Traveller-digest            Friday, 19 July 1996        Volume 1996 : Number 270

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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

         1. Re: [T96#248] Iridium Standard
         2. Re: Rules for Starship Construction (LONG)
         3. Re: INS Prefix calling ISS Suggestive
         4. RE: Culture. music, and other stuff
         5. Re: Mars\Moon Stuff
         6. Re: Long Night and Oxy/Nitro asteroids.
         7. Re: Linguistic referents
         8. Jump drive theory
         9. Re: Fighters in SPACE

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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 18:05:46 PST
Subject: Re: [T96#248] Iridium Standard

In mail you write:

>  Many people claim to understand but fail to realize the
>  implications of the statement that "Wealth and production are
>  equivalent."  The best way to illustrate it is this:
>
>  You have been placed on a semitropical island in its virgin
>  state.  You are wearing nothing but your birthday suit, and you
>  have no means of getting off the island or of communicating
>  with anyone off the island.  There are no dangerous life-forms
>  on the island.  There is a pile of gold bars (Fort Knox
>  variety) next to you, amounting to ten million troy ounces of
>  24K gold.  There is _no_ other product of civilization on the
>  island.
>
>  Are you wealthy?  No.  All you've got is over three billion
>  dollars worth of metal that you can't make into anything
>  useful, and can't trade for anything that you _could_ make into
>  something useful.  You might as well have been dropped there
>  without the gold, for all the good it will do you.

Not true. Unless there is *no* firewood, and no rocks on the island, I
*can* make use of the gold. It's too soft for tools, but I can pound
some of the bars into a drinking cup (trust me, unless you have a saw,
you *don't* try making a cup out of coconut shell). 

I might even manage to work up a mirror, or even draw the gold into
wire. And I can make a battery....

>  A year later, you've managed to build yourself a reasonably
>  sturdy two-room hut, and have some rudimentary wood and stone
>  tools and work surfaces.  You're located near a good source of
>  fresh water, and have managed to cultivate a small garden.

Actually, unless there's some accessible obsidian on the island, stone
tools will be a *bitch*. Stone tools require some rather specific sorts
of rock, and obsidian is the most likely to be found on this sort of
island. 

On the other hand, if it takes you more than a couple of *months* to
get to the stage described above, you aren't trying. Especially since
establishing a garden is rather pointless for the *native* plants. And
you don't have any "non-native" ones.

>  The
>  gold mysteriously disappeared your first night on the island.

No fair! I had plans for that gold!

>  A stranger walks up to you while you're foraging for some
>  things that don't grow in your garden, or while you're digging
>  out some nice stone to work with.  The stranger is in the same
>  state you were just one year ago, except that he never had the
>  gold that you did.  Who's wealthier?  You are - you have the
>  products of your own labor, and they have made your life
>  easier.  Yet there is no material on the island that wasn't
>  there when you arrived - all that's happened is that you have
>  used that material to produce the things that make your life
>  easier.  A more graphic illustration of "wealth=production"
>  you'll be hard-pressed to find.

Sorry, but if you made that island one with nothing but drinkable
water, and some sort of food supply that doesn't require or provide
tools, you won't be any wealthier than when you got there.

*Resources* count. Without them, there's nothing to produce wealth
*from*. 

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 18:21:01 PST
Subject: Re: Rules for Starship Construction (LONG)

In mail you write:

> On Mon, 15 Jul 1996, Paul Walker wrote:
>
>> OK, Here are the rules for Starship construction.  Please go easy on me as
>> I'm a fragil person and don't tear my work apart too much. ;)  Hope this 
> helps.
>
> Whew!  That's a lot of useful information!  Thanks for posting it.  
> I have aq uestion, though...
>
> I'll do some snipping to make it evident what I'm referring to...
>
>
>> Frame Construction:  A shipyard using the Frame Construction method
>> generally will begin construction with the creation of the internal
>> structure and framing of a starship.  After the basic frame structure is
>
> [snip]
>
>> Hull Construction:  The Hull Construction method is typically used with
>> military and other government hulls (*1), odd hull configurations, and 
> hulls
>> with specialized internal designs.  The basic process in this type of
>> construction is to start with the basic structure of the hull, and add the
>> internal structure and components as necessary.  With the aid of
> [snip]
>
> I'm sure it is due to my unfamiliarity with shipbuilding, but I couldn't 
> find very much difference between these two methods.  Can you help me 
> out, please?  They both seem to be saying that they start with the hull, 
> then add other components.  What is the difference between them?

The framing is the stuff that looks like ribs AND ALL THE GIRDERS ETC
ATTACHED TO THEM. The hull is *just* the "ribs" and the plating that
attaches to them.

To put it a different way. If you've ever seen a house being built, it
uses frame construction. If it used "hull" construction, they'd only
put up the frames for the outside walls and fasten the plywood
sheathing to them. Then they'd put on the framing for the roof and add
the plywood to *that*. Then they'd start putting in the framing for the
floors and internal walls. 

Yet a third way is to look at "framing" as building the skeleton, and
then hanging everything off of it. "Hull" builds the "skin" then starts
filling things in.


- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

From: Wes Payne <n9548326@cc.wwu.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 03:25:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: INS Prefix calling ISS Suggestive

Thus spake sudet@well.com (Glenn M. Goffin):

> >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.  

Is that not just about exactly what I said?  A recap:

I say:  The Aslan probably have designators based on the owning clan.

To which you respond:  No, I don't think so.  Each clan would have its 
own prefix.

Did I get hydrogen oxide, or only water?  If you're going to correct me 
on something, then please correct me on something.

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wes Payne, known to you as:  n9548326@cc.wwu.edu
Western Washington University -- Bellingham, WA -- The Great Northwet!  
"What is FUN?  Why is it usually colored BRIGHT PINK, and where does
 it go when JESSE HELMS comes around?" 
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------


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

From: ROWAN Iain <wm0iro@acresearch.sunderland.ac.uk>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 96 10:52:00 PDT
Subject: RE: Culture. music, and other stuff

Someone who I can't remember wrote:

>>You could start with music, for one.  Virtually every major musical
>>movement of the 20th century saw its origin in the US...  Ragtime,
>>Jazz, Blues, Rock, etc...

Funny, and here was me thinking that Jazz and Blues owed their
origins in turn to the work songs of the Africans brought over to the
US, and the polyrhythmic drumming and percussion that crossed
over from Africa to the US and to Central and South America.  So
you could argue that the foundations of virtually every major
musical movement of the 20th century originated in Africa folk
music.  Just to be ethnomusicologically pedantic.

Hell, how to get this round to Traveller.  One thing that isn't mentioned
very much is popular culture in the Imperium.  We've talked about
elements of pop culture surviving into the Far Future, but what about
the culture of the Imperium?  What does your average Imperial do
to unwind?  What TV/holovid programmes are the people's favourites?
(Orbitwatch, set in the search and rescue department of a large
spacestation where the sun's rays have unfortunately turned all the
vacc suits transparent?)

Doubtless there would be an infinite variety of sports, but I should
imagine that there would be 3 or 4 contenders which have at least
sector wide popularity, if not more.  I wouldn't think, (contrary to
much sci-fi) that any of the most popular would be along the lines
of Rocketpack Zero-G Jetball kind of stuff, as virtually all truly
popular mass sports are playable by the average kid in the park,
jumpers for goalposts etc.  It's interesting to speculate whether
these sports would cross state/species boundaries - can you
imagine a tournament involving the Imperials, the Zhodani,
Vargr and Aslan?  Wars have been started over less.  I would
think that the Hivers probably wouldn't take part, but would
control all the betting...

Could be an interesting episode for PC's arriving on a new world.
They come across some extremely complicated event that is
obviously of deep significance to all taking part and watching.
Is it their most holy of holies religious festival, or is it the
championship decider?

Anyone have any thoughts on what Mr and Mrs Average Imperial
might do on their days off?

Iain
iain.rowan@sunderland.ac.uk



Iain
iain.rowan@sunderland.ac.uk

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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 19:57:03 PST
Subject: Re: Mars\Moon Stuff

In mail you write:

> 1)  The USA is now more concerned with domestic problems that with space
> exploration and scientific research.  I remember my brother doing a school
> project on NASA's budget vs. Military earlier this year, and NASA gets
> something like half a cent out of each dollar, while USA military gets 10-20
> cents.  I'll try and dig up the exact figures and post them.

Better yet, compare the NASA budget with the various "Health and Human
Services" departments. They dwarf even the military budget. And at the
*height* of the space program, they were spending NASA's annual budget
every *hour*.

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 19:17:56 PST
Subject: Re: Long Night and Oxy/Nitro asteroids.

In mail you write:

> On 07/16/96 at 12:28 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
> said:
>
>>> You could sustain a viable civilization at a lower level of technolo
>>> than you might think.  You don't *have* to have gravtics or even
>>> fusion.  You do have to have access to minerals, energy, and the too
>>> to produce the things you need.
>
>>I'm *certain* that WWII tech levels are sufficient to maintain a
>>civilization in an asteroid belt or airless world, as long as they
>>had access to icy bodies in the outer system.  WWI tech *might* be
>>able to do it.  And mid-to-late 1800s tech would be about the limit.
>
> I agree about the tech going back as far as Victorian levels, as long
> as we're talking about the civilization staying out of gravity wells
> greater than..oh say, 1/5g.  If they have to boost onto an off more
> massive bodies they're going to need to maintain proportionally higher
> tech levels.

Yep. To do a V-2 type rocket engine (or later) requires a type of pump
patented around 1905.

> The outer system is a different story.  Out beyond 4 or 5AU, solar
> power is *much* more problematic, collectors become huge!  For
> propulsion you *might* be able to use something like Magsails, cutting
> down on fuel needs.  For power I think you are right..at least
> radio-isotope power packs, and very likely fission reactors.

Funny thing, *given* the radio-isotopes (even if they still didn't know
*why* they were radioactive) they can be used at fairly low tech
levels. And seperating them can be low tech, if you are patient.

> BTW, Mars would qualify as an airless world in our system.  However,
> there are *almost* surely enough volitiles locked in the soil to
> support a good population..if they can mine it, crack out and capture
> the gases.  Could you maintain a civilization on Mars without outside
> resource input (except solar of course)...if it is a matter of life or
> death I'd guess you could.

I suspect that the Belters would be able to trade an occasional "drop"
of ice and other items for an occasional launch of seeds or other items
easier to produce on a planet. It's not like you need a huge payload. :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Date: Thu, 18 Jul 1996 20:15:07 PST
Subject: Re: Linguistic referents

In mail you write:

> This is a big problem.  Sometimes I just ignore it when I referee or play.
> If all of the participants are willing to speak in the appropriate dialect,
> however, role-playing is greatly enhanced.  When the dialect has to be
> imagined, and has to incorporate future social and technological changes,
> it's very hard to do (much harder than being the berserk Irish dwarf that
> one friend always played in D&D).  
>
> Alfred Bester's The Stars My Destination handles gutter patois very well,
> using plain English words with slight grammatical twists to convey a
> different dialect (Me, preaching language, is all.  Listen up, or don't.)
> The Star My Destination has just been reissued; I recommend it.  Another
> well-known resource is Anthony Burgess' A Clockwork Orange, but he found it
> necessary to include a glossary.

I just had this flash of a party landing on a planet controlled by a
dictator, and with an *extreme* lawlevel. 

Welcome to Oceania. Newspeak Newspoken here. :-)

- -- 
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort

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

From: Wes Payne <n9548326@cc.wwu.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 03:34:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Jump drive theory

Thus spake Bri <bri@teleport.com>:

> On Fri, 12 Jul 1996, Derek Stanley wrote:
> 
> > all your jump fuel in external collapsable bladders,  By the time the
> > field is formed the fuel is consumed and the ships volume is exactly what
> > it was before.  On a Midu Agasham this would give 10,500 cubic meters in
> > which to place weapons, power plants, etc.

>  This is cannon, just look at the Gazelle close escort. It operates on
> exactley the same principle.
>  And if I recall correctley, even FFnS states it.

No, I'm sorry; it is not or, at least, you do not recall correctly.  The 
applicable canon, even supported by FF&S, is that part (or even all) of a 
starship's jump fuel allocation can be stored in detachable, RIGID 
storage tanks.  Applying canon to the Gazelle close escort, the process 
goes like this:  The external tanks are drained by the jump drive 
reactor, which charges its capacitor banks; the tanks are detached; the 
capacitors are discharged into the hull net, opening the 'weave' into the 
appropriate level of J-space, setting the ship's 'tumble,' and forming 
the jump field bubble.  Nothing is stated in any canonical resource about 
the jump field bubble forming gradually as the external tanks were 
drained.  It is also important to note that fuel tanks used for the 
j-drive's fuel allocation, internal or external, must be rigid.  
Apparently, flexible fuel bladders cannot be drained quickly enough.

So, actually you're mostly correct, insofar as rigid, detachable fuel 
tanks as found on the Gazelle close escort, are concerned.

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wes Payne, known to you as:  n9548326@cc.wwu.edu
Western Washington University -- Bellingham, WA -- The Great Northwet!  
"What is FUN?  Why is it usually colored BRIGHT PINK, and where does
 it go when JESSE HELMS comes around?" 
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------


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

From: Wes Payne <n9548326@cc.wwu.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 03:51:43 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Fighters in SPACE

Thus spake Bri <bri@teleport.com>:

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

[snip]

> > 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.

That may be true for water-going vessels, but the title of this thread 
includes the word "SPACE", as in outer space.  The point I made, that Mr. 
Broussard noted, was that many of the capital ships in Traveller could 
accelerate just as quickly as could fighters, negating their 
speed/maneuverability edge.  With the attention required to reaction mass 
(which limited just how much acceleration could be done), an edge for 
fighters over capital ships might be afforded in TNE/BL, but in earlier 
starship combat systems, there were many ships which, although being 
thousands of times larger than fighters, were just as nimble.  This 
problem will return along with thruster plates.

A possible fighter advantage, which many people, including Mr. Broussard, 
touched upon, was the lower sensor cross section owing to the fact that 
fighters were simply so much smaller.  Fighters in Traveller, to be truly 
effective, would have to rely on the fact that they're more difficult to 
detect than larger ships, perhaps being able to deliver a missile 'sucker 
punch' before the opposing capital ships had time to react.

- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wes Payne, known to you as:  n9548326@cc.wwu.edu
Western Washington University -- Bellingham, WA -- The Great Northwet!  
"What is FUN?  Why is it usually colored BRIGHT PINK, and where does
 it go when JESSE HELMS comes around?" 
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------


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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #270
**********************************

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".
