			    TRAVELLER Digest 225

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: TRAVELLER digest 220	by CyHiggin@aol.com
  2) Transponders, Virus, etc.	by A.S.Lilly@bnr.co.uk (Andy Lilly)
  3) Re: Transponders (TRAVELLER #224)	by Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
  4) Missiles	by "Post, D L (Dan)" <PostD%HOST2@WLV.IIPO.GTEGSC.COM>
  5) missiles and guidance systems	by jmg141@email.psu.edu (john m gardner)
  6) Insane Insights	by CyHiggin@aol.com
  7) Transponders/Frigate Design	by d.golden@genie.geis.com

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

Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 08:28:01 -0500
From: CyHiggin@aol.com
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 220
Message-ID: <950316082800_51215671@aol.com>

From: "Harold D. Hale" 

>>>The problem with straight radio communication is that radio
>>>transmissions can be intercepted
>
>>Eh? More easily than transponder radio signals?

>   Actually, yes.  The frequency at which transponders broadcast
>would be a closely guarded naval secret.  Communications bands much
>less so.

Hahaha! <snorkle! guffaw> He he he! <insane tittering...>
ROFLAO!  Secret frequencies... what a concept! Hehehehe!
<Pick self up off of floor.>  

Sorry, but I remember a pair of bored electrical
engineers playing with the spectrum analyzer in the lab, and eavesdropping
on every interesting conversation in the entire radio spectrum.  You'd
be amazed how indiscreet people are over cellular phones... drug deals,
assignations with girl friends, etc., etc.  I digress.  The point is,
all it takes is a full-spectrum scanner to find what frequency you are
using; there is no such thing as a "secret frequency".  Now, encrypting
a signal so that unauthorized listeners can't figure it out, that's another
story.  

Now I know that someone out there is going "Aha!  She doesn't know 
about spread-spectrum signals, which can be secret!".  Well, yes I do
know, and you can do that trick NOW, and spread-spectrum can't
be picked out from background noise -- we think.  By the 57th century,
they will have had 3700 years to work on the problem of finding a 
spread-spectrum signal in the background.  My guess is that we'll
figure it out before the end of the 21st century.


>>No, it takes someone with the right codes.

>   Normally, yes.  But as has been proven in the past, if you can
>pretend to be someone else well enough, people will believe you.

You've never met anyone serious, Top Secret kind of security, or
anyone in the spook business, have you?  You don't bluff past those
guys... they wouldn't let the president himself in without the right codes,
and they have no sense of humor, either.  OTOH (playing devil's advocate),
I concede that there are a lot of places and times where the local
"authorities" aren't taking security seriously because (a) nothing ever
happens around here, and (b) we're not doing anything important anyway.
THAT kind of security, you can disguise yourself as the pizza delivery
man and get in...

>>The thing about a black box is that _anything_ can be concealed
>>inside it.  Worse, this is a black box that is constantly spouting
>>coded radio signals.

>   This fact doesn#t stop black boxes from being mounted in
>practically every airliner used on Earth.  Do you honestly believe
>that Lufthaunsa (or any other major airline) could get away with 
>deciding not to cooperate?

I hate to do this to you (no I don't, I love it! :-), but it is very well known
what is in those "black boxes".  They're referred to as "black boxes" 
because they are *sealed*, and the airliner is not allowed to open them
up and play with them, but that they contain a flight recorder on a
continuous loop (an hour or two) is very, very well known.  And Lufthansa,
or any other airliner, *could* get away with it -- if they stayed out of those
countries where the boxes are legally required.  Otherwise, no.  I can't
get away with refusing to give the IRS half my money, either, much as
I wish otherwise.  Governments tend to be nasty that way about their laws.

OTOH, another, soveriegn *government* can get away with ignoring 
someone else's laws.  You know, like "you're supposed to allow us to
inspect your nuclear reactors", "You're not supposed to shoot people
for criticizing you in the press", or even "You're not supposed to murder
unarmed civilians".

                                      -- Cynthia

"Those who sacrifice essential liberties for temporary security
 deserve neither"  -- Benjamin Franklin



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

Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 14:03:26 +0000
From: A.S.Lilly@bnr.co.uk (Andy Lilly)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Transponders, Virus, etc.
Message-ID: <199503161411.JAA29609@Mithril.MPGN.COM>

[Login]Andy
[Connection Type]Direct Neural Implant
[Subject]Transponders and the Virus
[Output]Direct Brain Dump to Screen
"Warning. Direct brain dumps are too fast to allow standard error-checking
for bad grammar, high waffle content, etc."
[Proceed?]Yup

There's been a lot of discussion about transponders, etc.
Following the example of the real world, I'd say any ship that doesn't want
to get arrested and impounded for several months of red tape (or years in
prison if the rules are more extreme), would opt to have a transponder
fitted. Each world makes its own but set designs would have to be authorised
by the Imperial authorities to verify that the local worlds were not adding
anything they shouldn't (or taking out the secret back-door firmware, etc.
the Imperium's already put in). Transponders can be more than just a
"identify yourself or die" unit - as a merchant captain I would certainly
not answer a distress call for a ship that didn't have a transponder... nor
would I allow any other ship, apparently military, Imperial or whatever,
unless I could be sure of identifying it at distance by its transponder.
Transponders can also be used for navigation to mark ships (which might be
too small to be easily detected by the simple sensors of most merchants),
hazards (asteroids, debris, etc.) and space lanes. The entire navigation
system would rely to some degree on coded data to prevent hackers, enemy
fleets, etc. playing havoc with your in-system navigation.

If you want to out-smart the virus on ship IFF (Identification, Friend or
Foe) then have a look at the book (or less usefully the film) Blade Runner
(starring the heroic Harrison Ford). This includes a description of testing
'people' to determine if they are androids - the androids give themselves
away by failing to react to small things that humans do instinctively, etc.
Don't forget, a lot of communications in Traveller would involve video as
well as voice and data links, so if the ship approaching your world has the
correct IFF but refuses to open a video channel, or does so and you can see
the ship's captain is actually a Marionette from Thunderbirds, then you know
it's a nasty Virus ship and not an innocent human ship.

There are all manner of such tests that could be carried out - if they are
successful and Virus ships get destroyed then the next Virus intruders won't
have been warned that (for example) the correct answer to IFF query "What's
the rat's piss like at the Enope bar?" is "Watered down as usual." The Virus
is much more likely to say, "I'm not aware that rats are served at the Enope
bar?" BLAM.
Problem solved.

[Halt]
Query halt
[Automated Halt Occurred at line 872347]
Query reason
[Waffle content rising]
Logout

Incidentally, MDURRAN@aol.com... what's TACSOP, for it to have ANNEX G
(COMMUNICATION) TO 1-4 CAV TACSOP?
Tactical Standard Operating Procedures?
CAV     Cavalry?
SOI     ?
IAW     In Another War? :-)
Damn, I ought to know these!

Andy
Cmdr Lilly, PITS (Political Intelligence Team, Scout)
PITS Team motto: "We are never outgunned."
* Nothing I say or do in any way reflects the views of my very kind
  and generous employers who have no interest in outgunning anyone. *


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

Date: Thu, 16 Mar 95 10:59:16 -0500
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Transponders (TRAVELLER #224)
Message-ID: <9503161559.AA03325@qrc.com>

MDURRAN@aol.com writesL
> [about the "Deyo" transponders]
> >>How do you keep a radio frequency jammed with signals a secret?
> >The same way that every military organization today does. 
> Would you care to explain how that is kept a secret?
> If it's broadcasting it's not a secret to anybody with a scanner
> (anything more than a few seconds will give away your postion)!

Exactly.  From this, we can conclude that military vessels have some way of
making telling the transponder "Shut up and stay shut up 'till I tell you
otherwise".  Its absolutely vital to be able to maintain radio silence, no
matter how much the "Deyo" wants to talk to its buddies.

And, given the realities of military supply depots and human (and alien)
personal foibles, anything that's available to the military will become
available (albeit in extremely limited quantities and at incredible prices)
to the black market - and thus to anyone whith enough money and the right
contacts.

Note: If you think this sounds a little far-fetched, that someone might sell
such military technology, think again.  There are plenty of arrests yearly
for selling pilfered supplies from military bases.  The most extreme example
that I can think of involved entire (whole, working) jet engines from
Air Force bases.


Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
> Incidentally, GDW did a good job with the Deyo chips in the technical
> sense. As they are described they do seem impossible to tamper with.
> Where I believe they fall down is to imagine that the chips would not
> eventually be faked. You'd need some breeder chips and some trainer chips. 
> Both of these MUST be present at every starport that install new 
> transponders, ie all systems with Class A and B starports. That's several 
> thousand in the Imperium. What do you think the chances are that over a 
> period of 30 years at least one corruptable individual would have access 
> to these chips?

Exactly.  The information transmission medium is secure, but the endpoints
(the originator and recipient) aren't.  It is also quite illustrative to
note that throughout most of the history of seafaring on this planet,
"proof" of a given ships ownership and nationality have been no more secure
that accepting (or disbelieving) the flag flying from the stern, and the
ship's papers onboard.

It is also quite interesting to note that the cruises of the CSS Alabama
would make a bang-up Traveller adventure, if translated to starships and
planets, instead of steamships and countries.  The Alabama's captain made
a regular practise of changing the ship's apparent identity and nationality
of his ship.


Actually, I feel that GDW did TOO good of a job with tamperproofing the
Deyo chips.  To my mind, this makes corruption and piracy MORE lucrative and
easier to "get away" with on a continuing basis, rather than less.

Think about it - if the Deyo transponder is accepted universally as absolute
proof of the identity and ownership of a starship, any pirate haven that has
managed to acquire breeder and trainer systems can manufacture perfectly
valid registrations for any ships that it cares to.  Not only will the
aparrent ownership be changed (and the original proof destroyed), but the
uncorruptable Deyos will ensure that the forgery is accepted as genuine,
nearly no matter where the ship goes.

As a ship owner or captain, I'd almost rather have a sheaf of Imperial
Stationery in my hand, stamped with the Seal of The Imperial Registrar of
Ships, and giving particulars about my ship, its ownership and provenanace,
and so on.  Anybody attempting to steal and re-register my ship would need a
similar set.  Even assuming that they could come up with perfect forgeries,
any half-honest portmaster, when presented with two different sets of
documentation for the same ship, will impound the ship (and probably the
people) in question, until queries to the appropriate offices via the IISS
X-boat and packet network resolve the situation to his satisfaction.


I think we can conclusively state that "breeder" and "trainer" systems MUST
be available on the black market, and are (probably) also standard equipment
on all Imperial Navy capitol ships.  There is canonical (Classic) Traveller
material which indicates that Navy capitol ships can impersonate any ship,
civilian or military, that registry records are available for.

In addition, in The Traveller Adventure, Sergi Haut-Oberlindes was able to
procure for the player-characters a special transponder with three settings.
One was their normal identification, another was a Akerut (or Tukera, I
forget) ship, and the third was as yet unprogrammed.  Obviously, Sergi had
access to a breeder and a programmer module.  Possibly these items, like the
spinal particle accellerator, were also "overlooked" when the Emmissary was
de-militarized?

> But the Deyo chips are not a transponder standard. They are small eletronic
> devices produced by the Imperium military and enclosed in a tamperproof
> casing which the Imperium delivered to their neighbours with instruction
> of how to connect to your main computer and ship broadcasting equipment.
> Guaranteed by the Imperium not to contain any secret surprises ("Hey,
> would we lie to you?"). Sure.

As Gene Roddenberry wrote a long, long time ago in the original Star Trek
writers' guide: Translate the situation to current-day equivalents, and see
if its believable.  In this case, Hans is right - its not.

Can you imagine that at any point - even now - that all (or even many)
foreign governments would install an American-made "black box" on every one
of their ships or aircraft.  A black box that transmitted indecipherable
signals more-or-less continously, and which was unopenable without
destroying the contents, such that everyone had to take the US Government's
word for it that the contents were benign?

I think not.  PERHAPS, if it were somehow made a requirement in order to use
US airports and seaports, some foreign aircraft and ships would be equipped
with the device, and more-or-less dedicated to the US trade.  But many more
would drop out of the market in favor or larger carriers, and certainly no
miliary service in its right mind would install them on their aircraft and
ships.


Personally, there are many things about the Deyos and the Virus that strain
my suspension of disbelief to the breaking point.  This is one of them.
Unless you're wedded to the T:TNE canon, these items are 'retcons' added for
the New Era, and don't belong (and don't exist) in Classic or MegaTraveller.

wildstar@quark.qrc.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Shoot Them!  A lot!  --- Don
Karnage

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

Date: Thu, 16 Mar 95 09:21:00 PST
From: "Post, D L (Dan)" <PostD%HOST2@WLV.IIPO.GTEGSC.COM>
To: Traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Missiles
Message-ID: <2F6873F9@MX.IIPO.GTEGSC.COM>



>I wish I knew.  On this subject, does anyone know what the game
>differences are btwn homing and target memory Tac missiles?

In todays terms a homing missile would be a sidewinder which
"homes" in on the IR heat  from a target. Advanced forms of homing
missles will continue to try to hit the target if it misses the first time.
(until it runs out of fuel or loses lock)
If a homing missle loses "lock" on the IR target then it will miss.
A target memory missle would be like a harm or navy RIM(67?)
which are antiradation (antiradar) missles. It will home in on the
radar signal until it hits. However the enemy may do something
like turn the radar off so the missile will miss. This has been countered
by the newer antirad missiles who have a "target memory" widget
built in. The target memory device constantly estimates the actual
position of the target from the homing electronics. If the homing
electronics loses the "lock" the target memory device would tell
the missle to go to the last known location and blow up. The
current (TL8?) models only work well agianst stationary targets.
However with advanced sensors such as "target imaging" the
missle could actually search for the target once it got to
the estimated position.(very nasty).
                         Dan
"The most deadly fire is friendly fire"



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

Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 17:18:15 -0500
From: jmg141@email.psu.edu (john m gardner)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: missiles and guidance systems
Message-ID: <199503162227.RAA14143@genesis.ait.psu.edu>

Just a few notes on how "modern" missiles are guided . . .

controlled missiles are those which require constant operator or system
inputs from a source outside the missile itself inorder to remain flying  in
a straght line, let alone hit the target.  an example of such a missile on
the current battlefield would be the TOW anti tank missile used by the US
army, or the AT-3 sagger used by the "soviet" army.

semi independant missiles use some sort of passive sensor to gain a "fix" on
the target in question.  generaly a target lock from the launch site is
handed off to the missile, which transmits no active targeting beam of its
own, but follows the reflections from the target produced by the lauch
site's sensors.  the AIM 7 sparrow air to air missile in service with the
USAF since the 1950"s and the british semi active skyflash missiles are of
this variety.  interestingly enough, so is the hellfire missile used on the
apache helicopters.

fully independant missiles posess their own sensor and guidance packages
which allow them to track and attack a target once the target handoff has
been recieved.  such missiles are able to continue to track the target even
after loosing line of sight (LOS), or any other form of transmission from
the launch site.  These are the fire and forget systems, and are usualy
limited to relativly short ranges, or reduced payloads due to the large size
of the transmiter/reciever and guidance systems nessicary to make such a
beastie work.  current equivalents are the AIM-9 sidewinder air to air
missile, and most ICBMs.

hopefuly this helps.


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

Date: Thu, 16 Mar 1995 19:47:09 -0500
From: CyHiggin@aol.com
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Insane Insights
Message-ID: <950316194707_51828064@aol.com>

Well, I'm at home with the flu, so I have nothing better to do than
make pointless remarks on the TML...

From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton):

  > > > But why would a civilian *need* BD?

That's GovThink talking.  Rephrase the question from a Free
Citizen's point-of-view:

"What overwhelming *need* do YOU have to restrict MY ownership
of anything, including Battledress?"

From: "Harold D. Hale":

>   No doubt there were Terrans who were whole-hearted >supporters of the
Solomani Party in 1117.  No doubt when they 
>heard about the assassination of Strephon they pulled their 
>pick-up truck off the side of the rode, removed their shotguns 
>from their gun racks, and went Vilani and alien hunting.  Yee-haa.

As the owner of a Ford Explorer who drives up to the local
shotgun range to get in some skeet shooting every other week,
"I resemble that remark..."  :-)  And I *do* live in the South...
YEEE-HAAA!!!

>>How do you keep a radio frequency jammed with signals a 
>>secret?

>   The same way that every military organization today does. 

They aren't secret, just illegal for civilians to use.

>   I'm assuming you're implying they'd start blowing up their own
>merchant vessels out of fear that they might be bad guys.  >Presumably
before you issued any "shoot to kill" orders, you'd 
>change your merchant transponder frequencies.

And the Bad Guys change theirs to match... civilian merchant
traffic isn't known for high security... Any general "Notice to 
Spacemen" is going to be in the Bad Guys' Intelligence Agents
hands in moments.

                                    -- Cynthia

"I'm too sick to come up with any neat quotes." -- Cynthia
 

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

Date: Fri, 17 Mar 95 06:07:00 UTC
From: d.golden@genie.geis.com
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Transponders/Frigate Design
Message-ID: <199503170630.AA058271833@relay1.geis.com>

%^$*@$#$ mail system at work! Spent the last three days trying to get two
messages through to the list, and they just don't make it. Finally gave up &
signed up from GEnie as well, so I could get them through. The first one is
just my Cr0.02 about transponders, but the second one is an overview of a
frigate design I've been working on.
 ------------------------------------------------------------------
  Dave Golden                        Home: D.GOLDEN@genie.geis.com
                           Work: GOLDEND@smc-det10.afaa-net.af.mil
                                          PGP Public Key available
 ==================================================================
 
Message 1 =================
 Harold Hale wrote:
 >>>The problem with straight radio communication is that radio
 >>>transmissions can be intercepted
 >>
 >>Eh? More easily than transponder radio signals?
 >
 >   Actually, yes.  The frequency at which transponders broadcast
 >would be a closely guarded naval secret.  Communications bands much
 >less so.
 
    But if the frequency for transponders is guarded, how can anybody
transmit or respond? After all, even merchant vessels have transponders that
 identify  them. Seriously, it's the _codes_ that make up a valid interrogate
 / response  pair, and identify the ship, that are guarded. Perhaps something
 involving a  public/private key. Military transponders would have an
 additional, frequently-changing code set used in combat.
    Even if the frequencies started out secret, the first time somebody
 interrogated my transponder and it responded, I'd know what frequencies were
 involved. All it would take is a scanner. (Or in TNE terms, a simple passive
 ems sensor).
 
Message 2 =================
     Recently Michael Bailey asked for a design for a TL-12, 1000T frigate.
 After several days trying to set up a spreadsheet, I think I have a design
 almost finished. Highlights are listed below, but I still need to do a final
 check on everything. If anybody else is interested, I can uuencode the
 spreadsheet and design notes up and post them. Source format is Quattro Pro
 for Windows 5.0 and Word for Windows 6.0, but I can write to a variety of
 formats. Let me know if you'd prefer e-mail, or if there's enough interest
for a public post.
     I would certainly appreciate an independent sanity-check. Also, I don't
 have a regular group to playtest the design, so once I post the BL stats I'd
 appreciate feedback on the use. I wanted something that could either
outfight
 or outrun anything its own size.
 
   * Jump 2, 6G
   * Offensive Armament
     4 600-Mj Lasers (10: 1/20-43, 20: 1/20-43, 40: 1/20-43, 80: 1/10-31)
     8 Missile Turrets
     2 Standard MFDs (10 hexes)
     4 Missile MFDs (10 hexes)
   * Defenses
     Armor Level 500
     10 Sandcaster Turrets
     10 5-Mj Anti-Missile Lasers (1: 1/2-6, 2: 1-3, 4: Nil-1)
     5 Anti-Missile MFDs (1 hex)
     250PV Meson Screen
     Decoy Dispenser with 500 decoys
     Electromagnetic Masking
     300,000km ECM Jammer
   * Electronics
     2x 300,000km Active EMS
     2x 120,000km Passive EMS
     2x 300,000km Radio
     2x 1000AU Maser
   * Fuel
     42 G-Turns reaction mass
     1 Jump-2 (equals 33.6 G-Turns using jump fuel)
     Fuel scoops - 1 hr for full load
     Fuel Purification - 24 hours for full load
     Power Plant fuel for 1/4 year
   * The ship is strictly a military space vessel. While it is streamlined
for planetary landings, it does not have contragravity, so it spends as
little time in the atmosphere as possible.
   * G-Rating is 6G. TL-12 g-compensators are only good to 3G; however, the
 thrust axis is aligned with the "up" direction of the ship. Thus, the crew
can handle 4G's, and simply feel their own weight. At 5G's, crew in
workstations are unaffected, and others (damage control), suffer +1 DiffMod.
At 6Gs, workstation crew are at +1 and others are at +2.
   * The only major deviation from the "standard" rules is I adopted the
TL*50 limit on laser pulse energy.

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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 225
***************************
