Subj:	TRAVELLER digest 359
Date:	95-07-26 20:15:49 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 359

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) some extra clarifications of ship maintainance
	by rhunt@med.unc.edu (Rick Hunt)
  2) Question for GDW
	by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
  3) 
	by HA281PMR01@ntu.ac.uk (Lynx)
  4) Re: Grandfather (Ugh!) (Td#358)
	by Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
  5) Re: Walkers
	by "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@tasc.com>
  6) Re: Walkers
	by Bill Currie <BILLC@teleng1.tait.co.nz>

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

Date: Wed, 26 Jul 95 10:50:36 EDT
From: rhunt@med.unc.edu (Rick Hunt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: some extra clarifications of ship maintainance
Message-ID: <9507261450.AA28703@dallas.med.unc.edu>

> > How much fuel is used in normal maneuvers?
> 
> The starships in T:TNE have their maneuver fuel duration listed in G-hours.
> Thrusting 1 hour at 1G (a G-hour) consumes 1 G-hour of fuel.  Thrusting at
> 4Gs for 1 hour consumes 4 G-hours of fuel.  The rules for maneuvering
around
> a system give thrust requirements in G-hours; you can figure the required
> accellerations in G-hours, and the ship will consume the appropriate amount
> of fuel.
> 

That was about about as far as I got.  The players have a beat up old far
trader (wear 7) and it says that it has 24 G-hours of fuel, 39(?) if jump
fuel is used.  What does that mean?  It gave a time required for fuel
purification of some amount of fuel, which we assumed must be the fuel
capacity.  How much of the fuel is maneuver fuel and how much is jump
fuel?  How many cubic meters in a G-hour?  Am I missing something in the
rules?  Am I asking too many questions? :-)

Rick


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

Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 09:26:17 -0600 (MDT)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (traveller)
Subject: Question for GDW
Message-ID: <9507261526.AA27596@Rt66.com>


Howdy,

I have been thinking that it would be nice if GDW could give us the basic
hull-forms used in FFS page 12.

In other words, what does "needle" mean, and why 3 times the diameter of a
same-volumed sphere (and not 3.2 or something)---what is the formula for the
dimensions of the needle?  Same for the other configs.  Cylinder is easy, but
it would help to know what the "type specimens" were the way we know the
table
on page 11 is based on a sphere.

I was wondering this when looking at the Midu Agashaam. It says it's a Wedge
SL,
and length is 105 meters---why isn't it more scout-shaped (my vision of
wedge)?

Also, the Vargr corsair, and the CEs are all the same config, but different
lengths.  I know they are just guidelines, but it would help to know the
ideal
shape for the config in order to help figure out which one a design is (also
just to help visualize designs). (am I crazy, or is the Valor's length just 
plain wrong (44m)?)

All and all I hate the fact that length is gelled in the hulform table.  For
my own stuff I make sure the volume is calculated for the shape I use.  Why
not
for example, make a 100,000ton hullform with a length of 350m (wedge) and
then
subtract half the hull?  Now you have a 50,000ton cruiser that can mount a
long spinal weapon (not that you need one with their laser rules), but I 
digress...

Bottom line: It'd be nice to see what the "type forms" look like.

-Merrick


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

Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 17:00:18 +0100
From: HA281PMR01@ntu.ac.uk (Lynx)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Message-ID: <95072617001880@newvax.ntu.ac.uk>

During a Traveller game recently one of my players asked if a small ship
could
hide behind another, larger ship in close proximity assuming that the vessels

have the same velocity and vector. I'm not sure why he wanted to know this
but
I guess he was thinking that he could possibly hide a vessel behind a relic
'hulk' for some devious purpose of his own.

If the hiding ship was running in 'cold mode', then i would have thought that
a larger powered ship would mask its presence. If both are unpowered or
running
at reduced levels then would AEMS differentiate them successfully?

If both powered, would PEMS be able to differentiate the two?

Paul


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

Date: Wed, 26 Jul 95 12:58:56 -0400
From: Derek Wildstar <wildstar@qrc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Grandfather (Ugh!) (Td#358)
Message-ID: <9507261658.AA27977@qrc.com>

Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> writes:
> Derek Wildstar writes:
> >Grandfather (or one of the Kids) has undoubtedly been to Cymbelline ...
> Come now, Derek. Possibly, certainly; propably, maybe; but undoubtedly?

Well, 'very probably' at the least ... details below.

> [H]e wouldn't've found anything on Cymbeline until after that Solomani
> spaceprobe crashed there (how many years ago? 3000 or so, wasn't it).

Umm, no actually.  According to the background material (Signal GK, assuming
that GDW hasn't officially invalidated it yet), Cymbelline was the home of
naturally-occurring electronic-based silicon life forms since 'way before
the Solomani starship crash-landed there.

The original point of the research expedition was to locate Cymbelline
life-forms that had incorporated bits of the Solomani chips into their
structure, and thereby learn Interesting New Things.  They certainly did
find that (complete circuit patterns - which they didn't expect to find),
as well as sentient life-forms (which they REALLY didn't expect to find).

As a homeworld of naturally-occurring, silicon-based electronic life forms,
I'd think that it'd be at least as interesting to Gradfather and the Kids as
any other world with pre-sentient life.  It's well-known that Grandfather
'tried out' the available sentient races in an attempt to find the right
kind of assistants, before settling on artificially-intelligent robots.

> If Grandfather only  visits us every once in a while he may not even know
> about the Collapse yet.

No argument there.  And even if he knows about it, he probably doesn't care.

> >Maybe the central elements of his AI computers are derived from
> >Cymbelline life - "uplifted", and as you point out, about as far ahead of
> >their Vampire relations as humans are from the lesser primates.
> 
> Since they were made 300,000 years ago that's not very likely.

I don't think the date that electronic, silicon-based life forms established
themselves on Cymbelline has ever been given.  All we know is that they
already existed when the Solomani starship crashlanded there; we don't even
know if sentient chips existed before then, or if they are a recent
development.

My offhand reaction is that sentient chips already existed at that time, 
recognized the potential of the Solomani devices, and incorporated them into
their own composition.  Here's why: recent work with "genetic algorithms"
(computer programs that "evolve" to solve certain problems) have shown that
hand-coded algorithms, while they display significant short-term benefits
(they are typically smaller, faster, or more efficient at accomplishing
their designed task) are poor long-term survivors in these experiments
(because they aren't very adaptable, and are genetically fragile: change
some bits at random, and they stop working entirely - imagine that!).

By analogy, I'd expect that native Cymbelline lifeforms would be (to an
electronic engineer) poorly organized, slow, and inefficient at the primary
design goal.  But, by being flexable and genetically robust, they and their
progeny would survive for generations, while human-designed circuits
wouldn't be able to adapt or reproduce well (if at all).

However, if there were sentient or presentient Cymbelline organisms, it seems
to me that they could recognize the advantages human-type circuits could give
them.  By using these tools, they could get specific tasks accomplished in a
faster, more efficient manner.  In short, they could learn the concept of
technology (at least, the kind of technology that applies to living
electronic
circuits) by example.  And (assuming they did learn that lesson) they could
then incorporate this technology into their lives.


wildstar@quark.qrc.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      "I've been to hundreds of new worlds ...
                               ... what could be so different about this
one?"

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

Date: Wed, 26 Jul 95 17:56:56 -0400
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@tasc.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Walkers
Message-ID: <9507262157.AA03536@classic.dayt.tasc.com>

--DRAFT--

(Sky)Walkers: A Walker Design Sequence Supplement

Version 1.0

by Harold D. Hale


Introduction

     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.  Though there is some development in this 
field after TL 10, the results are specialty vehicles which
operate on worlds where contragrav equipped types 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.                
                                                               
     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 to having the 
"flying cars" pictured in "Back to the Future" and other 
Hollywood flicks dating back to the 50's and we have 
achieved TL 8 in many areas.  Wouldn't there be some worlds 
that chose to develop walker vehicles to their technological 
conclusion (whatever that may be)?  And what about worlds 
where walkers were developed, and later contragrav was
introduced?  Would they abandon their walker vehicles
immediately, or would there be a transitionary period where
walkers were retrofitted with contragrav?

     This supplement attempts to address these issues by
providing the designer with more advanced walker design 
tools. You must own a copy of Fire, Fusion & Steel (FF&S) 
to utilize this design sequence.

Disclaimer: This design sequence supplement incorporates 
material copyrighted by GDW.  It is being posted for the 
sole purpose of testing, evaluation and general feedback.  
Use of this material for other purposes is not a good 
idea. Really.

Walker Vehicle Design

Step 1. Chassis

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section. 
Walker chassis are available in the same types and 
materials as other vehicles.

Step 2. Suspension

     Select a suspension type appropriate to the vehicle.
Improved walker suspensions appear at TL 12, and take 
advantage of gravitic (if available), cybernetic, and 
materials technology advances. Advanced walker 
suspensions are similiar, and capitalize on advances in 
those fields made up to TL 16.  Advanced walker and 
Improved walker vehicles require that a contragrav unit 
be installed in the vehicle. Contragrav generators can be 
found on page 24 of the FF&S manual.

WALKER SUSPENSIONS
                     TL     Vol     Mass     SA     MCr
Walker                8     2.8      2.8     80     0.0028
Improved Walker      12     1.4      1.4     80     0.0056
Non-Grav Imp Walker  12     2.1      2.1     80     0.0042
Advanced Walker      16     0.7      0.7     80     0.0112

TL: Tech level available. Vol: Volume in kiloliters 
(cubic meters) per displacement ton (14 kl) of hull. 
Mass: Mass in tonnes per displacement ton of hull. 
SA: Useful surface area in square meters is equal to the 
chassis material volume (from chassis size table) times 
this number. MCr: Price in millions of credits per 
displacement ton of hull.

Step 3. Control Systems

     Improved, Non-Gravitic Improved, and Advanced 
walkers require a computer of a tech level at least equal 
to that of the vehicle. The computer may be of the 
standard variety, or a flight computer type.  Regular 
walkers do not have this requirement.

Step 4. Life Support

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section.

Step 5. Electronics

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section.

Step 6. Weaponry

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section.

Step 7. Power Plant

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section.

Step 8. Transmission

   All walkers regardless of type must be equipped with a 
walker transmission. The size of the transmission depends 
on the tech level of the vehicle and the power available 
for the transmission.

WALKER TRANSMISSIONS
          TL      Vol/L      Cr
           8        8        10,000
           9        2         2,500
          10        0.4         625
          12        0.067       156
          14        0.0096       39

TL: Tech level available. Vol/L: Volume (in cubic 
meters) of a legged walker vehicle suspension per 
Mw of power output designated to the transmission. 
Cr: Price in credits per displacement ton of hull.

     Improved and advanced walkers can also have their 
power plants modified to provide thrust by the addition 
of propellers, a combustion chamber, or to power a more 
exotic drive. The variety of thrusters available is 
detailed in the Sublight (Maneuver) Drive Chapter (9) 
which starts on page 69 of FF&S.

Step 9. Crew

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section.

Step 10. Cargo

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section.


Design Evaluation Modifications

1. Check Step

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section.

2. Record Design Features

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section.

3. Determine Movement

   a. Ground Movement

      Road Speed (Ground):
          Base road speed in km/hr = 5 + ([MW / LW] x 2500)
          MW: Vehicle motive power in megawatts
      	  LW: Loaded weight of the vehicle in tonnes

          Modifiers
          Each tech level above 5          +1 kph
          If standard walker               x0.25 kph
          If improved/non-grav imp walker  x0.4 kph
          If advanced walker               x0.5 kph

      Off-Road Speed (Ground):
          The Off-Road Speed of all walkers equals their 
          Road Speed.

      Vertical Movement (Leaping):

          ***I have a way to get this, but am looking for*** 
          ***a better one. Two different sets of formulas*** 
          ***need to be used--one for contragrav equipped***
          ***vehicles, which will have their leaps       ***
          ***evaluated based on how high they can jump in***
          ***2.5 seconds (or half a turn--presumably they***
          ***would spend the other 2.5 in descent--if    ***
          ***not,calculating how high they can go in a   ***
          ***combat turn would be a simple matter of     ***
          ***multiplying by two); and one for            ***
          ***non-contragrav vehicles, which should be    ***
          ***pretty straight forward since hangtime, etc.***
          ***is not an issue.                            ***

      Flying:
          If so equipped, determine the walker's G rating 
          and aerial movement capabilities of the vehicle 
          using the Lift Vehicle Design evaluation section 
          on page 26 of FF&S.

          ***It would also be possible under the right   ***
          ***circumstances for a contragrav equipped     ***
          ***walker to be fitted with collapsible        ***
          ***wings which could be extended and allow the ***
          ***walker to become a glider. Anyone want to   ***
          ***take a crack at a formula for calculating   ***
          ***the proper wing surface, etc.?              ***

4. Firing Characteristics

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section

5. Determine Maintenance Points

     As described in the Ground Vehicle Design section


     Your comments (good or bad) and constructive 
suggestions on this supplement are welcomed. Please e-mail 
me at hdhale@tasc.com or post something to this mailing list. 
I'll be posting new and improved versions of this supplement
to the mailing list as time permits.


--Harold







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

Date: Thu, 27 Jul 1995 10:25:10 +1100
From: Bill Currie <BILLC@teleng1.tait.co.nz>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Walkers
Message-ID: <104DEF93FBC@teleng1.tait.co.nz>

Just an ambiguity: 
> 3. Determine Movement
> 
>    a. Ground Movement
> 
>       Road Speed (Ground):
>           Base road speed in km/hr = 5 + ([MW / LW] x 2500)
>           MW: Vehicle motive power in megawatts
>       	  LW: Loaded weight of the vehicle in tonnes
> 
>           Modifiers
>           Each tech level above 5          +1 kph

Is the above before or after the following? (should be clearly 
stated)

>           If standard walker               x0.25 kph
>           If improved/non-grav imp walker  x0.4 kph
>           If advanced walker               x0.5 kph

Otherwise, a very nice piece of work.

Bill
+--------------+-----------------------------------+
|Bill Currie   | "Watch that first step..."        |
|Christchurch  | Jump trooper motto.               |
|New Zealand   |                                   |
+--------------+-----------------------------------+

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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 359
***************************


----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
From traveller@mpgn.com Wed Jul 26 20:14:54 1995
Received: from Ambassador.MPGN.COM by mailgate.mail.aol.com with ESMTP
	(1.37.109.16/16.2) id AA065124093; Wed, 26 Jul 1995 20:14:54 -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 UAA05155; Wed, 26 Jul 1995 20:06:52 -0400
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 1995 20:06:52 -0400
Message-Id: <199507270006.UAA05155@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 359
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Traveller Mailing List

