Subj:	TRAVELLER digest 298
Date:	95-05-26 21:43:23 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 298

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: Anti-Matter
	by "Upton, Django" <DUpton@vtrnntov.telecom.com.au>
  2) Re: More RCEG problems...
	by "KMCCARTHY" <KMCCARTHY@QMGATE.OSC.HQ.NASA.GOV>
  3) Wilds vs. Nonaligned worlds
	by E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK
  4) Isolated TL G
	by Hugh Foster <100326.446@compuserve.com>
  5) Re: More RCEG problems...
	by "Harold D. Hale" <HDHALE@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>

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

Date: Fri, 26 May 95 12:34:00 EST
From: "Upton, Django" <DUpton@vtrnntov.telecom.com.au>
To: tml <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Re: Anti-Matter
Message-ID: <2FC65A4E@msmailv0.telecom.com.au>


Roger Moore <moore@hep.phy.cam.ac.uk> writes:

 ----------------------------
> My reading of the TL section was that bulk anti-matter, and anti-matter
> containment/reactors, is indeed TL16+ -- however, you have to remember 
that C20
> Earth is producing (minute) quantities of anti-matter in particle 
accellerators!

The 'high-tech' trick for anti-matter is unlikely to be containment but
more likely to be how can you produce anti-matter for less energy than
you get from it? In almost all cases when you produce anti-particles
you produce and equal and opposite number of 'normal'-particles, mixing
these together again merely means that you get back the energy you
originally put in, useful for batteries but not much else.
 ------------------------

I always thought that GDW's antimatter power plants WERE just "antimatter 
batteries".
The production of that antimatter was not gone into but did not necessarily 
require less energy than the antimatter battery contained.

 ------------------------
To get useful energy out you need to find someway of producing
anti-particles WITHOUT the associated particle ie. an interaction which
is different for matter and anti-matter. We know that there has to be
something that does this since the Universe is made of matter, with no
traces of anti-matter anywhere. We can observe something of a difference
in the decays of neutral kaons (a type of meson) and the experiment I'm
working on is trying to find what causes this difference. (The technical
term for this is break in the matter/anti-matter symmetry is CP violation).
 ------------------------

I read somewhere that the mass in the universe may be attributable to CP 
violation in the decay of supermassive particles shortly (~10^-35 seconds) 
after the big bang.
As traveller contains gravitic manipulation to the point of the creation of 
pocket universes prehaps similar processes were used by the ancients to 
create supermassive particles to make their antimatter!

Django.

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

Date: 26 May 1995 08:27:38 -0500
From: "KMCCARTHY" <KMCCARTHY@QMGATE.OSC.HQ.NASA.GOV>
To: "New TML Broadcast" <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Re: More RCEG problems...
Message-ID: <n1410645513.15119@QMGATE.OSC.HQ.NASA.GOV>

                       Subject:                               Time:8:21 AM
  OFFICE MEMO          RE>More RCEG problems...               Date:5/26/95

cs5025@wlv.ac.uk (L.T.Bryant) SAID:

>7*30mm-6
 >again this should be a straight round with a Ea of 462J

>7*30mmE-10
>>This  is worked through as a necked round, but in FF&S it  states
>rounds  must  have a Lcc of 35mm + to be necked.  As  a  straight
>round the energy is Ea (alot less).

I pointed the 7mmACR round problems out to GDW last(?) year.  Loren posted a
message that the FFS errata would include a change to necked rounds being
greater than or equal to 30mm.  I haven't seen the FFS erata so I don't know
if it was included.  I understand there were other problems with the 7mm ACR
listed in FFS as an example.

I haven't played for a year or more so I've sort of lost interest in finding
GDW errors.  How about GDW emailing a complete set of TNE product errata to
this list.  As I don't subscribe to Challenge I guess I have missed alot of
the errata.

Kevin


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

Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 17:25:29 EDT
From: E.Watters@Queens-Belfast.AC.UK
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Wilds vs. Nonaligned worlds
Message-ID: <00990F16.29941C80.71@v2.qub.ac.uk>

Does anyone have ideas for the Military forces generation for the 
nonaligned worlds (Na in alegance column) Vs. Wilds forces generation 
given in PoT.
I havnt given it much thought, but I think that a non-aligned world,
if of sufficent tech level would concentrate more on Space and Air defence,
giving lesser priority to Ground and Naval (Wet) defence. How to represent
this? Maybe multiply pace and Air results by 1.2, and subtracting the 
increase from Naval and Ground forces.
E.P. Watters. CNG0016@qub.v2.ac.uk.

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

Date: 26 May 95 14:56:35 EDT
From: Hugh Foster <100326.446@compuserve.com>
To: <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: Isolated TL G
Message-ID: <950526185634_100326.446_BHG41-3@CompuServe.COM>

>>  According the CT supplement covering Imperial Navy 
ships of the Spin-  ward marches, the IN had it's own 
network of J-6 fleet couriers. The  5th Frontier War game 
also had some crurons that were J-6. I think it's  very 
likely that there were enough of these around that this 
system  would get a 'visit', eventually. <<

Having said that, probably not very many. They might be 
able to close their "border" much more beleivably than the 
Domain - and shoot down any visitors. With brillo TL G Deep 
Meson guns. How hospitable <g>


-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Hugh Foster [100326,446]                                      |
|                                                               |
| Such is the human race. Often it does seem a pity that Noah   |
| and his party didn't miss the boat. (Mark Twain)              |
-----------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 18:21:21 -0400
From: "Harold D. Hale" <HDHALE@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: More RCEG problems...
Message-ID: <sfc61c02.092@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com>

Lawrence Bryant writes:

>And of course my old fave
>18*90mm-10 shotgun energy should be 5955 J

Never call a man's baby ugly....he might take offense.

I designed the original assault shotgun, a  lower tech version of
which appeared in the RCES Equipment Guide.   My TL 12 version
has an average muzzle energy of 5,496.37 J, a barrel length of
54.29 cm, and an actual muzzle energy of 4,946.73 J.

IMHO, the assault shotgun can't be beat as a boarding weapon--
deadly even to armored troops at close range (who have to be poured
out of their suits after getting hit a few times), and unlike a plasma or
fusion weapon, it will leave the ship in flyable condition after a shootout.

If anyone is interested, I have developed an even nastier round for
it than the slug HEAP round.  Presenting (drum roll please)....

the HEAP Flechette Round!

The HEAP Flechette round consists of a standard 18mm x 90mm 
shotgun shell and contains 8 HEAP tipped flechette darts.  Production
of this round recently began on Aubaine.  It can be fired from the
standard issue RC assault shotgun.

TL: 12
Diameter:         18 mm
Length:            90 mm
Weight:            68.7 g ea.
Price (ea. rd):  5.5 Cr

Damage:  Medium (ea. dart) -     3
                Close (entire round) - 8 x 3

Penetration:  2-2-2

Rounds per magazine:    20
Weight of full magazine:  1375.08 g
Price of full magazine:     124 Cr

Not cheap....but then the finer things in life never are....     :)

--Harold


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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 298
***************************


----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
From traveller@mpgn.com Fri May 26 21:43:33 1995
Received: from Ambassador.MPGN.COM by emin04.mail.aol.com with ESMTP
	(1.37.109.11/16.2) id AA114839013; Fri, 26 May 1995 21:43:33 -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 VAA01544; Fri, 26 May 1995 21:29:28 -0400
Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 21:29:28 -0400
Message-Id: <199505270129.VAA01544@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 298
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Traveller Mailing List

