From traveller@mpgn.com  Tue Aug 22 22:10:00 1995
Return-Path: traveller@mpgn.com
Received: from Ambassador.MPGN.COM (Ambassador.MPGN.COM [149.109.1.5]) by mail03.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA22612; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 22:09:53 -0400
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ambassador.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA19903; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 22:02:14 -0400
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 22:02:14 -0400
Message-Id: <9508230150.AA04151@Rt66.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 386
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Traveller Mailing List
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

			    TRAVELLER Digest 386

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Non-linear PAWs
	by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
  2) Re: Armat M41A Pulse Rifle
	by Liam_McCauley@qsp.co.uk
  3) Considering selling up Classic Traveller stuff
	by Traveller@hmlrly.demon.co.uk (Traveller)
  4) Re: Help With FFS Design
	by That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>
  5) Re: Mapping Software
	by Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
  6) Hoverboards
	by cmdrx@magicnet.net (Commander X)
  7) Re: Mapping Software
	by E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk (Ewan D Quibell)
  8) Re: Help With FFS Design
	by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
  9) RE: Help With FFS Design 
	by That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>
 10) Low tech starships
	by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
 11) HEPLAR & Fusion drives
	by John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>
 12) MFDs
	by Christopher_Griffen@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
 13) Re: HEPLAR & Fusion drives
	by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
 14) Re: Help With FFS Design
	by "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
 15) MGs, Lasers, and Limits
	by Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
 16) previous digests
	by pda94@aber.ac.uk
 17) Re: Traveller Navigator
	by Pauli <P.Dale@mailbox.uq.oz.au>
 18) BR damage
	by merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)

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

Date: Mon, 21 Aug 1995 23:47:59 -0600 (MDT)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (traveller)
Subject: Non-linear PAWs
Message-ID: <9508220548.AA03350@Rt66.com>

Hi,
 
I've been working on a way to design non-linear PAWs.  The design that follows
was done using some rules I made up with the input (a lot) of Derek Wildstar.
 
Basically, toroidal PAWs run a pulse around the "racetrack" PA a few times 
(call each one a "lap"), then let them go off at a tangent.  This takes more 
energy to do, and as the beam accerates, it becomes harder to keep in the torus,
so the KE imparted to the beam decreases with each lap the beam takes.  
 
As FFS also says, this won't take much damage, so I'd divide the number of hits 
it takes by 3 or 4 (losing one part of the accelerator will cause the beam to 
exit the tunnel right through the wall).  It also uses more juice since each 
shot is made up of several added pulses.
 
Toroidal PAWs:
---------------------
 
1.  Select a tunnel radius, r.
2.  Select a torus radius, R.
3.  Calculate the path length of the torus, L:  L=2*Pi*R
a.  Calculate the DE/lap:  DE/lap=L^2  (this is just the max DE, it 
    could be lower)
4.  Caculate the tunnel volume:  Vtun=2*Pi^2*R*r^2
a.  double this (to cover cradle)
5.  Caculate the effective range as in FFS, but use L from above.
6.  Pick the ROF you want:  ROF(actual)=(ROFeff)/laps per shot.
7.  Calculate the effective ROF (this is just the total laps used each turn).
8.  Calculate the actual DE:  DE=DE/lap*sqrt(laps per shot)
9.  IE=10*DE/lap (use this for HPG calculations)
10. For power, use the ROFeff, as the ROF.
 
All the other stuff uses the regular rules.  The idea here is that you take an 
HPG that  will support a ROF=800, and use several "shots" per actual shot 
(since the beam doesn't leave the tunnel).
 
The following is a sample TL15 Ring PAW.  It used the above stuff, but I added 
a short, linear section on the end.  This critter *includes* its own powerplant (there was extra room).
 
==================================================================
TL15 Ring PAW (two tunnels---both must fire at the same target)
 
Displacement:	65 tons (it fits in a standard 50ton bay, but has a 15ton turret
		above decks)

Bore Diam:		2m
Mass:			857.89 tonnes
Price:			76.72 MCr
Crew:			1
 
This weapon has a variable ROF, and the DE changes with the ROF.  
 
ROF	DE (MJ)	Power	 (MW)			Stats
(act)	(per tube)	(total used)		(BL over BR)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10	1937.26		1435.82		10:220   20:110   40:55   80:28
					P10:6-3-2-1
 
50	1243.24		"	"	10:176   20:88    40:44   80:22
					P(-1)10:5-3-2-1
 
100	893.46		"	"	10:150   20:75   40:37   80:19
					P(-2)10:4-2-1-0
 
200	646.12		"	"	10:127   20:64   40:32   80:16
					P(-3)10:4-2-1-0
 
 
The ROF of 10 is for each tunnel, so you'll get 2 shots.  All the other ROFs 
assume 2 tubes firing, so the ROF of 50 has each tunnel firing 25 shots where 
each shot took 16 laps around the PA.  Because they share an HPG, they'd 
alternate actually firing.  There is enough waste space to armor the turret up 
to around BR AV:15 or so if you were worrying about it (still weak, but what the
hell :).
 
This bay looks like a 2 barrel large naval gun, but the barrels are much bigger in relation to their length.
 
-Merrick 


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

Date: 	Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:19:07 +0100
From: Liam_McCauley@qsp.co.uk
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Armat M41A Pulse Rifle
Message-ID: <03993af0@pc173.qsp.co.uk>

     Someone has pointed out that the weight for 95 rounds of 10*24mm 
     caseless ammo should be 1.8Kg, not 0.18Kg, which puts the weight for a 
     loaded magazine at double that in the book, and thus the whole weapon 
     about 1.5Kg over.
     
     As far as I can see in FF&S, there is no weight modifier for caseless 
     ammo, but I was under the impression that real-world caseless ammo is 
     lighter (and you can get more in a magazine because it tends to be 
     square in cross section) than comparable cased ammo.
     
     *Is this true?
     *Has anyone worked out house rules for caseless ammo?
     
     Also, what material is the magazine assumed to be made of?  Steel (in 
     which case I could replace it with composite)?
     
     Cheers,
     Liam

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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:18:53 GMT
From: Traveller@hmlrly.demon.co.uk (Traveller)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Considering selling up Classic Traveller stuff
Message-ID: <87@hmlrly.demon.co.uk>

I've got a load of old Traveller stuff:
starting with all of the A5 rule books (remember when Scouts came out with all 
the errata in it? you are all probably used to calculating stuff with FFS but 
when Scouts came out with the ability to work out a star system it was cutting 
edge stuff!)
All A5 scenarios (good memories Across the bright face my first ever RPG 
scenario, Twilights Peak one of my favourites the GM that ran it was excellent), 
many TAS, lots or third party supplements, no FASA, the beginings of A4 all of 
the Aliens modules Atlas of Imperium, Grand Census and the other one that came 
out at the same time, The Traveller Campaign, A4 hard back Traveller rules, 
Snapshot, Azanti High Lightning the Invasion Earth boxed game, bits and pieces

All this stuff is bagged in my attic I've not seen or used it for some time but 
my attic is dry and it should all be pretty mint, apart from the big Azanti box 
which an idiot sat on (my imagination or was that really 10 years ago!!)

I'm thinking of selling up, whats it all worth?

I haven't been on the list long and if this post is out of order my humblest 
apologies, just treat it as a small journey through memory lane!


-- 
Arthur


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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:48:47 -0400
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Help With FFS Design
Message-ID: <199508221348.JAA25957@chopin.udel.edu>

In Reply to Your Message of Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09: 11:17 EDT
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 09:48:47 -0400
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>

: 
: Howdy, 
:  
: > Okay, dumb question.  When I'm designing a laser turret and I want it
: > to have an MFD, where does the MFD go?  Does it replace the crewstation
: > that would be in the turret (and thus take up it's volume)?  Or, is the
: > MFD an external piece of machinery from whatever may be inside the
: > turret (and thus take up volume on the ship, but not in the turret)?
: > 
: > Thanks in advance...
: > 
: >         --Jerry
: 
: It's supposed to be a separate unit, but since it includes a crewstation, I
: frequently use one instead of the normal crewstation on the turret.  Also,
: because MFDs can control multiple turrets, this might be overly expensive, so
: I tend to do it on bigger weapons (bays, for example--or missile barbettes).
: 
: So do it either way :)

So, does this mean that I can create my 200Mj laser turret that's got a
HPG so large (how large is it?) that it eats up all of the volume in
the turret and doesn't leave any room for a gunner's workstation, and just
dedicate an external MFD to it to do the fire control?

: Just keep in mind whether or not the weapon in question needs a dedicated MFD
: enough to justify the added cost.  When in doubt, I add the MFD since a small
: added cost is cheaper than losing a ship.

Cost?  Cost?  Did you say cost?  Not to worry, military-surplussed
ship.  Price is no object!  8)

: -Merrick
: 
: PS-since you're designing ships, I'd add something unrelated: don't
: bother putting a damper turret/barbette on anything.  You'd be much
: better off with a laser turret (it can shoot at ships *and* missiles,
: and has a better chance of killing the missile anyway--so where are the
: area dampers, anyway?)

Not a bad idea.  Hmm.  Makes me think about non-grav focused lasers as
well.  Sure, they really suck at long and extreme ranges, but at short
and medium, a TL-15 720Mj laser turret does double the damage and
penetration, and has about the same power requirements as a 150Mj grav
focused laser turret.  Makes you wonder about MFD'ing a couple of
turrets and then switching between the two based on range of target...

       --Jerry

8) Jerry Alexandratos                %  "Nothing inhabits my    (8 
8) darkstar@strauss.udel.edu         %   thoughts, and oblivion (8
8) darkstar@canary.pearson.udel.edu  %   drives my desires."    (8

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

Date: 22 Aug 1995 14:11:55 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Mapping Software
Message-ID: <1731198942.118917120@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca>

In response to several requests:

I am currently writing a Macintosh program that maps (and generates) TNE
systems, using either basic or extended system generation and including names
(using the Classic Traveller word generation).

This software is not, and probably never will be, available on an FTP site. 
The reasons for this are: (1) It contains material copyrighted by GDW, and
they haven't given permission, and (2) a couple of years ago I found some of
my work at an FTP site, with my name replaced with someone else's in the
copyright and shareware notice.

To become a tester, send me a private message.  I'll email you a license
agreement to print out, sign, and mail to me.  Once I get the license
agreement I'll add you to the list of testers.  

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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 10:19:18 -0400
From: cmdrx@magicnet.net (Commander X)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Hoverboards
Message-ID: <199508221422.KAA02114@magicnet.magicnet.net>

>From the RQS Fortune and Glory
Commander X Transmitting...
*>BEGIN TRANSMISSION<*

Greetings fellow TMLers! Commander X has returned from his long foray within
the Vargr Extents
and is ready to begin the 2nd instalment of Tales from the Line, but 1st,
the old Commander must
put in his 2 credits worth...

quoting from Mr. Boulton in Digest#385 (aboulton@cix.compulink.co.uk):

>Talking of bizarre vehicles, I thought of a great one in the shower this
>morning - grav-boards! Surf-board + contragrav =3D very silly, but I've=
 just
>gotta do it :-) Haven't attacked the idea with FF&S yet, but watch this
>space...
>

I have been using these toys since MT days, but I converted them to TNE.
The original idea was to try to make a Hoverboard like from "Back to the
Future part II" but all I
could do was make a hover surfboard.(The things heavy too! 86kg  :(  ) The
stats are as follows...

Hoverboard TL-12

HULL:
	Rate:0.005	Volume:0.07m^3	Material Vol:0.003m^3
	Config:simple(slab)	SA:70cm^2`	Mass:0.003
	Material:fiberglass	hull cost:3cr

SUSPENSION:
=09
	HiEff ContraGrav TL-12 	Vol:0.03	Mass:0.02
				Power:0.01MW	Cost:3000cr

POWER:
=09
	0.01MW Storage Battery TL-11
	Duration: 1hour
	0.01m^3 	0.02tonnes 	Cost:40cr

Total Price: 3043cr
Total Mass:0.043tonnes(86kg<heavy!>)
Total Space Available:0.07m^3	Total space used:0.043	Waste space:0.027m^3

Dimensions:  1m x 70cm x 10cm (1x0.7x0.1=3D.007  OK! :) )

To use the hoverboard,  jump on it, put your foot on the pressure activator
and it will gently rise as
the mass becomes boyant.  Then just push of the ground with the other foot
and coast!  Simple!
But bear in mind the laws of Newtonian mechanics, the harder you push, the
faster It goes and
the more you push, the more you excellerate.  To slow down you must either
coast or use your off
foot to brake.=7F

My PC's had loads of fun with these toys, crashing into walls and each other
(giggle!) Hoverboard
tasks are realtively easy to judge, just use the AGL stats (yes Accrobatics
can help too!) and
depending how fast they go and how fancy they do it, raise the dificulty
appropriately.

I hope that gives you some ideas Mr. Boulton.  Now that you have this, you
dont need to do all
those calcultions in FF&S! Please feel free to correct, adjust,
improve(especialy the MASS!) or
whatever.

>From the RQS Fortune and Glory.
KEEP THE FLAME!!!
Commander X out....<click>
**>END TRANSMISSION<**


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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 16:47:32 +0100 (BST)
From: E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk (Ewan D Quibell)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Mapping Software
Message-ID: <9508221547.AA11014@diamond.bton.ac.uk>

Rob, what's your email address ?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- E.D.Quibell ------------------------------------ Thought is just about ----
-- Data Communications Technician ----------------- the hardest thing a   ----
-- University of Brighton ------------------------- human can do - which  ----
--------------------------------------------------- probably explains why ----
-- Email  e.d.quibell@bton.ac.uk ------------------ so few seem to do it. ----
--        quibez@essex.ac.uk -------------------------------- Henry Ford -----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Who me ? Na, I didn't say that. My Employers ? They don't say anything ---
----- My spelling is entirely due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic licence -----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 11:20:45 -0600 (MDT)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Help With FFS Design
Message-ID: <9508221720.AA29179@Rt66.com>

Hi again :)

> So, does this mean that I can create my 200Mj laser turret that's got a
> HPG so large (how large is it?) that it eats up all of the volume in
> the turret and doesn't leave any room for a gunner's workstation, and just
> dedicate an external MFD to it to do the fire control?

No, I sometimes use an MFD *instead* of the wkstation.

-Merrick

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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 13:34:32 -0400
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: RE: Help With FFS Design 
Message-ID: <199508221734.NAA06652@chopin.udel.edu>

In Reply to Your Message of Tue, 22 Aug 1995 13: 24:07 EDT
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 13:34:32 -0400
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>

: Hi again :)
: 
: > So, does this mean that I can create my 200Mj laser turret that's got a
: > HPG so large (how large is it?) that it eats up all of the volume in
: > the turret and doesn't leave any room for a gunner's workstation, and just
: > dedicate an external MFD to it to do the fire control?
: 
: No, I sometimes use an MFD *instead* of the wkstation.
: 
: -Merrick

I was afraid you'd say something like that.  8(

Oh well, back to the drawing board.

       --Jerry

8) Jerry Alexandratos                %  "Nothing inhabits my    (8 
8) darkstar@strauss.udel.edu         %   thoughts, and oblivion (8
8) darkstar@canary.pearson.udel.edu  %   drives my desires."    (8

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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 18:33:37 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Low tech starships
Message-ID: <63@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

(Techy bit follows, skip to bottom for adventure seeds)
I've just tried designing some starships at TL9, I haven't finished the designs 
yet, but lots of interesting things turned up while I was working on it.

- There is an error in the MFD chart, which includes TL9 MFDs with ranges up to 
10 hexes. All very well, but they need a pencil beam active sensor, and TL 9 
radar has a maximum short range of 3 hexes. This means that there is no point in 
fitting a (3hex) MFD, as a 10 hex beam-pointer would be far more effective at 
most ranges.
I would suggest the following chart as a quick fix for this

Radar availability
                        Processor Volume
Short range (km)         TL8    TL9
90,000                   60     30
120,000                  70     35
150,000                  85     45
180,000                  100    52
210,000                  -      57
240,000                  -      62
270,000                  -      75
300,000                  -      85


- It is very hard to design any kind of exploration craft, even once Jump-1 
becomes available at TL9. For proper exploration, refuelling capability is 
important. Fusion rockets are very effective drives, so long as you don't want 
to get anywhere fast, but they 'cannot be used in planetary atmospheres'. I 
assume this is mainly because of the effects of radiation on planetary 
ecologies, so this doesn't apply entirely to gas giants. However, flying a 
fusion rocket powered craft through a gas giant creates another problem, as the 
plasma exhaust will cause secondary fusion reactions in the hydrogen behind the 
craft. This means that any refuelling craft needs to keep up speed inside the 
gas giant so the fusion explosion behind it doesn't catch up. In design terms 
this requires an airframe hull and armouring to 30 to prevent the fuel shuttle 
from burning up, and to allow it to go fast enough in the atmosphere, although 
1G acceleration should be sufficient to allow escape.
:From orbit the sight of fuel shuttles refuelling is truly impressive. On 
entering the atmosphere an initial fireball speads out slowly from the point of 
impact with the atmosphere. From one edge of the expanding fireball a point of 
fire reaches out, an inferno spreading out like the wake of a speedboat from the 
speeding shuttle.
Even with a specifically designed craft the danger of this maneouvre is 
considerable. Refuelling in this way is a Difficult:Pilot Interface/Grav task. 
Failure results in 1h damage to the fuel shuttle, and -1 to the physical 
attributes of the crew for the next week due to slight radiation poisoning (The 
only symptom unless the referee is cruel/realistic. ADVENTURE idea: Optionally 
some or all of the crew develop cancers which may not be treatable at TL9, 
turning their exploration mission into a race against time to find some 
civilisation advanced enough to treat their sickness.)
Catastrophic failure results in the destruction of the craft (crewmembers could 
escape in a specially designed rocket escape pod, but they would definitely 
receive major radiation poisoning)
Low tech pilots tend to be _very_ good for this reason.

-Exploration is also hampered by the available thrusters. All of the lower tech 
thrusters have very large fuel requirements, and cannot be fueled on hydrogen. 
The low thrust of the 'clean' thrusters means that the main exploration vessel 
cannot land on habitable planets using them, so much smaller landers, launched 
from a jump capable fusion rocket propelled craft would need to be used. Because 
none of the clean thrusters can be fuelled with hydrogen, the mothership would 
need to carry enough fuel for the whole mission.

I suggest the following thruster as a TL9 solution for planetary landings

TL Type             Th   MCr    MaxT    FC     FT     Airframe
9  HeatJet          8    0.5    -       2.00   Lhyd   Hyper

The heat jet passes liquid hydrogen around a fusion reactor, heating it and 
boiling it, expelling it as a gas. This is a precursor to the HEPlaR drive, but 
the hydrogen does not reach a plasma state. Although considerably inferior to 
the fusion rocket which becomes available at the same time, it is a cleaner 
alternative, and can be used within planetary atmospheres.
Alternatively stick with the FFS rules, it produces interesting results and 
makes design challenging, if not impossible.

Adventure idea:
Under normal conditions the fusion wake in gas giant atmospheres will die down, 
as the atmosphere is not dense enough to support the fusion reaction. However, a 
brown dwarf, a gas giant which is almost a star, could possibly be triggered by 
a fusion rocket into igniting into a full star, making the vicinity decidedly 
uncomfortable for any lifeforms.
This could cause all sorts of problems for the players:
1. Get out of here! Now! - The players' ship should be capable of taking them 
out of danger, of course now would be a particularly unfortunate time for 
saboteurs/vermin/old age to strike at the maneuver drive, resulting in a race to 
repair it before the the characters become Kentucky Fried Travellers.  
Alternatively, insufficient fuel to escape had been taken from the star, so the 
fuel shuttles are forced to make a few last runs into an igniting star to get 
enough fuel to escape

2. Guilt trips - Even if the players can get away, it doesn't meant that 
everyone else nearby can. If the players' actions have accidentally caused the 
impending doom of someone nearby, then they should probably have a go at 
rescuing the victims, who could be:
1/A settlement on a nearby agricultural moon.
2/Sentient aliens encountered living within the atmosphere of the gas giant.
3/A nearby free trader who is experiencing problems similar to those outlined 
above for the players.
4/An old imperial research station, complete with signal beacon and remnants in 
low berths. 
5/For mercenary players, a cache of relic technology could be discovered on 
one of the moons just as the gas giant ignites - how much can they grab before 
the lot goes up in flames?

-- 
Brendan


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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 12:32:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: John Muir Macpherson <muirmac@uclink.berkeley.edu>
To: Traveller Mailing List <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: HEPLAR & Fusion drives
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9508221257.A29919-0100000@uclink.berkeley.edu>

	FF&S says that Heplar is a real drive but that its performance is
greatly exaggerated.  Does anyone know what the performance of a
"realistic"  Heplar drive might be?  Twice as much fuel, an order of
magnitude more? 
	Two related notes:  How big would the reaction mass "flame" 
behind a Heplar or fusion equipped ship be.  Since the reaction mass IIRC 
is around 10^6 C, shouldn't it be visible from a great distanc, like 
multiple AU?  And second, would using a fusion drive in the region from the 
upper atmosphere to LEO  generate an EMP?
	Thanks. 

		-- Muir

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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 13:06:49 -0700
From: Christopher_Griffen@dmcwave.com (Christopher Griffen)
To: traveller@mpgn.com
Subject: MFDs
Message-ID: <03a38df0@MailXFER.DMCWAVE.COM>

     Answering Jerry Alexandratos' question:
     
     >>Okay, dumb question.  When I'm designing a laser turret and I want 
     it to have an MFD, where does the MFD go?  Does it replace the 
     crewstation that would be in the turret (and thus take up it's 
     volume)?  Or, is the MFD an external piece of machinery from whatever 
     may be inside the turret (and thus take up volume on the ship, but not 
     in the turret)? <<
     
     The MFD is controlled by a bridge workstation.  See your Brilliant 
     Lances or FF&S design rules for workstation complements.  Bridge 
     workstations are allotted to command crew, maneuver crew, electronics 
     and MFD crew.
     
     --Chris

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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 20:13:16 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: HEPLAR & Fusion drives
Message-ID: <66@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

:From the message dated Tuesday 22, August 1995 :
> 	FF&S says that Heplar is a real drive but that its performance is
> greatly exaggerated.  Does anyone know what the performance of a
> "realistic"  Heplar drive might be?  Twice as much fuel, an order of
> magnitude more? 

I don't know, but there are a few theoretical near-future (or possible, but not 
attempted) drive types which are not mentioned in FFS
Orion Drive: A bit like the Daedalus drive mentioned in FFS, but intended for 
insystem maneuvers. Nuclear warheads would be dropped and detonated behind the 
craft, the explosion pushing on a shock absorbing 'pusher plate'and driving the 
craft forward. This system would produce massive thrust, and would be available 
at TL8-9. While it wouldn't be as bad as a fusion rocket, it would have a 
detrimental effect on the ecology of a planet if used in a major space program.

Nuclear-thermal rocket: Water or some other reaction mass would be heated by a 
nuclear reactor (fission/fusion) and the steam resulting would be vented at the 
rear to produce thrust.

The thrust of both of these would be comparable to or greater than the low tech 
thrusters presented in FFS, and the fuel economy would be an order of magnitude 
greater.

> 	Two related notes:  How big would the reaction mass "flame" 
> behind a Heplar or fusion equipped ship be.  Since the reaction mass IIRC 
> is around 10^6 C, shouldn't it be visible from a great distanc, like 
> multiple AU? 
The flame would be very hot, but when travelling at a speed of 67 km/s (4hexes 
per turn) or a similar order of magnitude, the reaction mass expended would be 
spread out across such a large area that it would not be easily visible. The 
exhaust near the ship would be hotter, but the greatest signiture would come 
from the end of the ship heating up, which would accumulate heat, rather than 
the exhaust itself.

               And second, would using a fusion drive in the region from the 
> upper atmosphere to LEO  generate an EMP?
HEPlaR is not radioactive, so it wouldn't. Fusion rockets would certainly emit a 
lot of electromagnetic radiation, but it probably wouldn't be an EMP. The energy 
from the fusion rocket is output more gradually than from a nuclear explosion, 
so there would be a constant wash of radiation rather than a pulse. This 
radiation might be enough to disrupt electronics depending on the size of the 
rocket and the range involved.

> 	Thanks. 
> 
> 		-- Muir
> 

-- 
Brendan 


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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 19:47:51 GMT
From: "Brendan O'Donovan" <Brendan@odonovan.demon.co.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Help With FFS Design
Message-ID: <65@odonovan.demon.co.uk>

:From the message dated Tuesday 22, August 1995 :

> : > So, does this mean that I can create my 200Mj laser turret that's got a
> : > HPG so large (how large is it?) that it eats up all of the volume in
> : > the turret and doesn't leave any room for a gunner's workstation, and just
> : > dedicate an external MFD to it to do the fire control?
> : 
> : No, I sometimes use an MFD *instead* of the wkstation.
> : 
> : -Merrick
> 
Bear in mind that these limitations only apply if you are designing turrets to 
be fitted to traders and similar ships which otherwise have no MFDs. You could 
design a turret with no MFD or crewstation, but it could only be used by ships 
with fitted MFDs as part of their original design (inevitably, any ship with 
unused hardpoints is unlikely to have an MFD). Think of MFDs as remote controls 
for ships' weapons, they are usually in a completely different part of the ship. 
A turret can work without MFD/crewstation, but if there is neither a crewstation 
or an MFD in the turret, it means that if the external MFDs are blown up, then 
the turret cannot be fired.

The reduced crew requirement when using MFD batteries can help with particularly 
tight designs, but remember, there is no need to stick to the standard volumes 
for turrets and barbettes in your own designs. You do more work if you work with 
non-standard sizes, but once you get used to designing lasers in FFS, you can 
produce custom designs pretty quickly.
-- 
Brendan 


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

Date: 23 Aug 1995 00:41:14 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: MGs, Lasers, and Limits
Message-ID: <607780862.121262038@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca>

>>Myself, I have no problem with the arbitary TL*50 rule to balance things out


>Neither do I, but I doubt it will be official, and that it will be possible 
>to enforce.

Actually, you can't 'enforce' the official rules, either.  Back when I was
running the MegaTraveller Referees' Exchange, a lot of people sent me designs
using their favourite varient rules, without a note stating that these were
varients.  (Most of these changes made weaponry more deadly.)   

Some of the designs in this list have done the same thing.

It's easy to see if a design follows the TL*50 rule.  If a ship breaks that
rule, you can always decide that in your universe that ship doesn't exist.

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

Date: Wed, 23 Aug 1995 01:57:48 +0100
From: pda94@aber.ac.uk
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: previous digests
Message-ID: <199508230057.UAA29597@Mithril.MPGN.COM>

Dear everybody,
               Can anyone help ? My mail-list central file store has
corrupted and I've only reached Digest 343 as my backlog of mail has been
horrendus lately.Can anybody send me Digest 344 onwards (up to the most
recent) ? I'd be very grateful,
               yours hopefully,
                                Peter Antill

pda94@aber.ac.uk


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

Date: Wed, 23 Aug 95 11:02:25 +1000
From: Pauli <P.Dale@mailbox.uq.oz.au>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Traveller Navigator
Message-ID: <199508230102.AA15656@dingo.cc.uq.oz.au>

hi,

Rob Prior wrote:

>Alternately, Jo Grant has a set of software available for PCs, and I have a
>beta mapping program for Macs.

If you are interested in Mac Traveller program then: I started writing a
suite of various utilities for playing Traveller with a couple of years ago.

The lastest version I posted anywhere did a pretty good job of mapping
space (sort of a traders' view of space, including most of the little
symbols GDW includes in their maps, move around by clicking on another system).
It also included a word generation & speaking package and a simple dice
rolling package.

The mapping sub-program did include generation of worlds, reading in
the standard sector files and seaching for worlds based on stats, names etc
Plus any die roll could optionally be edited for GMs customisation.


It is located at: ghost.cc.missouri.edu (128.206.222.222)
and the file is:  PUB/Traveller/software/TNEUtil.sea

It is a self extracting archive, though Stuffit Expander should be able
to deal with it.







        						Dr Pauli

Paul Dale                       | p.dale@mailbox.uq.oz.au
10/217 Hawken Drive             | +61 7 3870 5688
St Lucia                        |
Australia, 4067                 | Did you know that there are 41 two letter
                                |     words containing the letter 'a'?


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

Date: Tue, 22 Aug 1995 19:50:47 -0600 (MDT)
From: merrick@Rt66.com (Merrick Burkhardt)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM (traveller)
Subject: BR damage
Message-ID: <9508230150.AA04151@Rt66.com>


Howdy,

I've been thinking about the way damage is handled in BR, and it seems a little
screwy.  The fact that you add outstanding hits together is what bugs me.

A while back there was a "death of BRs" thread, and part ot it (in addition to
cheap/low_volume armor at large ship sizes) was the fact that you need a big
ship to have a big MG (unlike HG where the biggest MG was 7000tons).  The reason
for the death of the BR in BR (but *not* in BL!) is the conversion they did 
from BL to BR, *not* the TNE universe as it stands.

Meson screens in BR subtract their PV from the attack *even if the task fails*,
this is not the case in BL.  So instead of making them work like BL, they added
the Outstanding Success = 2*damage rule so MGs would have some value (my theory)
As it stands, MSs are very, very effective.  As a result, Outstanding success
is virtually required to do damage.  In addition, none of the ships given in BR
are well designed. With a MS:16 ship that is size -4, it is totally safe from
MGs that do less than damage 10, and only temps from them (all on outstanding
success only), and that is assuming they miss their 75% chance of no damage at
all.

If you play meson screens as they are in BL (base diff 3, +1 if the MG exceeds
the MS by 2 or more, and +2 if 4 or more, and -1 if the MS beats the MG by 4+),
a successful task negates the attack, and if it fails the ship takes MG + size
damage.  Don't double damage (out. suc. equals 2 separate hits).  Remember that
you'll have to compare the BL values for the MG and MS (use the chart at the
end of the BR rules) since the BR damage values scale to BL in a non-linear way.

The gist of this is that MGs are as useful as they are in BL.  A smaller ship,
with a smaller MG has a small (5% if MG*4<MS) chance of doing damage, but if it
does, it will do its full damage (minus size).  Now, like BL, many smaller ships
have a use against one bigger one.

To use the example of the damage=10 MG vs. MS:16, if the MG hits (95% at short
range) the screen task will be 1.  95% of the time no damage (100% the old way).If the task fails, then it'll take 6 hits (10+(-4)).  On outstanding success, 
the BR way does 1 temp hit every time.  The BL way it would do no damage 67%
of the time, but you'd get 2 trys.  If it does hit, it'll do 6 hits.

The cool thing is lesser MGs will have the same 33% chance to do some damage.

Comments?  

-Merrick

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

End of TRAVELLER Digest 386
***************************
