisingly
enough, this very subject (the TML/TNE split) has brought a couple
of old-timers out of the shadows, if ever so briefly, to wit:

Paul Dale <grue@cs.uq.oz.au> writes:

>       I tend to agree with Mark.  I'd prefer a second list dealing
> with non TNE stuff.  Even though I don't dislike TNE too much, the volume
> has been a little intense recently.
> 
> Guess this means I vote for the split.

 ...and Gerry Williams <gsw@aloft.att.com> writes:

> As far as I see, the only issue is if enough people are
> interested in an "old traveller" mailing list, especially
> those that have already left because of TNE.  People who
> want it all can just subscribe to both.
> 
> The only inconvenience this should cause is if a great
> deal of cross-posting occurs, although given that the
> past high-volume contributors have largely been quiet or
> left the list, this seems unlikely.
> 
> Other than discussing valid impediments to splitting the
> list, let's not argue about it or take sides.
> 
> P.S. I would be interested in joining the new list.

For those folks that remember, we've lost the priceless wisdom
of Metlay, the wonderful ship designs of Rob Dean, and many
others.  I never see posts from Bertil Jonell any more, and
I can't recall the last time Adrian Hurt stomped me into a
tortilla, arguing weapon designs.  Too many of the old, rich
voices are silent, and I for one, would almost anything to
get them back.

- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 mark f. cook * mark cook consulting * shoestring graphics & printing
2055 sw whiteside dr. * corvallis, or, 97333-1406 * markc@csos.orst.edu
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
"When your enemy falls, don't rejoice -- but don't pick him up either."
                                             - Yiddish proverb

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7597
Date: Mon, 16 May 1994 21:41:33 MST
From: Steve Gibbons <steve@nereid.sunquest.com>
Reply-To: steve@sunquest.com
Subject: TML split

Greetings Gentle-sophonts,

It has been suggested (and argued) that the TML list should be split into
several splinter groups.

I think that both sides have stated their points of view:
1) The volume and noise/signal ratios of the current TML are too high for me.
2) What's a little volume, it's the contributions that matter, wade through the
   cruft - the rest of us do.

Personally, I find myself falling into the first camp for various reasons, some
of which are technical and some of which are personal.  Firstly, I receive the
nightly bundles, which is about all that I can handle at one sitting since I'm
saddled with a MUA that does _not_ automatically break the digests down into
individual messages for me.  This same limitation in my MUA requires me to wade
through entire articles that I couldn't give a hoot about just to get to a
short posting that I _am_ interested in.

I think that James's suggestion of automatic, individualized digests would make
everyone happy, you get what you want to read, you can post to the relevant
sub-lists as needed, heck you can cross-post if it's relevant to more than one
group.

I don't think that requiring a special "tag" in the subject line is the proper
way to go about things, though.  It makes much more sense to me (from a
technical point of view) to have separate mailing addresses for each of the
list, as well as separate "digestifiers" for each list.  If you want to
cross-post then send the message to all of the lists that are (or might be)
concerned.

I might also include a list called "Traveller-general",(or somesuch) that would
(hopefully) have broad appeal.  In the case of a cross-post to more than (say)
three sub-groups, the _actual_ message woud be posted to Traveller-general, and
only a short pointer message would be cross-posted to the others.

Yes, this scheme requires some thought in posting, but the poster _has_ to
realize that he/she's not only using up his/her own time, but the time of
countless others that may or may not have the same specific interests.

I think that it would be much more efficient in general to split the various
sub-groups out, require those that are interested to subscribe (or perhaps
subsribe them by default, and let them unsubsribe if they wish) than to
continue with the current high-volume mish-mash that we currently have.

As an aside, I probably will subscribe to any and all Traveller related mailing
lists that get created.  The main advantage for me will be that I'll be able to
_concentrate_ on what _I'm_ most interested in, possibly skipping the other
stuff if I don't have the time for it at the moment.

I hope that the message above made sense, It's been a 12-hour day for me, and
I'm not done yet...  :(

- --
Steve@Sunquest.COM

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7598
Date: Mon, 16 May 94 21:18:38 PST
From: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Deep Space refueling

 
I 've been following the discussion, and note a *major* suumption being
made by practically everyone. An incorrect assumption, at that.

Interstellar space is not "empty". It's full of all sorts of dark
matter. Comet nuclei, the occasional planet,  giant molecular clouds,
etc.

A comet nucleus is a "dirty snowball", that is, it's water ice, with
amonia, methanne, and a fair amount of "dirt". The dirt willl be mostly
fairly finely divided stuff like carbonaceus chondrite meteoric
material. Plus bits or rock and other things.  And these snowballs will
be tens to hundreds of kilometers in diameter.

It'll be *real* easy to extract hydrogen, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and
many other things useful for ship fuel or life support from these. And
even the small ones will supply fuel and other consumables for *decades*
of heavy use.

This may be a good reason for carrying fuel purification plants. If you
mis-jump into an "empty" hex, you have a fair chance of locating
something useful if you stretch your sensors to the limit and use
manuever fuel (and low berths) carefully. In CT or MT, scratch the bit
about manuever fuel. :-)

Also, once found, relocating them would be easy. Especially if you
plant a good beacon. I'm willing to bet that pirates and
revolutionaries would find these ideal hideouts.

I'd also be willing to bet that a number of such "bases" whether
illegal, or just "company secret" might survive the Virus, because
they'd have long practice in "I'm not here" tactics. If a ship jumps in
and doesn't give the right codes, they won't broadcast anything to it.
And if it acts "wrong" it'll be considered an enemy and dealt with. If
it's merely a misjumped ship, well, accidents happen.

This could explain the survival of groups of merchant ships. The
locations and codes wouldn't be entered into the ship's computers so as
to prevent them being found by the law or by competitors. Likewise, log
entries would be faked to make it seem like the ship had made one jump,
not two (or more) small jumps. So the virus might never find out about
them.
- --  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!51!Leonard.Erickson
Internet: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7599
Date: Tue, 17 May 1994 00:05:33 -0500
From: bonnevil@mermaid.micro.umn.edu (Steven M Bonneville)
Subject: Air / Planetary Defense

Alistair Langsford <langsl@cbr.hhcs.gov.au3 writes:

>Imagine you are in a sealed room. How long does it take a person to die
>    because the air gets bad - and why? Is it lack of Oxygen, or the
>    presence of impurities?

Yes. :)  The people in the room breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon
dioxide (well, some anyway; as anyone trained in CPR knows, a fair amount
of oxygen goes out too.)  Eventually, the oxygen partial pressure in the
chamber falls in favor of the carbon dioxide, until not enough oxygen is
left in the room for the occupants to continue respiration.  How big is
the room?

If you're really interested in this, check out old submarine stories --
WWII-era and prior submarine crews were *vitally* concerned with this 
question.  The old "diesel" boats equipped with the German schnorkel
could run their motors underwater, and ventilate with outside air, but
carbon *monoxide* fumes still could cause problems.  A lot of research
was done on both, from what I understand.  Nowadays, nuclear subs have
enough power to spare for "scrubbing" systems that this isn't the same
sort of problem.

As for the question about the pure oxygen environment, I'll leave that
to the Apollo 1 experts in the crowd.  Actually, come to think of it,
carbon dioxide build-up was an important hurdle for the disastrous  
Apollo 13 mission as well.


Chuck Hamilton <c_hamilton%w036_nw@MWMGATE1.mitre.org> writes:

>Fact 1: Planetary defense forts are not covered in Traveller literature.  The
>closest thing is "planetary defense battalions" from the boardgame "Invasion:
>Earth", which are not that effective.

The battalions were grav-mobile, and had about the same bombardment factor
as a BatRon (but not same defense/offense).  Earth also had three corps-
level PD emplacements, non-mobile, one identified with each starport on
the chit.  Those had the highest bombardment in the game and a sizable
defense garrison.  Are you speaking from tactical experience?

Also, I'm unconvinced Earth is a fair example...it's possible both sides
were treading lighter than they wanted lest they risk damaging Earth too
much in the fighting, for political reasons at least all around.

  Steve Bonneville
  <bonneville@mermaid.micro.umn.edu>


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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7600

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7601

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7602

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7603

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7604

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7605

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7606

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7607

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7608

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7609

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7610

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7611

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7612

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7613

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

Bundle: 606
Archive-Message-Number: 7614

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

End of TML Biweekly
******************
