From ???@??? Tue Jul 16 18:11:58 1996
X-State:  3
X-Total-length:     28092
Received: from NS.MPGN.COM (NS.MPGN.COM [206.66.87.254]) by mail-e2a-service.gnn.com (8.7.1/8.6.9) with SMTP id DAA18704; Sun, 14 Jul 1996 03:00:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by NS.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9) id BAA29333 for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 14 Jul 1996 01:45:55 -0400
X-UIDL: 837568871.023
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 01:45:55 -0400
Message-Id: <199607140545.BAA29333@NS.MPGN.COM>
From: owner-traveller-digest@MPGN.COM
To: traveller-digest@MPGN.COM
Subject:   Traveller-digest V1996 #247
Reply-To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Errors-To: owner-traveller-digest@MPGN.COM
Precedence: bulk


Traveller-digest            Sunday, 14 July 1996        Volume 1996 : Number 247

(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

         1. Re: The Iridium Standard
         2. Re: The Iridium Standard
         3. Subject: Re: The Iridium Standard
         4. RE: The Iridium Standard 
         5. Re: INS Prefix calling ISS Suggestive
         6. Re: The Iridium Standard
         7. Re: Starship Construction
         8. Licenced Empires
         9. Re: FF&S QuattroPro Spreadsheet - Major Oops
        10. Re: How the Imperium Really Fell
        11. Re: Starship Construction
        12. US Marines vrs Imperial Marines
        13. Fighters in Space
        14. [none]
        15. Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #244
        16. Re: Fighters in Space

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

From: Joe Walsh <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 13:57:58 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: The Iridium Standard

On Fri, 12 Jul 1996, Charles Pratt wrote:

> On Fri, 12 Jul 1996, Stuart L. Dollar wrote:
> 
> > Very, very true...
> >
> > In an environment where communications are limited to the speed of
> > the fastest ship...information is THE most valuable cargo...
> 
> Exactly...Has anyone given any thought to the myriad of private x-boat
> knock offs that would almost certainly be prevalent in the Imperium?  Like
> the Fed-Ex's and UPS's of the Traveller universe...

Unless, of course, the Imperium guards the Xboat network like the US 
Government guards the US Postal Service.  Did you know it is illegal to send 
1st class mail through any other carrier?  You can send Priority-mail or 
Express-mail type stuff through another carrier...you can send parcels 
through another carrier...but something considered 1st Class-type mail 
MUST go through the post office.  Businesses have actually been 
fined, according to the _Mail: The Magazine of Communications 
Distribution_.  Amazing, is it not?

The Imperium might even more jealously guard the Xboat's market.  They 
might decide that a certain class of communications may only be delivered 
via Xboat to any worlds along the official Xboat routes.

Then again, the reasoning behind the US Post Office's sole claim to 1st 
Class mail traffic is that the cost of delivering mail to remote/rural 
areas is so great that if all 1st class mail did not go through the US 
Postal Service, a uniform price to all locations could not be maintained.
Since the Xboat doesn't go to all worlds, perhaps the Imperium has no 
reason to guard it as jealously.

Still, it's something to think about.


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh      |  Atari 8-Bit User and Programmer Since 1982
ransom@iconnect.net  |  Classic Traveller Referee Since 1983
Stuck in the '80s    |  Microsoft-Free and Loving It! :)



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

From: Joe Walsh <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 14:04:57 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: The Iridium Standard

On Fri, 12 Jul 1996, Charles Pratt wrote:

> Uhoh.  Star Trek universe coming on ("What do you mean you don't use money
> any more???").  It would be _nice_ if all the wealthy Imperials (is that
> what you call a citizen of the Imperium?) were philantropists and art
> lovers...But I, for one, don't necessary want that kind of "nice".

Agreed.  I think something along the lines of your reply to my other post 
(I'll reply to that in a minute, soon as I'm done catching up with the 
rest of the List mail) would be best.  Not so loose as to evoke images of 
the Cyberpunk genre, but not so contrained as to choke the life out of 
trading campaigns. 


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh      |  Atari 8-Bit User and Programmer Since 1982
ransom@iconnect.net  |  Classic Traveller Referee Since 1983
Stuck in the '80s    |  Microsoft-Free and Loving It! :)



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

From: "Jonas Karlsson" <Jonas.Karlsson@Mail.Bostaden.Umea.SE>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 21:18:26 +1
Subject: Subject: Re: The Iridium Standard

> From: Charles Pratt <tminus@u.washington.edu>

> One must consider
> that a huge trade megacorp has the potential to effectively supplant the
> ruling power.

Only if the government is - relatively - laissez faire(sp?). To use a 
historical example, I don't think - um - Zil had much of a chance of 
supplanting the USSR gov. Or, for that matter, VolksWagen to supplant 
the Nazis. (Buying enough government officials so that they could do 
whatever they wanted, now, that's another matter. ;-)

>  Something along the lines of: Gov't Official "We'd like you
> to lower your outrageous prices, or we'll break up your
> monopoly"...Megacorp "Ha.  You remember the Long Night?  You wouldn't want
> THAT to happen again, would you?"

In *my* Imperium, the Govt Official would then smile back and say, 
"Ha. You remember the Imperial Navy? You wouldn't want it to 
nationalize your assets, would you?" Or, if I were in a nastier mood, 
"Ha. You remember the Imperial Marines? You wouldn't want us to send 
a few companies of them to pick up the board, the major company 
officials and every major shareholder and dump them on Exile for 
treason, would you?" (Actually, the second option would probably be 
better, even for the corp. It would probably run a lot better once it 
got rid of it's top brass and their ridiculous perks. ;-)

In my book, threatening to destabilize the Imperium would be treason. 
Governments seldom tread lightly when dealing with treason. 
Especially not governments controlling *huge* fleets with lots of 
well-trained people just aching for a bit of clean, wholesome war. 
;-)

But, realistically, I doubt either side would let it get that far, 
there *is* a bit of a terror balance there. (Also, any Board that 
started a war with the government would get thrown (at .1c or more 
;-) out of the corp as soon as anyone could manage. Not much profit 
in a war. Unless you sell the weapons, that is. ;-)

>   The Imperium would have vastly greater
> control over the bit players.

True. But then, being smaller, they could also get away with more. Of 
course, a Big Corp that gets caught is far more likely to get away 
with a 'slap on the fingers', while a small corp would most likely be 
destroyed.

> > If we're going to assume an Imperial Rules of Trade, does anyone have any
> > ideas as to what the rules would be?
> 
> Well, obviously, anything that subverts the ideals of the Imperium would
> be straight out.

Like threatening Imperial collapse. ;-)

Doing stuff that *obviously* hurt trade would probably be frowned on 
as well. (Like fixing the starport docking fees at ridiculously high 
levels for everyone but members of certain cartels, selling nukes (or 
relativistic rocks ;-) to the Ine Givar, etc.)

> If the Imperium rulers were smart, the would RESERVE alot of rights to
> interfere/regulate trade, and exersize those every once in a while (very
> publicly) so everyone is quite sure who the sheriff in town is, but other
> than that, be pretty hands off.

Right. They could most likely do a lot of it semi-covertly (everybody 
knows they're actually punishing a corp, but everybody can pretend 
it's just business as usual) with things like subsidies, research 
grants, granting or withholding major contracts, tax breaks/hikes, 
and, of course, actually *applying* laws that everybody mostly 
ignore. ;-)

/Jonas

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

From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@udel.edu>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 15:22:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: RE: The Iridium Standard 

In Reply to Your Message of Sat, 13 Jul 1996 13: 57:58 CDT
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 15:22:22 -0400
From: That Computer Guy <darkstar@chopin.udel.edu>

: The Imperium might even more jealously guard the Xboat's market.  They 
: might decide that a certain class of communications may only be delivered 
: via Xboat to any worlds along the official Xboat routes.
: 
: Then again, the reasoning behind the US Post Office's sole claim to 1st 
: Class mail traffic is that the cost of delivering mail to remote/rural 
: areas is so great that if all 1st class mail did not go through the US 
: Postal Service, a uniform price to all locations could not be maintained.
: Since the Xboat doesn't go to all worlds, perhaps the Imperium has no 
: reason to guard it as jealously.
: 
: Still, it's something to think about.

However, we can look at many other countries that do have successful,
privatized mail carriers and know that the USPS's claims may not have
much validity to them.  8)

       --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

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

From: Charles Pratt <tminus@u.washington.edu>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 12:53:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: INS Prefix calling ISS Suggestive

On Sat, 13 Jul 1996, Glenn M. Goffin wrote:

> >From: Wes Payne <n9548326@cc.wwu.edu>
>
> >Them poor Aslan.  They probably have designators based on the owning
> >clan.  Otherwise, well... fill in the blank...  The Beavis or Butthead in
>
> No, I don't think so.  Each clan would have its own prefix, which might be
> followed by SS for starship, or might not.

For the Aslan, I'm sure that clan based ship designators would be no
trouble---after all, they grow up in a very factionalized society.  I'm
sure they would be expected to be able to recognize all sorts of clan
related designators at a very early age.

- -----

        "Life is a disease of matter." --- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
        Charles Pratt tminus@u.washington.edu -- when in doubt, sail.
"The gods do not protect fools. Fools are protected by more capable fools"
                                          -- Larry Niven, _Ringworld_


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

From: Joe Walsh <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 15:11:32 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: The Iridium Standard

On Fri, 12 Jul 1996, Charles Pratt wrote:

> > If we're going to assume an Imperial Rules of Trade, does anyone have any
> > ideas as to what the rules would be?
> 
> Well, obviously, anything that subverts the ideals of the Imperium would
> be straight out.

Maybe a law against interference with lawful trade?  This would include 
the obvious things like piracy, but also things like intimidating the 
purchaser into not buying what s/he wants to buy.


> If the Imperium rulers were smart, the would RESERVE alot of rights to
> interfere/regulate trade, and exersize those every once in a while (very
> publicly) so everyone is quite sure who the sheriff in town is, but other
> than that, be pretty hands off.

Sounds right to me.  


> It would make PC-traders much more interesting if they not only had to
> avoid the dark side, but also avoid getting their heads publicly chopped
> off by the Imperium for doing something "untoward".

Ah, fear: the great motivator. :)


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh      |  Atari 8-Bit User and Programmer Since 1982
ransom@iconnect.net  |  Classic Traveller Referee Since 1983
Stuck in the '80s    |  Microsoft-Free and Loving It! :)




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

From: Joe Walsh <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 15:15:02 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: Starship Construction

On Fri, 12 Jul 1996, Paul Walker wrote:

[Informative list of real-world ship-building costs snipped]

> Using these numbers, I came to the conclusion that the Starships in
> Traveller cost too much, or people don't make enough.  I than looked at the
> 100Td Scout and figured out how long it would take to construct one with the
> World Tamers Economic Model.  I came up with a figure of 8.83 years for 100
> workers.  This is an incredible amount of time.  I think the Starship costs
> are broken!

I'm sure the costs listed in Traveller were never meant to stand up under 
the kind of scrutiny we're giving them.  But, it would be nice if 
Traveller had an economy that was more realistic.  I don't know how 
popular it would be with the gaming public in general, but I'd like to 
see a supplement for Traveller that dealt with all of the economic issues 
raised on the lists - and more.  "Economics of the Imperium" or something 
like that.


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh      |  Atari 8-Bit User and Programmer Since 1982
ransom@iconnect.net  |  Classic Traveller Referee Since 1983
Stuck in the '80s    |  Microsoft-Free and Loving It! :)



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

From: Les Howie <lhowie@novalis.ca>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 17:24:11 -0300
Subject: Licenced Empires

Stuart L. Dollar wrote:

>1588 was a red letter date in European history...it was the last time 
>anybody in Europe had a colonial empire without at least the tacit 
>acceptance of Britain, until the late 19th century. 

Gaak.. How to find some traveller related to discuss this.. Unk.

Look, the defeat of the Spanish Armada was important in terms of its impact
on English history, and it was a big help for the Dutch Revolt, but I don't
think you can hang the whole collapse of the Spanish empire on it: If it was
that important, why did the process take 400 years?

As for British naval domination, that was really a product of the Napoleonic
Wars.  

There is a hell of a lot of political agenda in any British history touching
on Parliament or the Navy; both British agenda and American agenda; and I
think that that has warped a lot of our view of events like the Armada.

Les Howie
Senior Software Developer
NovaLIS Technologies
Halifax NS
lhowie@novalis.ca


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

From: "Andrew Wardell" <wardell@m1.sprynet.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 18:46:24 +0000
Subject: Re: FF&S QuattroPro Spreadsheet - Major Oops

For those of you who may have been interested in or downloaded the Quattro Pro 
spreadsheet, I apologize...

I accidently uploaded the wrong version to my web page.  The correct version is 
now at the same location (http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/wardell/awhobby.htm
).  Hope this didn't give you too much grief.
I've also slightly updated the readme file...

Andrew Wardell
wardell@sprynet.com
(Yes, I have a web page, but it's not worth checking out...yet)

"Aside from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"

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

From: Joe Walsh <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 19:22:10 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: Re: How the Imperium Really Fell

On Sat, 13 Jul 1996, Jim Vassilakos wrote:

> Speaking as one James to another, I have to tell you that it's already
> been done. Not by me but by Bertil Jonell, one of our very own TMLers.
> He sent me an article back in 1991 that found its way into the 6th and
> final issue of the Guildsman, an online & paper fanzine I was running
> at the time. Since I'm currently working on asciifying some of those
> old articles, I figured I might as well send this one to the list.
> Personally, I think it would have made a much better history than
> the Virus, but that's just my opinion.

I agree that it makes a great history.  If the Imperium had to be 
trashed, this would have been a good way to handle it.  

Thank you for sharing it! 

Great job, Bertil! :)


- -Joe
______________________________________________________________________________
Joseph E. Walsh      |  Atari 8-Bit User and Programmer Since 1982
ransom@iconnect.net  |  Classic Traveller Referee Since 1983
Stuck in the '80s    |  Microsoft-Free and Loving It! :)



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

From: Charles Pratt <tminus@u.washington.edu>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 19:29:41 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Starship Construction

On Sat, 13 Jul 1996, Joe Walsh wrote:

> I'm sure the costs listed in Traveller were never meant to stand up under
> the kind of scrutiny we're giving them.  But, it would be nice if
> Traveller had an economy that was more realistic.  I don't know how
> popular it would be with the gaming public in general, but I'd like to
> see a supplement for Traveller that dealt with all of the economic issues
> raised on the lists - and more.  "Economics of the Imperium" or something
> like that.

And a self-help book entitled _How to Suspend Your Disbelief_.

- -----

        "Life is a disease of matter." --- Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
        Charles Pratt tminus@u.washington.edu -- when in doubt, sail.
"The gods do not protect fools. Fools are protected by more capable fools"
                                          -- Larry Niven, _Ringworld_


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

From: "David C.. Broussard" <broussa@connecti.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 03:05:20 -0500
Subject: US Marines vrs Imperial Marines

In response to Andrew Boulton's treatise on U.S. Military forces in the
Gulf...

This really is on Topic, I will splain at the bottom.

The US forces in the Gulf may (I am not sure but would believe even w/o
facts) have been responsible for the largest number of "Friendly-Fire"
casualties, but there are two basic reasons for this.  One the vast
majority of the front line units involved in direct combat with the enemy
were US, and second the other units were not entirely integrated into US
tactics and doctrine, and many were using the same equipment as the
Iraqis.

As for why this is important from a Traveller POV, here we go.  An
effective military in modern times has the job of defeating the enemy by
whatever means necessary.  When involved in high intensity combat there
really are no rules, and you do whatever is required to win.  This means
using overwhelming force in an effort to induce your opponent to
surrender.  War is not boxing or football (US or European), and you do not
have to play fair.  The Imperial Marines have a rep of leveling their
opponents.  This rep means that they are rarely messed with. When they
show up, they mean business, and the kid gloves are off.  The US military
has a similar doctrine once high intensity conflict has begun.  Do
whatever you can to destroy the enemy as quickly as possible with the
minimum loss of friendly life.  One only has to look at the Air War in the
Gulf to see that this philosophy works.
DCB
- -- 
David C. Broussard (broussa@connecti.com)  
Home page: http://www.connecti.com/~broussa/
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions represented herein are the sole responsibility of
the proclaimer, and should not be interpreted as dogma, doctrine
philosophy, or anything else other than blabber.  However, if you
REALLY like it, then gimme a dollar!
- -----------------------------------------------------------------

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

From: "David C.. Broussard" <broussa@connecti.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 03:43:07 -0500
Subject: Fighters in Space

Thanks Wes.  I enjoyed your comments.

You raised a great point about how in Traveller, there may not be a place
for fighters.  My main point is that in a game that wants to emphasize the
individual character, that fighters seem to be a great way to let
individuals decide the game.  Another point is that fighters are VERY
SMALL.  They should be much harder to hit as they are more maneuverable,
and harder to lock onto anyway.  Lastly Capital Ships really should not
easily be able to hurt little ships.  This has been the case for most
large ships throughout history.  Now can a  small ship hurt a large one? 
That has not always been a requirement, but it has been the case for a
while.  Fighters and other aircraft are hard to hit because they usually
move so much faster.  Traveller's problem is just like Wes said, the
Capital Ships can often move just as fast as the fighters.  Oh well.  

For Eris' benefit, I will refrain from discussing how a fighter with BB
missiles could take out a Virus infected Silicon Asteroid moving at .1 C
towards the Carrier group I am designing.
DCB
- -- 
David C. Broussard (broussa@connecti.com)  
Home page: http://www.connecti.com/~broussa/
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
The opinions represented herein are the sole responsibility of
the proclaimer, and should not be interpreted as dogma, doctrine
philosophy, or anything else other than blabber.  However, if you
REALLY like it, then gimme a dollar!
- -----------------------------------------------------------------

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

From: Tom Miller <scouse@inforamp.net>
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 1996 00:17:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [none]

unsubscribe traveller-digest
subscribe traveller

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

From: Paul Walker <tiger@datasync.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 23:35:37 -0500
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #244

>From: Paul Walker <tiger@datasync.com>
>Subject: Re: Starship Construction
>

Corrected Price Numbers:  (Forgot to post to XBoat)

>Retail Price:  100%
> Price Breakdown:
>             Cost -  80% to 95%  (Avg: 85%)
>  Profit/Overhead -  20% to  5%  (Avg: 15%)
>
>   Cost Breakdown:
>            Labor -  25% to 35%  (Avg: 30%)
>         Material -  75% to 65%  (Avg: 70%)
>
>Average Dollar value per Manhour:  $12.00 to $15.00 (Avg: $13.00)

OK, more clarification.  The Labor percent (Avg: 30%) includes Overhead
(Both Corporate and Yard), Engineering, and Actual Construction Crew.  Each
of these four divisions use about 7.5% of the labor cost.  This fixes the
problem I refered to in my last post.

Also, using the Starship Salary rates from the TNE main book, and
considering someone with skill level one as a laboror, and assuming the pay
listed would be 1/3 of someone not serving onboard a ship (with free room
and board) the average dollar value could be converted directly to credits.
I have the calculations if anyone is interested.  (It actually converts to
the low pay in the yard, and the higher skill levels would be payed higher.)


>    ******HELP!!!******
>
>
>Using these numbers, I came to the conclusion that the Starships in
>Traveller cost too much, or people don't make enough.  I than looked at the
>100Td Scout and figured out how long it would take to construct one with the
>World Tamers Economic Model.  I came up with a figure of 8.83 years for 100
>workers.  This is an incredible amount of time.  I think the Starship costs
>are broken!

I've figured out the problem.  Most of it came from the fact that Iwas using
the entire 30% for yard laborers working on the vessel rather than the
overhead, engineers and all.  Anyway, I came up with the following figures
for the standard ships in BL.

Ship Type      Disp	TL         List Price 	    Construction
        	Td		      (MCr) 	     Time (Yrs)
				
Scout	        100	15	     50.28 	       1.05 
Far Trader	200	12	     57.50 	       0.85 
Free Trader	200	10	     46.26 	       0.68 
Yacht	        200	15	     84.60 	       1.24 
Close Escort	400	14	    224.44 	       2.33 
Lab Ship	400	15	    129.20 	       1.34 
Patrol Cruiser	400	15	    197.29 	       2.05 
Sys Def Boat	400	12	    166.59 	       1.73 
Sub Merchant	400	12	     87.53 	       0.91 
Survey Ship	600	15	    305.98 	       2.60 
Sub Liner	600	12	    169.29 	       1.44 
Merc Cruiser	800	15	    314.90 	       2.32 
Missile Corv	400	15	    242.09 	       2.52 
Dest Escort	1000	15	    686.32 	       4.51 
Colonl Cruiser	1250	15	    493.82 	       2.91 
Destroyer	3000	15        1,549.38 	       5.88 
RC Clipper	600	12	    733.17 	       6.23 

The Construction Time Column is for a single shift (48hrs/wk, 52wks/yr).
Add 2 Months of Engineering lead time at the beginning of the project.  Add
1/4 of the time for "sea trials" at the end of construction (More for
military vessels).

I'm working on the rules system to explain Starship construction Costs and
Times, and I'll post it as soon as its done.


Paul  {tiger}


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

From: Bri <bri@teleport.com>
Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 22:45:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Fighters in Space

On Wed, 10 Jul 1996, David C.. Broussard wrote:

> and harder to lock onto anyway.  Lastly Capital Ships really should not
> easily be able to hurt little ships.  This has been the case for most
> large ships throughout history.  Now can a  small ship hurt a large one?
 Why would you say that?
 This was certinley not the case during the 1920s, which is about as close
to Traveller combat as we can get. Armored ships of the line with huge
main guns(in Traveller, missiles are generalley a secondary weapon). This
was also the same era that big battleships ruled the sea. Wooden warships
to a lesser extent(no armour) but that was still basicley the same deal.
 Modern warships are another story, but that's simply because most ships
today aren't even armored(Rember, modern waships are built with the
expectation of nuclear cruise missiles. Not enoufgh armor can be carried
to stop those...), and the ones that are armored can't be armoured enoufgh
to stop modern air-to-surface missiles or surface-to-surface missiles(they
would sink, duh<grin>)

> That has not always been a requirement, but it has been the case for a
> while.  Fighters and other aircraft are hard to hit because they usually
> move so much faster.  Traveller's problem is just like Wes said, the
> Capital Ships can often move just as fast as the fighters.  Oh well.
 That's not true. In real life water ships, the drag goes up squared whiel
the volume goes up cubed. Hence, a larger ship can have a bigger engine
porportionatley to the drag produced on thie ship while still using less %
of the displacement then a smaller ship. The same is true for traveller
ships, as the larger ships can get the same armount of armour for less
displacement % of the ship.

bri <bri@teleport.com>
The Law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich, as well as the
poor, to sleep under the bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal
bread.      -- Anatole France


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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #247
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@MPGN.COM".  If you want
to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from,
such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the
"subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".
