Subj:	TRAVELLER digest 276
Date:	95-05-05 19:15:50 EDT
From:	traveller@mpgn.com
To:	traveller@mpgn.com

From: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: traveller@mpgn.com
Reply-to: traveller@mpgn.com
To: traveller@mpgn.com (Multiple recipients of list)

			    TRAVELLER Digest 276

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) 2300AD net resources?
	by E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK
  2) Realistic Thrusters
	by Maximillian Callahan <callahan@cts.com>
  3) Re: TRAVELLER digest 275
	by Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca>
  4) Re: TRAVELLER digest 275
	by pd82495@wapol.gov.au (Michael Bailey)
  5) Re: Waste Heat
	by Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
  6) RE: Sensor data still more questions
	by roger.myhre@niva.no
  7) RE: Sensor data still more questions
	by Neil Taylor <neil@owl.uk.gdscorp.com>
  8) Re: TRAVELLER digest 274
	by aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
  9) RE: FF&S design issues: "real" drives
	by ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu (Joseph Heck)

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

Date: Fri, 05 May 1995 01:22:44 EDT
From: E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: 2300AD net resources?
Message-ID: <0098FE0F.303BA700.1355@v2.qub.ac.uk>

I've been vigilantly crusing the net, looking for 2300AD resources, and
so far found nothing. Do any list members know of any net resouces for
this game? Mailing lists? Mail me if you do.
 Thanks
Eamon Watters, CNG0016@qub.v2.ac.uk

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

Date: Thu, 4 May 1995 19:06:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Maximillian Callahan <callahan@cts.com>
To: List Traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Realistic Thrusters
Message-ID: <Pine.SCO.3.91.950504190542.13661A-100000@crash.cts.com>


>If you are thinking about the low tech thrusters I think
>that they are good enough. If you consider the Shuttle it
>need large fueltanks just to get it into orbit. Low tech
>fuels are not efficent if you consider the weight and 
>volume, but they are all we have at the moment.

>Tommy Grav

WRONG!! The shuttle is only 66.7% fuel tank and it can hit orbit
Under FFS it would have to be 1000% fuel tank to hit orbit. The FFS
thruster rules are broken. Feel free to prove me wrong though, post a
Tech 7 design that can hit orbit (with annotations) under The realistic
thrusters rules from a size 8 world under 1g and I'll eat this post.
		callahan@crash.cts.com

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

Date: Thu, 04 May 1995 22:26:13 -0400 (EDT)
From: Alvin Plummer <alvin.plummer@sheridanc.on.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 275
Message-ID: <Pine.OSF.3.91.950504221315.8180A-100000@hubble.sheridanc.on.ca>

From: rhwalsh@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Robert H. Walsh)
> 
> Hello All, this is my first post to the mailing list, 

Glad to see another one...

> 
> 1). Whatever became of "Project Longbow" was it Psi Based, or more like a
> FTL System or "HPG" ala Battletech.

Unknown, offically.  I suspect it's psi-based.

> 2). What happened to Terra when the Virus Hit?
Unknown (but I hope we do get there, eventually)

> 3). Is HIWG still in Existance, and if not are the Archives available
anywhere
Yessir! You'd have to contact cbush3@genie.geis.com, the N.American head 
of HWIG, for the archives. (Yes, Mr. Bush, I remember about that 
subsector viewer I still owe you!)

> 4). Has anyone done work with Star Hero/Champions Converted to Traveller or
> Vice Versa?

No: but some here have a GURPS/Traveller translation (nod to Mr.  Summer)
===============
From: James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us> 

Thank's for the info.
I hope that GDW tread's lightly in the Regency, but even if they don't, I 
can hope that they will finally give the Area the treatment it deserves!

Please, Mr. Wiseman, Sector maps! A good Breakdown of the "top ten 
Regency world"!  Flog out all the implications of TL 12-16 societies!  
Remember the old Honor Code!

Think "Path of Tears", not "Hiver and Ikhur"!


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alvin Plummer
"Preserve what we created, Norris, and remember what we stood for."
                               - Strephon, 179-1126

Reply to: alvin.plummer@SHERIDANC.ON.CA

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




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

Date: Fri, 05 May 1995 10:59:36 -1600
From: pd82495@wapol.gov.au (Michael Bailey)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 275
Message-ID: <9505050252.AA17452@phq1002.wapol.gov.au>

>OK, I'm trying to design an ARL(Assault Rocket Launcher) using FFS, the 
>problem is, I'm not sure what to design them as, since ARL's arn't 
>mentioned. Any clues as what to design them as? Grenade launchers? 
>Recoilless rifles? Tac missile launchers? :) 
>
>-Josh 
>
I don't know if this helps...but a few weeks ago I knocked up a one-shot
anti armour rocket launcher.  The three major steps I went through were:

1/  Design the warhead (choose size, type, TL)

2/  Design the delivery system (artillery, rocket, missile, grenade?)

3/  Design the launcher

The weapon that I knocked up was a 10cm HEAP warhead, propelled by a solid
fuel
rocket.  The launcher was little more than a cardboard tube, which also
doubled as
the carrying case for the rocket.  More sophisticated launch mechanisms are
available, including (I think) provisions for multiple rocket launchers,
similar to the old Soviet MRLS.

Next week:  some TL-5 innovations from the Wehrmacht:  the 'Panzerfaust'
(one shot anti tank rocket), and the 'Nebelwerfer' (multi-barrel mortar).
Michael Bailey (pd82495@wapol.gov.au)

"...you mad-dog, shaven head, bottle boy freaks..."
                                      Marillion, "Berlin"



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

Date: 04 May 1995 23:39:07 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Waste Heat
Message-ID: <118591.116332960@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca>

>the worst problem, regardless of radiation, is the power levels.  I keep
seeing 
>Grav bikes and such using 100kW to 2MW - think about dumping that hlot as
waste 
>heat!  Trav anti-grav uses so much power that it alone is anti-social,
without 
>beginning to consider the megawattage of Hot Plasma!

Amen!  

Every time I see someone getting their shorts in a knot about some aspect of
TNE rules, I think of this.  Most people ignore waste heat, but it can have a
significant effect at far lower levels that encountered in TNE (or MT, for
that matter).  

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

Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 08:32:08 +0200
From: roger.myhre@niva.no
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: Sensor data still more questions
Message-ID: <e9f784c0@smtplink.niva.no>

Jonathan Dixon wrote:

>When you play Brillant Lances and several objects are detected they 
>are considered to be only blobs until a sensor lock is achieved after 
>which everything is known about the object.  This seems a bit strange 
>to me as a straight radar image contains a lot of information just 
>picking up the object like how far away it is, the size of the 
>object, the velocity,  direction etc.  More than enough information 
>to allow a good guess that  the object is a ship, missile, bouy, a 
>rock etc.

You'll have to look at the scale of things. How do you identify a blob 
of a contact when it is following a fixed vector. On a planet where 
thnings are affected by gravity and a horizon things are different. 
Thus you'll need a lock-on to get a telescope to "see" the object. A 
missile can be made in such a way that it gives the same radar and IR 
image to a large craft. To properly identify this you'll need a 
lock-on. And a large craft can do the same thing by powering down and 
present a side of the craft that gives a small radar image.

>I have no problem accepting that in order to hit an object its 
>location needs to be known very precisely hence the need for a sensor 
>lock but not to make a general identification of what that object is.

See above.

>Also considering the technological improvements used in the Traveller 
>universe in other areas sensor technology seems pretty pathetic.

As a former sensor operator from the Norwegian Navy, I'll agree 
partially. Firstly having too complex sensor rules just bogs the 
gameplay down. Most people just doesn't have the faintest idea what 
electronic warfare is about. Most people have this feed in by series 
as Airwolf, Knight Rider, Star Trek which are so far from the thruth 
you can get. But no ine objects, why, because it would destroy the 
story.

So the sensor rules in TNE is an improvement from MT which I never 
managed to stomach at all.



Roger "StarWolf" Myhre

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

Date: Fri, 05 May 1995 07:53:27 EDT
From: Neil Taylor <neil@owl.uk.gdscorp.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: Sensor data still more questions
Message-ID: <0098FE45.C511DB20.30@arc.uk.gdscorp.com>

J.Dixon@massey.ac.nz writes:

>When you play Brillant Lances and several objects are detected they are 
>considered to be only blobs until a sensor lock is achieved after which
>everything is known about the object.

I expect that is primarily 'cos BL is a *board* game not an RPG; Trav itself 
should offer more in the way of tasks and incremntal information gain, (cf
Star 
Trek...)

>a straight radar image contains a lot of information just picking up the
>object like how far away it is, the size of the object, the velocity, 
>direction etc.

I think outside the board game, you can sensibly assume that is true,
certainly 
velocity direction and distance.

HOWEVER:  *radar* is ACTIVE sensors - and if you use those, everyone in the 
system wakes up and says "oh there you are!"   The *easiest thing to detect
is 
someone elses active sensors being used, the next easiest is the reflection
of 
your own active sensors off a target, and the hardest is PASSIVE sensors - 
spotting the other shipo without giving anything away.

Most of the long range sensor argument concerns these passive sensors.

T2300 had the nice idea of a sensor drone, which was deployed with active 
sensors of its own and tight-beam telemetry back to the main ship.  Tough if
the 
drone got hit, but before then it lit up the system enough for you to get a
lock 
on most things.
'Course, having stutter-warp drone helps too!

>More than enough information to allow a good guess that 
>the object is a ship, missile, bouy, a rock etc.
..
>Also considering the technological improvements used in the Traveller 
>universe in other areas sensor technology seems pretty pathetic.

Trav is a hostile universe - there's lots of ships out to get you, even if 
you're a peaceful, unarmed vessel.
I expect an equal amout of Tech goes into ANTI-sensor stuff (coatings etc) to

balance many of the imporvements in sensors.

If you are really bothered, try using +/- TL as a DM on tasks!  That way a TL
15 
sensor suite against a TL 9 steamer has little difficulty in bypassing the TL
9 
attempts at concealment;  vice versa, the same TL 9 ship against TL 15
stealth a 
****** all chance of spotting its opponent.
That does then have the effect of further exagerating the importance of TL...

Personally I belive the DMs for difference in Computer cover much of the 
required factors, as the computers are heavily tied in to the imterpretation
of 
the sensor suite;  I could also argue that they are tied into the anti-sensor

suites too in helping produce decoy emissions, masking, and such
--------------------------------------------------+
-- Neil Taylor              neil@uk.gdscorp.com --|
-- Graphic Data Systems Ltd,                    --| 
-- Wellington House, East Rd, Cambridge CB1 1BH --|
--------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Fri, 5 May 95 18:26 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 274
Message-ID: <memo.117719@cix.compulink.co.uk>

In-Reply-To: <199505032324.TAA25886@Ambassador.MPGN.COM>


  > From: djohnson@frame.com (Dane Johnson) 
  > Subject: Sneaks & Geeks, And those wacky K'Kree 
  >  
  > I haven't seen anybody mention the God-awful Santa Claus -- and I
  > use the term loosely -- 'joke' involving the founder of the Ithklur
  > philosophy.  Did nobody else notice, or have I just missed the other

Yes, I spotted it. This is the only bit of the book I really object to.
Just for the record, I didn't mind the lack of 'facts' - as far as the
Hivers are concerned, it works. It'd probably work for the Droyne, too,
but I'd prefer a more traditional format for the other races. One thing
I really missed was data on the homeworlds (maps etc), and Hiver space
(sector map w/stats, dot map, etc).

  > Concering the K'Kree eating fallen Ithklur during the K'Kree/Hiver
  >  
  > at work), the K'Kree started to eat Ithklur when the Ithklur began
  > eating K'Kree, sort of as a "retaliation".  For my conception of the
  > K'Kree, this would be a wholly unthinkable motivation, mostly because
  > historically this sort of Barbarism was met with a wholesale genocide
  > of the offending party by the K'Kree. 

Let's face it, it doesn't take much to get this sort of response from the
K'Kree :-)

  > From: Bri <bri@teleport.com> 
  > Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 273 
  >  
  > Yes, i've always wonderd what exactley is the black curtin myself.

Maybe _Vampire Fleets_ will tell us. Or maybe not.


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

Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 12:45:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu (Joseph Heck)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (TML Submissions)
Subject: RE: FF&S design issues: "real" drives
Message-ID: <9505051745.AA88394@showme.missouri.edu>

>Arthur Green <ARTHUR@cclana.ucd.ie> writes:
>
>>The objective is to avoid using grav technology (so no inertial 
>>compensators, no contra-grav lifters, no gravitic focussing for 
>>lasers). 
..
>have you tried using the T2300 space rules?  They were near future and used 
>magneto-hydro-dynamic turbines (burnign l-ox and l-hyd) for most power 
>generation, and got intertial thrust for landers by flooding the turbines
with 
>excess fuel and venting the flame.
>They tried quite hard to use realistic maths for thrust etc., so that'd be a

>good place to start.

Could you post them or mail some bits of them to me? I've never seen the 
T2300 rules, and I'm curious.

-- 
 joe                          (314) 882-5000
 ccjoe@showme.missouri.edu    University of Missouri - Columbia  
 "with a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and
 impenetrable fog!" -- Calvin
 <A HREF="http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe">ccjoe</A>

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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 276
***************************


----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
From traveller@mpgn.com Fri May  5 19:14:55 1995
Received: from Ambassador.MPGN.COM by mail05.mail.aol.com with ESMTP
	(1.37.109.11/16.2) id AA299925694; Fri, 5 May 1995 19:14:55 -0400
Return-Path: <traveller@mpgn.com>
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ambassador.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9)
with SMTP id TAA12158; Fri, 5 May 1995 19:06:26 -0400
Date: Fri, 5 May 1995 19:06:26 -0400
Message-Id: <199505052306.TAA12158@Ambassador.MPGN.COM>
Errors-To: traveller-request@mpgn.com
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Originator: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: traveller@mpgn.com
Precedence: bulk
From: traveller@mpgn.com
To: Multiple recipients of list <traveller@mpgn.com>
Subject: TRAVELLER digest 276
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Traveller Mailing List
