			    TRAVELLER Digest 346

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Electrical Discharge Devices, or some such...
	by DER04123@Jetson.UH.EDU
  2) Re: Combat walkers
	by john.bogan@asb.com
  3) Electric Death and Starship Crews
	by James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>
  4) Powered melee weapons
	by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
  5) Extreme needle hull configuration
	by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
  6) Re: TRAVELLER digest 345
	by A.S.Lilly@bnr.co.uk (Andy Lilly)
  7) Walker vehicles...
	by Christopher_Griffen@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
  8) KU hyperzine is up and running
	by myhre@oslonett.no
  9) Re: High-powered melee weapons
	by stedee@auto-trol.com (Steve Deemer)
 10) Re: TRAVELLER digest 345
	by aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
 11) Olga in the Third Imperium
	by Ron Dawson <rdawson@ccgc.tc.gc.ca>
 12) How nasty nukes are
	by "Bruce Johnson" <JOHNSON@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu>

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 21:50:01 -0500 (CDT)
From: DER04123@Jetson.UH.EDU
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Electrical Discharge Devices, or some such...
Message-ID: <01HSSQGH8I2QHXKFHE@Jetson.UH.EDU>


Stun batons...  

Well, your original question about "powered melee weapons"
put me in mind of weapons with small jets in the haft or gyros for balance,
in the spirit of several neat short stories from _Body Armor: 2000_ (edited
I believe by Joe Haldeman).  But now that I know what you mean...  you want
a glorified cattle prod...

The concept is simple:  high voltage, low amps at about the frequency used
by the central nervous system of humans (most of us, there's a Rodney King
in every crowd, though...).  This causes temporary stun effects.  There is
really no need for "design rules" per se.  Choose your battery size, a
comfortable weight for balance (usually mostly transformer and contact
points) add a switch (some have safeties) and Whammo!  (My stunners use
either one or two 9-volt batteries, and generate (depending on model)
anywhere from 40,000 to 120,000 volts in the microamp range.  I think the
human CNS runs at about 30 hertz.  A doctor can correct me if I'm wrong,
but being a couple of hertz off can make the attack relatively impotent.
Some drugs, like PCP (Rodney King), or was it cocaine?, can increase the
running freq of the CNS, and some people have a naturally higher freq than
others; it hasn't been investigated, but some theorize that this is one
factor that allows some to function better under stress or move more quickly
physically or mentally than others...  In Traveller, different minor races
may require different electrical stun weapon freqs...  A geonee may not be
downed by a Vilani stunner, or an Ithklur affected by ANY human frequency
weapons.  These weapons will be quickly supplanted, I am sure, at higher
tech levels by neural weapons, which may or may not incur similar limitations
based on race.

The trick is there is NO permanent damage (well, normally...) for short
term exposure.  I would implement CON checks, added chances for stun (like
those for concussion explosion attacks), or maybe us a single wound category,
the head, for the addition of multiple attacks to eventually disable the
target.  The effects wear off in about 30 minutes.  Long term exposure to
high voltages, even at low amps, may cause nerve damage, but make great
torture weapons (point in case- zap gloves used to great effect in _Voice
of the Whirlwind_ by Walter Jon Williams, which also had a great MONO-
FILAMENT WHIP in it...  but that's for another time.)  However, if you
up the amperage all kinds of hell would get played with the target.  I
guess your laser analogy would be the best for electrocution, but remember
there will be damage at two body points, the contact point, and the point
where the body is grounded, usually a foot, but not always...  I've seen
some nasty death scene photos of autoerotic deaths where these demented
folks used model train transformers to, well, you figure it out...  It 
would be VERY hard to have power in the MW range while maintaining microamp 
performance in the human CNS freq range, and very unnecessary if your aim 
is only to incapacitate.  If your intent is too kill, other means would be 
more efficient.  Kinetic energy comes to mind.

One hazard comes about because of the weapon's dependance on natural skin
resistance.  Skin is a high Ohm material, blood is not, water is not
(especially when ionized nicely by ferrous compounds - can you say
"hemoglobin"?  I can; it's pronounced C-O-N-D-U-C-T-O-R.).  If the skin
is pierced, which may happen in a stressful encounter (arrest or combat) 
if your contacts are too long (or deliberately sharpened, which no legit
law enforcement officer would do, honest.  :-) ), the heart will decide 
to stop functioning.  Oops.  Also wet skin can also cause an arcing 
effect to the blood stream similarly.  On a side note, that's why hospital 
telephones (which may be used by persons having a direct conduit to their 
bloodstream - IV) have to be specially insulated against accidental 
discharges which your home phone probably gives off once in a while, and 
you never notice...  Sounds like a great murder plot device on a low tech
world, like Earth, 1995 AD, where wet, barefoot women are still electrocuted
by hotel door room card readers that are in cahoots with room air cond-
itioners...

The stunner will not normally affect the user, even when the user is in
contact with the target, but if you're both wet...  :-)  As they say,
"Don't light a match..."

Which reminds me, for some unknown reason, about the Taser.  about 20 meters
of monofilament cable, twin darts fired by .22 caliber shells, 40,000 volts,
and you have Rodney King...  or don't you?  Hit him with them twice, they
did, and he laughed...  Scary stuff that 'angel dust'...  My advice to
potential Traveller law enforcement personnel is "Don't give up your batons,
and get some cayenne pepper spray... (which incidentally doesn't work on
some other people... mostly cajuns)"

I guess I've pontificated about stunners enough.

Dave.

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

Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 00:25:45 -0500
From: john.bogan@asb.com
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Combat walkers
Message-ID: <9507130025.00LPK0C@asb.com>


Harold, you might want to lift an idea from GURPS Robots
and envision some walkers as "robots with a human (or other 
sapient being) command/control system".  For one thing this
would help bridge the gap between battledress and walking
vehicles.  Compare large robots made from VAMPIRE FLEETS
with small walker vehicles. I haven't done it myself yet, so I 
couldn't tell you what you might find, but it's worth checking.


Harold Hale writes:

> 1)  Would improved walker suspensions and transmissions be 
> developed beyond those currently available in FF&S?

Inevitably.  Check for a trend in developement that could continue
after the "end" after CG.

> 2)  What would the effects of installing a contragrav unit into a walker
> be?  Would this enable the walker to leap into the air? 

Yes.

> If so, how high?  

The main considerations would be the power to the drive train (and 
efficiency of use thereof), total mass of the vehicle, and local gravity.

> What if the contragrav unit fails during a leap?  

I believe the technichal phrase is "faw down go BOOOM".

> How much damage would be done to the vehicle? 

There's no falling/collision damage rules anyplace? Hmmm...



John Bogan


If a mime screams in the woods and someone is there to hear it,
does he really make a sound?

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jul 95 23:59:22 PDT
From: James Kundert <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>
To: traveller@mpgn.com
Subject: Electric Death and Starship Crews
Message-ID: <9507130659.AA25545@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>

That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu> aka Jerry Alexandratos, says:


>I can't believe that over the past 17
>years, no one at GDW has thought of making local law enforcement
>officials with stun batons (or criminals for that matter).  It seems as
>though the combat rules are either `shoot it with a bullet and let it
>bleed' or `hit it with fusion/plasma weapons and watch the blunt trauma
>add up.'  Not that I don't like these forms of combat, I'm just
>wondering what I should do for electrical weapons, etc.

...
>I figured that I would treat charged melee weapons as energy weapons
>for terms of damage.  So, a character would make a successful melee
>hit, and then the hit character would suffer the damage from the
>weapon, plus the energy damage.'

 If you are trying to increase the lethality of melee weapons, this
works fine. I would probably look up the (altogether too brief) rules
on neural weapons from MegaTrav, mesh them with the Tranq rules from
TNE, and use the result: Normal melee damage for the weapon form, plus
a CON task based on the strength of the charge. The results of the CON
task would vary from no effect thru a "lose an action" and "lose the whole
turn" to unconsciousness and possible death (unlikely, since a weapon
with that much charge is very dangerous to use in _non_ combat situations).


>And then, as for designing the weapons, all I could think of was using
>the rules for handheld laser weapons and batteries.  You know, design a
>battery with a certain amount of power output...

 Looks reasonable, but I would consider boiling down the "damage" into
a toughness rating for the above CON task, instead of figuring a die
rating.


>And I guess that no one has any idea what the penalties are for not
>having enough crew members on a ship?  Damn, and I thought I was the
>only one not getting it.

 A couple spring to mind immediately: Maintenance points/hours equal
man-hours required to keep a ship in top condition. Feel free to
impose wear values on whatever the players decide not to maintain <EG>.
Also, because Imperials are trained to specific bridge positions, you
can impose stress modifiers to all tasks performed in a second bridge
position by one person. Only Scouts don't have this problem, as they
often have one guy doing ALL of the bridge jobs, making their training
much more multi-task friendly.

James Kundert <j.kundert@genie.geis.com>
              <james@dumbcat.sf.ca.us>

There was a young lady named Bright,
Whose speed was much faster, much faster than Light.
She departed one day in a relative way,
And returned on the previous Night.
   --Albert & the Heart of Gold

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

Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 18:18:56 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Powered melee weapons
Message-ID: <43@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

:From the message dated Wednesday 12, July 1995:

>      >>Well, here's another question that I hope someone can help me with. 
>      What do I do if I want to create powered melee weapons?  I want to 
>      create batons that pack an electrical `punch' for some characters I'm 
>      working on, but I have no idea where to start off.  Unless I am 

Assuming that you are designing at TL12, there are several possibilities for 
these sorts of weapons. You don't say what sort of 'punch' you want, but a 
non-lethal shock could be delivered very easily considering batteries and HPGs 
at TL12. I don't have exact figures for this, but I think that a lethal shock 
becomes possible with voltages of 50-100V, depending on where the current is 
applied, so even less than this would be needed. By TL12, this could probably be 
fitted into almost anything, a glove for city gangs, or a fake pen for covert 
agents. I expect someone to correct me, as I haven't done any calculations, but 
I reckon that the components of the system would have such a very low cost, that 
the price you give it probably would be determined more by how commonly 
available you want the devices to be. For effects, I suggest using the 
description for tranquiliser rounds as a guideline. It would penetrate any 
low-tech non-metal armour covering the location (ballistic cloth, etc), but 
metal suits of armour (which act as a faraday cage) and probably combat armour / 
battle dress (superdense is a metal) would provide complete protection.

All this assumes that your players are altruistic, peaceful souls, looking for a 
non-lethal melee weapon with which they can subdue those poor, misguided people 
who have taken it upon themselves to kill them. <ahem> If they aren't, then a 
lethal version would be equally possible. Considering power storage and 
discharge available, it seems to me that it would be very easy to produce 
extremely lethal melee shock weapons, which would effectively kill on contact 
(again, anyone with more experience of electrics, feel free to contradict), 
although you would need to be careful of the discharge arcing to unwanted 
targets, or even the firer. Combine a shock weapon with some sort of high tech 
blade, and you have a weapon which would be illegal on almost all worlds. 
If these weapons became very common, then a common piece of cybertech would be a 
network of thin superconducting wires implanted under the skin, which would 
protect against any hits from shock weapons (nasty surface burns, though).  

>                              .........................As I recall there 
>      were knives, swords and whips made of some sort of fantastic material 
>      that made them quite deadly.  Some of the players in my campaign 
>      wanted to design some.
>      
>      --Chris
> 
Anyone want to design some superdense melee weapons?
Could be good for impressing the natives at around TL1-2 - 'see, I come in a 
glory of fire from the sky and bring the magic sword "masspr'o-duced ru-bbish", 
I am truly your king, returned to rule you!' 

-- 
Brendan


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

Date: Wed, 12 Jul 1995 18:44:28 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Extreme needle hull configuration
Message-ID: <44@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

Considering how important the length of hull is in producing effective meson 
guns, it is odd that the hull types available are limited to relatively boxy 
shapes. Even the needle configuration, which I roughly modelled as a cylinder, 
has a length to width ratio of about 1:7. I did some rough calculations for a 
1:20 ratio hull (which I had to tweak to be more material efficient than the 
cylinder I modelled it with. This brings it into line with the conventional 
needle which is much more material efficient than a cylinder of the same length 
and volume - has anyone else found this?):

Hull form                  MVM    USL    SL    AF     LM
Extreme needle             1.8    0.6    0.7   1.1    6.4
(use the needle data for weapon arcs)

Compared to a conventional needle it would have about 30% less armour, which 
seems a reasonable trade-off for more than doubling meson gun range.

Notes:
- It seems to make Open frame craft almost obsolete, except in price terms, this 
needs to be looked at, and is a product of a mathematical approach, instead of 
any conscious attempt. 
- From the front arc the profile of the ship is so small that it might be 
considered one target size smaller for sensor and/or fire purposes.
-It is only really suitable for 100 ton+ craft as otherwise the needle is so 
narrow that the space would not be useable for conventional ships sytems.

I think that this would need further adjustment before it could be used 
properly. Simply for the sake of game balance an MVM of around 2.1-2.2 would 
seem better and it might not be easier to streamline than a needle, as I have 
assumed. What does everyone else think?
-- 
Brendan

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

Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 11:04:12 +0100
From: A.S.Lilly@bnr.co.uk (Andy Lilly)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 345
Message-ID: <199507131006.GAA00989@Mithril.MPGN.COM>

SHOCK-STICKS ET AL

That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu> (Jerry)

>So, one could probably design a crowd control melee weapon that causes
>+1-2 points in damage for electrical damage using something like 125
>hits (for a scaled TL15 battery), or more damage for less hits in a
>hard-core combat/life or death situation.
>
>Now, since I'm anything but a good scientist, could anyone out there
>with a really good understand of this stuff please tell me if I'm
>anywhere on the right track?

Sounds about right. My only knowledge is from a Roger Cook investigative
program probing the manufacture and sale of such stuff from UK factories for
use as crowd control and torture in (mainly) the middle east, but also
China, South America, etc. Apparently applying them to the soles of your
victim's feet is very effective.

They were showing 40cm-100cm batons with two electrodes sticking out one
end. Press el buttono and watch the sparks. Values of c.40,000V were
mentioned but various models have less or more. I think they had an internal
battery pack and would store 100-200 charges. They also showed police riot
shields (from 'bucklers' up to 1.5m x 0.5m with electrodes running over most
of the surface - these had much the same number of charges and were able to
(I think) stun or KO an opponent with each shock. Remember though its the
volts that shock but the amps that kill (otherwise Van De Graaf generators
would have been banned in schools years ago!) so I guess for a really
efficient stick/shield you need high tech batteries or a low tech larger
battery pack. And don't forget the common-garden taser (both the touch
version and the fire a dart on a wire version). I think high tech armour
(whole-suit stuff from CE suits up) might already have protection against
shock attack, perhaps by using a conductive outer surface which bleeds the
charge to ground? Certainly robots would be protected. But if you can put in
enough amps you can probably still burn through, etc.

NOT ENOUGH CREW?

>And I guess that no one has any idea what the penalties are for not
>having enough crew members on a ship?  Damn, and I thought I was the
>only one not getting it.

No official rules that I know of, but suggestions are:
(1) Ship operations take longer - this may be hazardous when under attack, 
suffering major faults anywhere, trying complex manoeuvres, etc. It
increases the time taken to dock and perform port operations (loading cargo,
etc.). This can be compensated by hiring dock workers, but this increases costs.
(2) Ship may not pass safety inspections (increase difficulty).
(3) Ship may have more service problems (insufficient maintenance is done) -
[make sure you have enough jump drive engineers!]
(4) Insufficient stewards - you get ratty passengers vid-phoning the captain
all night because he's the obvious link when they can't find the stewards.
(5) Insufficient services - crew morale drops when the sole chef is doing
the work of three men and either has insufficient food, or it's the same
burgers and beans for the 9th day running...

Then Harold Hale asks about...

CONTRAGRAV - TO BE OR NOT TO BE...
                                     
>   The general consensus is that the appearance of contragrav at TL 9,
>and HEPlaR at TL 10 renders most forms of ground transportation
>obsolete

Ha ha. Yes, I know it's "in the rules" but as you point out, we're a bit far
from gravitics at the moment. We can't even make a decent fusion reactor -
hot or cold... :-)

The easiest way to play this to maintain rough consistency with 'canon' is
to say that gravitic devices at TL9 are huge and power hungry. Okay, so very
expensive grav tanks might be worth it, but only the most expensive limo's
will have grav. Common people's grav cars will still be more expensive (10 x
or greater) than ground cars at _any_ TL (IMHO). They are also far more
hazardous to drive, given that both grav and ground cars can be advanced in
the same manner (automated control and routing, auto collision avoidance,
traffic-sensing and rerouting, GPS-type navigation, etc.) but grav vehicles
are airborne, giving much more complex requirements for airspace control,
more expensive requirements for vehicle sensors (terrain-following radar,
all-round radar, weather-sensing, etc.) and associated instrumentation,
greater sensitivity to weather (high winds, electrical storms, fog, mist,
low clouds, smoke), greater opportunity for pilot error (an extra dimension
- up/down - to keep track of), much greater danger in event of a fault or
crash (okay, so some cars may crash off a road into a building, but a grav
vehicle might dive into a school from hundreds of metres or even km up -
mass murder or what?). Anyone driving grav will be paying much greater
insurance premiums and probably requiring more power to keep the vehicle
going (hence greater running costs). Grav modules are probably more complex
than ground car engines hence more expensive to maintain (further running
costs).

Many people can't drive a simple ground car properly. I wouldn't let 99% of
them _near_ a grav vehicle. If they can't even manage to lift one finger and
indicate when turning at a junction, how the hell is anyone going to know
where they're going in three dimensions?!?!?!?!

>1)  Would improved walker suspensions and transmissions be 
>developed beyond those currently available in FF&S?

You betcha. Better lubricants, mechanical design, harder-wearing materials,
etc. 

>2)  What would the effects of installing a contragrav unit into a walker be?

Makes it almost as dangerous as a grav vehicle.

>Would this enable the walker to leap into the air?

Probably

>If so, how high?

That would soon be discovered by the 'boy racers' in the community.

>What if the contragrav unit fails during a leap?

This would also most likely be discovered by the 'boy racers'.
Hey Mick, let's see if we can jump over our old school building.
Hey Tom, but that might be dangerous.
Hey Mick, are you a wimp or what.
Ok Tom, let's do it
<Stomp>       <Stomp>    <Stomp>    <Stomp> <Stomp><StompStoSt> (run-up)
Wheeeeeeee!
Hey Mick, what does the flashing red light mean?
Er, high oil pressure?
CRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGG!

Hi, this is Naremi Landrau for StellarLink News. Police have been unable to
ascertain why Michael Airhead and Tom Noballs tried to jump their new
Strider LandWalker 20T over the school building, but their deaths seem
little compensation for the resulting carnage which has taken the lives of
twenty seven pupils and two teachers...


>3)  Would installing contragrav improve the speed of the vehicle
>(after all, with contragrav on, it doesn't weigh nearly as much)?

I don't think so. By definition I would assume a walker requires friction
with the ground to push itself forward. Turn on contragrav and you might
find that pushing against the ground causes the walker to tumble rather than
staying upright.
Easy solution - ignore the physics, build a test vehicle, and get Airhead
and Noballs to test it for you.

>If so, what kind of penalties would have to paid by a vehicle that was running
>a maximum speed and tried to stop too fast?

How about: It doesn't stop... or it tumbles... sounds like another item to
add to the test plan for A & N 'crash dummies'.

>3)  Given that contragrav would make walkers "lighter on their feet",
>could a walker now perform martial arts type moves (even something
>as simple as a good old front kick)?  If so, how much damage would
>this cause (both to the target and the walker)?

See tumble possibility above. This would depend on how fast the mechanics
allow the legs to move. One machine bashing another doesn't achieve any more
than one martial artist bashing another - unless there are specific weak
points to attack (and you have the flexibility to reach them - which I doubt
in a large walker vehicle) then neither side can really hurt the other.

>4)  How much would walker vehicles benefit from advances in
>the field of Cybernetics?  Would including cybernetic devices allow a
>walker to move more naturally and efficiently?

I would assume yes, since cyber devices must adapt to their host and control
muscles, etc. efficiently given feedback on the limb status and a training
session of how to walk, etc. The same technology (upsized for walkers) would
be applicable and would probably be standard on higher tech walkers.

>...and the whole thing turned into a Challenge article.

Wibble.

(and you can quote me on that).

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, 13 Jul 1995 08:38:24 -0700
From: Christopher_Griffen@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Walker vehicles...
Message-ID: <0053e340@MailXFER.DMCWAVE.COM>

     >>Development of walker type vehicles also comes to a grinding halt.  
     Though there is some
     development in this field after TL 10, the results are specialty 
     vehicles which operate on worlds where contragrav units have 
     difficulty
     safely maneuvering because of weather patterns (high winds would 
     undoubtedly wreak serious havoc on a slow moving contragrav
     transport, not to mention what it would do to the passengers stomachs)
     or other factors. <<
     
     Maybe, but this doesn't seem to be the case with robots.  Using 
     VAMPIRE FLEETS' robot design section, it seems that gravitic-propelled 
     robots have a lot more difficulty with recoil than robots with legs or 
     other types of locomotion do.
     
     I've just started a design for a robot armed with a mounted VRF Gauss 
     weapon and discovered that I'd be better off putting legs on it if I 
     don't want to spend ridiculous amounts on recoil compensation.
     
     --Chris

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

Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 18:23:46 +0200
From: myhre@oslonett.no
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: KU hyperzine is up and running
Message-ID: <199507131623.SAA04948@hasle.oslonett.no>

I have finally managed to get this thing working. Kfan Uzangou hyperzine is 
available form the fllowing URL: http://www.oslonett.no/home/myhre/ku/

I hope you like what you will see on this page. And please give me a note if 
there are any problems with any of the links.

--------------+-------------------+-----------------------------------
Roger Myhre   | myhre@oslonett.no | http://www.oslonett.no/home/myhre/
HIWGmember 142| Some people have one of those days, I got one of 
              | those lifes.
--------------+-------------------------------------------------------


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

Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 09:24:48 MDT
From: stedee@auto-trol.com (Steve Deemer)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: High-powered melee weapons
Message-ID: <9507131524.AA28782@stedee.YP.attc>


That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu> writes:

>This is one of the sources of inspiration.  However, I just can't find
>any sort of rule for what to do.  I can't believe that over the past 17
>years, no one at GDW has thought of making local law enforcement
>officials with stun batons (or criminals for that matter).  It seems as
>though the combat rules are either `shoot it with a bullet and let it
>bleed' or `hit it with fusion/plasma weapons and watch the blunt trauma
>add up.'  Not that I don't like these forms of combat, I'm just
>wondering what I should do for electrical weapons, etc.

You're forgetting the snub pistol/tranq round combination that dates back
almost to the earliest days of Traveller. This is the `shoot them and haul
their unconscious butt off to the pokey' combat varient.

Steven Deemer
stedee@auto-trol.com

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

Date: Thu, 13 Jul 95 19:07 BST-1
From: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk (Andrew Boulton)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 345
Message-ID: <memo.570922@cix.compulink.co.uk>


In-Reply-To: <199507130134.VAA27647@Ambassador.MPGN.COM>


  > From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@smtpwpo.dayt.tasc.com> To:
  > Subject: Combat Walkers In Traveller 
  >  
  > The general consensus is that the appearance of contragrav at TL 9,
  > and HEPlaR at TL 10 renders most forms of ground transportation
  > obsolete--so much so that a TL 12 ground car is almost unheard of
  > (unless you're a nostalgia buff who wonders what it would be like
  > to cruise a highway and have to parallel park).  Development of walker
  > type vehicles also comes to a grinding halt.  
  
Don't forget economics - not everyone may be able to afford a grav car,
since they cost at least an order of magnitude more than ground cars. 

  > But what if contragrav weren't available on a world until later on,
  > say TL 14 or 15 (or was never developed)?  After all, we Terrans
  > aren't even close yet and we have achieved TL 8 in many areas. 

I think it's stated somewhere that Terra was unusually late in developing
antigrav technology.

  > 2)  What would the effects of installing a contragrav unit into a
  > walker be?  Would this enable the walker to leap into the air?  If
  >  
  > 3)  Given that contragrav would make walkers "lighter on their feet",
  > could a walker now perform martial arts type moves (even something
  >  
  > 4)  How much would walker vehicles benefit from advances in the field
  > of Cybernetics?  Would including cybernetic devices allow a walker
  > to move more naturally and efficiently? 

You've either been playing Battletech or watching too much anime...

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

Date: Thu, 13 Jul 1995 19:35:53 -0300 (ADT)
From: Ron Dawson <rdawson@ccgc.tc.gc.ca>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Olga in the Third Imperium
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.90.950713192756.266B-100000@Neptune>


From: scharlto@RTD.COM (Steve Charlton)
>Subject: Olga in the Third Imperium
> 
>  -- Some annoyed feedback that was far too charitable, IMHO --
> >SNIP<
> >--Harold
> 
> >(who has vented his spleen and feels much better now....anybody
> >want to be Olga at this point, with your name and home address posted
> >to God knows how many sites around the world?  Maybe she should
> >have her boyfriend open all her mail for a while....)
> 
> Things have been a bit slow at work this week.  In a fit of
> silliness, I began trying to sketch out a Traveller adventure based
> on this mailing.  If I can get it anywhere near useable, I will
> post a summary of it later this week.
> 
> How the H*ll did this twit David get the mailing list address anyway?
> 
   It looks like this fellow was doing a blanket mailing to a large
   number of internet mailing lists.  I read Olga's "offer" on 4 or 5 lists,
   and noticed that there were a large number of other lists in the 
   visible part of the "to" fields.  Some fellow downloaded some kind of
   "list of lists" on the internet and then sent his nonsense out.  I doubt
   very much he's ever read even 1% of the lists he "spammed"

   I'd be curious to see what kind of adventure you came up with based on
   this silliness.

- Ron

-------------------------------------------------
Ron Dawson
Search and Rescue, Canadian Coast Guard College
Sydney, N.S.
Phone:    (902) 564-3660  ext 345
Fax:      (902) 562-6113
Internet: rdawson@ccgc.tc.gc.ca
-------------------------------------------------


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

Date:          Thu, 13 Jul 1995 15:52:07 MST7
From: "Bruce Johnson" <JOHNSON@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: How nasty nukes are
Message-ID: <23B085643B9@tonic.pharm.Arizona.EDU>


Les say's
> 
> Inspired by the recent re-discussion of contact nuclear weapons, I did a
> brief calculation of the damage value of nuclear weapons.
> 
> I took a 1 MT weapon, which according to the sci.astro FAQ is 4.2*10^9 MJ,
> and assumed that all of that energy would be available in an attack.
> 
> I calculated that flux in MJ/cm^2 at various ranges, and took that as the
> intensity in the formula for laser DV.
> 
> My results
> 
> Range  (m)       DV
>   1              457
>  10               45
>  50                9
> 100                4
> > It is clear from this that a nuke can really only be effective in a true
> "contact" situation.  
> 

	This is correct, and probably why nukes aren't used much.  Most of 
the damage from a nuclear blast on a planetary surface is due to: a) 
the pressure wave from the blast...something that obviously doesn't 
happen in a vaccuum environment, and b) the superheated air from the 
blast setting fires.  The common factor in most of the effects is the 
presence of an atmosphere as a medium for transmitting the energy of 
the blast.  In vaccum, only radiatation damage can occur.  The 
localized plasma around the blast will be extremely hot, but quite 
thin by atmospheric standards. thus the amount of energy it can 
transmit will be much smaller.

	Of course, the radiation effects will be greater in a vaccum (all 
that energy's gotta go <somewhere>) so there will be a LOT of very 
high energy radiation in all directions, spread all across the 
spectrum.  So a shiny or white surface 
will be able reflect a lot of the energy back, and the armor should 
easily handle the rest, it had better...your average solar flare is 
going to put out energy on the order of a nuke going off nearby, and 
do it for days to a week at a time.  I don't think that nukes put out 
the high energy particles like solar flares, it's mostly photons 
(very high energy photons, to be sure, but photons nonetheless).

	Meanwhile, a nuke driven laser is going to channel a fair amount of 
that energy at a single (or very small number) wavelength, at a 
single spot...the main aim of weapons since Grog picked up that first 
rock and threw it at something.

	My question is: why not have multiple independently aimed lasers 
from each blast...this, after all, was the real life design that was 
proposed with the nuke pumped lasers that they were talking about in 
the Star Wars program (no not the movie, but that giant Reagan era 
cash sucker program)

Bruce Johnson
Information Technology/College of Pharmacy
The University of Arizona
johnson@tonic.pharm.arizona.edu 


As if this place HAD any opinions...

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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 346
***************************
