Traveller-digest      Monday, December 30 1996      Volume 1996 : Number 799



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

21st Century History
Air on ships
Is T4 worth the money?
Starship Construction
there is no law...
O2 sources
Web Site Suppression
Freelance Traveller Mirror Site
Ship Designs
Re: Water on Starships
Re: Water on Starships (long)
Re: O2 sources
Re: 21st Century History
Re: Air on ships
Re: Tech and Starports
A merchant captain's view of showers
SSDS Spreadsheet problems
Re: SSDS Spreadsheet problems
Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship)

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 11:19:41 -0600 (CST)
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@cs.umn.edu>
Subject: 21st Century History

An Expanded Timeline of Terran History, 21st century (25th century pre-
Imperial).

Additional dates from "Luna: A Travellers' Guide", by Marc Miller, in
Dragon #87.  Asterisks mark dates which were adjusted in order to try
and reconcile MT/TNE's AD 4518 imperial year zero with CT/T4's AD 4521;
they are on the adjusted date.  New information is marked with page 
numbers.

 imp.   AD

- -2576  1945   Terran Second World War ends.  United Nations (UN) founded 
              on Terra.
- -2562* 1959   First Terran space explorations, by Soviet Union.
- -2552  1969   USA, a Terran nation, lands first exploratory team on Luna.
              (p. 78)
- -2510  2011   USA builds first permanent colony on Luna at Archimedes.
              (p. 76)
- -2508  2013   United Nations Space Coordinating Agency (UNSCA) established.
- -2501  2020   USA, with European and Japanese support, build mining station
              at Copernicus, Luna to support the new Lagrange point colonies.
              (p. 78)		
- -2476  2045   ("Torch" fusion rocket technology needs to be available by 
              this date so that the Longrange expedition is feasible. 
              Probably developed by AD 2035-40.  A French Lagrange point
              colony and a German firm involved in exploiting the Main
              Belt (Beltmetallfabrikant AG) must also be able to be
              major partners in the plan at this point.)
- -2471  2050   ESA Longrange expedition leaves Solar system; begins to 
              accelerate to twenty percent of lightspeed.  Considered
              the most ambitious of several large STL colony missions 
              launched before the development of jump drive.  (Three
              ships, three hundred thousand colonists, and a projected
              2000 year flight.) 
- -2463* 2058   Terran bases throughout the Solar system.
- -2438  2083   Consortium of existing Terran manufacturing firms forms
              Gesichtkries Sternshiffbau, AG (GSbAG).  
- -2434* 2087   Jump drive developed by UNSCA research team in the Belt.
- -2433  2088   Luna becomes an independent nation, joins the UN.  Includes
              colonies from the USA, Europe, Russia, Japan, China, and India.
              (p. 77)
- -2424  2097*  US begins organizing military expedition to Barnard using deep
              space fuel caches.  First interstellar use of Terran jump 
              drives; previously was used to shorten travel time to the
              outer system.
- -2422  2099*  USSF expedition to Barnard contacts Vilani mining team.
- -2408  2113*  First Interstellar War begins at Barnard.  Fought by national
              fleets loosely coordinated by UNSCA, and the local Vilani
              authorities.  Terra achieves tech-10.
- -2407  2114   GSbAG in a joint venture with other Lunar companies continues
              jump drive development (jump-2?) and FTL warship manufacture.
              (p. 78)
- -2403  2118   "Harriman" disaster.  Thirty-four die in the collision of the
              passenger liner "George Harriman" and a mass driver payload.
              Lunar spaceport is moved from Archimedes to Copernicus.
              (p. 76)
- -2400  2121   First Interstellar War ends.  UN is renamed the United Worlds.
              Luna has a population of 60,000.  Lagrange colonies have a 
              population around 200,000.  (p. 78)

I'd say that the development of the fusion rocket marks the end of the
tech-8 and beginning of the tech-9 period.  

It is interesting that GSbAG was founded *before* the development of the
jump drive.  This fact and "Sternshiffbau" in GSbAG's name implies that 
GSbAG originally meant to build STL starships in the Lunar yards.  This
is no surprise; we know the Terrans were doing this by 2050, at least.

Trillion Credit Squadron says that Longrange was only the most ambitious
of several large Terran STL colonization projects.  I suspect that ships
were also sent to Prometheus (Alpha Centauri) before jump.  If we allow
the Imperium board game to be fact, there's not one, but *two* worlds
with breathable atmospheres in the Alpha Centauri system, one around A
and one around B.  They might have been spotted by Terran astronomers,
and a mission sent; this might be what the US was up to when the ESA was
working on Longrange.  A 0.20c ship could get there in 22 years.  An
0.80c ship could get there in five and a half years (and Terra could
know about mission success or failure within ten years of launch).  This
could allow Terra to colonize both and get them to world status by the
First Interstellar War, as portrayed in Imperium.

I'd also say that the Terrans have contragrav by 2087.  The UNSCA lab in
the Belt that discovered jump drive was working on more efficient drives
to haul ore, and I don't think fusion rocket research would lead to that.
Gravitic research might, and the T4 contragrav drives are annoying enough
that this would make a lot of sense.

  Steve Bonneville
  <bonnevil@itlabs.umn.edu>

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

Date: 30 Dec 96 13:14:32 EST
From: Hugh Foster <100326.446@CompuServe.COM>
Subject: Air on ships

>> Dive tanks are pressure limited because they tend to get 
banged into  things.  Stationary tanks can run at higher 
pressures safely. <<

Given the fact that every ship design in existence caters 
for the probability of combat, I would expect shipboard oxy 
tanks to be _at least_ as robust as divers' tanks. If 
shrapnel or laser beams hit the thing, and it blows, you've 
got (a) more shrapnel flyin' around and (b) double 
atmosphere pressure in your ship - ouch! 

>> I'm sure everyone already knows of the problems with the 
designs in  Starships - [...] the following really reached 
out and grabbed me by the throat, so to speak!    Luxury 
Liner (pp. 26-27)    [...]  Total = 6555 displacement tons 
... all in a 500 displacement ton hull! <<

Well, blow me! I confess I haven't got around to 
redesigning them yet, so I'd not spotted this. 

Is it just me, or has MegaTraveller now lost it's crown as 
the Most Error-Riddled Edition of Traveller?


>>[Starliner sourcebook] Something like a passenger version 
of DGP's Starship Operator's Manual would   be seriously cool. <<

<Does Meg Ryan impression> Oh! Yes, Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! 
YES!! Aaarfghh! Sorry. Just over-reacting at the idea of 
quality Traveller supplements again.


>> > Jaunting is the name of the teleportation power that 
is central to The   Stars My   > Destination.    ...and the 
'70s kids SF TV series _The Tomorrow People_. <<

Whoops! Someone's just given his age away!


[------------------------------oOo-----------------------------]
| Hugh Foster                                 100326,446       |
|   http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Hugh_Foster     |
| Peace: In international affairs, a period of cheating        |
| between two periods of fighting.                             |
[------------------------------oOo-----------------------------]

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:41:35 +0000
From: John.Garza@tattoo.sccsi.com
Subject: Is T4 worth the money?

[short rant]
I played lots of Classic Traveller in the 80's, then left gaming for
a while.  I recently decided to reenter, heard about T4, and bought
the rules book, Starships, CSC, and Aliens.  I almost hate saying it,
but there has been very little improvement in 20 years. Beyond the
non-Traveller related color artwork (the artist's name escapes me,
but I have a book of his artwork, he has an easily recognized style),
you have the almost comical hump-backed ships and vehicles, the
pitiful starship deckplans (Traders and Gunboats was FAR superior),
the unforgivable missing jump potential table, several missing
skills, etc.  Anybody know what happened?  Was it a virus? =:0

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:00:10 -0600
From: Paul Walker <tiger@goldinc.com>
Subject: Starship Construction

Hiya everyone. :)

I have been fine tuning my rules for calculating starship construction times
and I have some numbers to throw at you to see what you think.  Here are the
numbers for the ships in the main rulebook of T4.

     Ship          Disp Tons   Maximum Workers    Construction Time (Months)
Ship's Boat           30           55               3.12
Launch                20           45              10.56
Slow Boat             30           55               2.88
Pinnace               40           63               3.12
Sub. Merchant        400          200               7.44
Modular Cutter        50           71               3.96
Light Fighter         10           31               8.16
Sub. Liner           600          245               8.28
Yacht                200          141               7.56
Patrol Cruiser       200          141              53.40  (4 yrs, 5.40 mos)
Scout                100          100               7.56
Shuttle              100          100               4.92
Free-Trader          200          141               6.29
Merc Cruiser         800          283              28.80  (2 yrs, 4.80 mos)
Safari Ship          200          141               7.68
Far Trader           200          141               7.08
Lab Ship             400          200              21.72  (1 yrs, 9.72 mos)
Gig                   20           45               5.88

OK, there are the figures.  Lemme clarify a few things first...

The construction time listed includes the entire time from beginning
construction to delivery, but it assumes the vessel has already been designed.

Maximum Workers is the approximate maximum number of workers that can work
on the vessel at one time.

The above times assume a shipyard working 8 hour days and 6 day weeks, that
is working on the vessel 48 hours out of every 168.  It also assumes that
the maximum number of workers allowed are working on the ship that entire
time.  Finally it assumes 52 weeks per year.

OK, now, I'll return to lurk mode for a while and watch the responses to see
how believable my system is. :)  Please let me know. :)

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 10:18:02 -0900
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@lunatic.asylumbbs.com>
Subject: there is no law...

> There is
>no law that says each item can only produce X amount of profit.

Actually, there is one, although it "expired" in 1946... it is still in the
CFR, just no longer in force. We Haven't bee laisse faire capitalists in
some time. For reference, see also Office of Price Administration (defunct
since 1946)

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 10:39:08 -0900
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@lunatic.asylumbbs.com>
Subject: O2 sources

I once read (on sci.fusion) that fusion proton-proton systems can, in
theory, produce energy AND oxygen, but past oxygen, the needed fusing
energies get too high. Prior to  the Cold Fusion/PNF hrumpus, I allowed
fusion plants to be run full bore, with no power out, to produce oxygen.
Yes, it is inefficient... 100ppm is the figure I allowed for plant
products... just a Severe WAG.

Theory supports some o2 out, but I don't know HOW much of the fusion
plant's actuall energy production is needed for sustaining the reaction.

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 17:32:59 -0500
From: J_Lambert <72300.2131@compuserve.com>
Subject: Web Site Suppression

I've seen reports on the web that Viacom is attempting to suppress
"unofficial" Star Trek web sites and make its own "official" site the only
one. For more information goto
 http://www.stwww.com/viacom.html

It should make us appreciate the support and lattitude from FarFuture and
Imperium Games for free exchange and development with Traveller. In the
long run, I think Traveller can only grow and improve as a result.

Later, John Lambert

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 96 17:40:00 -0500
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (JEFF ZEITLIN)
Subject: Freelance Traveller Mirror Site

  Because of some severe problems that Dragonfire has been
  having lately, I have found it necessary to set up a mirror
  site for Freelance Traveller.  This is not necessarily
  permanent, but I have no immediate plans to take it down,
  pending Dragonfire straightening out their problems.

  The mirror site should be checked _first_ until further
  notice, as part of Dragonfire's problems include making it
  impossible for me to update the primary site.

  The URL for the mirror is

  http://www.execnet.com/~jeffz/freetrav

  I _think_ I've installed the site properly; I'd appreciate it
  if someone else would double check for me.

==========================================================================
Jeff Zeitlin                                      jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com
Editor-in-Chief
Freelance Traveller - The Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller Resource
- ---
  OLXWin 1.00b  CAUTION: Use with a 3-wire electrical system only!
       

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 96 17:40:00 -0500
From: jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com (JEFF ZEITLIN)
Subject: Ship Designs

  These are going to seem like dumb questions I'm sure, but...

  When working on the accommodations for crew and passengers:

  1. Does one use the entire given volumes for the stateroom/
     bunk, or does one split it between the staterooms and the
     common areas (Lounges, Promenades, Dining Salons, etc.)?

  2. If the latter, what's the canonical source for this, and
     what's the ratio (I can't find it in either FFS or
     Starships)?

  3. Are corridors included in the "common" allocation, or is
     this a separate allocation (using up some of the 10-20%
     slop volume)?  Does one also include corridors in the
     volume allocation for other kinds of rooms?  Again, what
     ratio?

  4. Does one include the 'fresher in the allocation for the
     stateroom, or is this a separate (0.5td) allocation?

  5. Does anyone have a VISIO 4.0 stencil set for starships?
     The OFFICE stencil is good for _some_ of the stuff, but not
     all of it, and I don't have a HOME stencil which might
     contain most of what OFFICE is missing.

  6. What is the personal luggage allocation per crew, command,
     high passenger, and low passenger?

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

These are for sketching out some ideas inspired by the GoldRush
Games request in connection with the Starliner sourcebook.  If
people want to help me beat this idea to death, the GDW-BETA list
is a good place to do it.

==========================================================================
Jeff Zeitlin                                      jeff.zeitlin@execnet.com
- ---
  OLXWin 1.00b  "To enjoy art is a sign of intelligence."...acp

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:18:11 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Water on Starships

In mail you write:

> Fri, 27 Dec 1996 20:22:53 PST, shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
>>I rather expect ships to have a *lot* of water. For one thing, it helps
>>you balance the load in the ship by pumping it between tanks.
>
> I guess I dont' think, given how well powered they are, that
> starships are that sensitive to weight distribution.  Also,
> they can already pump liquid hydrogen around but even this
> seems pretty crude for a starship that has artificial gravity.

Simple. Regardless of things like artificial gravity, if you "push" on
the ship somewhere, it will pivot around its "center of gravity (which
is really the "center of mass distribution"). 

This means that thrusters are "paired up" to given equal "moments" on
opposite sides of the CG. If they are translational thrusters (ie
designed to move the ship as a whole in a given direction) if you don't
"balance" thrusts about the CG, you will start the ship spinning. 

With rotational thrusters (ones designed to rotate the ship about one
of its axes) if the thrusts aren't balanced about the CG you wind up
with rotation that you don't want (ie you do a burn to rotate the ship
90 degrees, and then as it swings thru 45 degrees you do a reverse burn
to stop the rotation. If the thrusters aren't balanced, instead of
stopping at 90, you'll wind up with the ship still rotating).

Also, you put extra stress on the ship's structure if the thrusts
aren't balanced. And the main drive's thrust had *better* be pointed
thru the CG or the ship will spin out of control like a pinwheel!

Sure you can adjust thrusters to some extent. But that extent is
limited. More importantly, you *can't* adjust the main drive very much.
*Amount* of thrust, yes, *direction*, no. And it's a lot cheaper to
redistribute the mass on the ship than to burn extra fuel in the
thrusters! 

So you need to be able to keep nass distribution of the ship balanced
so that the CG *stays* where it is supposed to be. Most of this is done
by paying attention to the mass of cargo containers and loading them so
they balance. But you'll always have some off center mass to compensate
for. Then add in the crew and passengers moving around. 

Balancing loads is one of the things that give ship captains
nightmares. And it won't be any different in space. Heck, they'll have
to worry about balancing it for optimum thruster performance as *well*
as to keep the main thrust axis thru the CG.

In battle, being able to *quickly* shift *tons* of mass around to keep
the ship balanced in spite of battle damage (like punctured fuel tanks)
could mean the difference between life and death. And since water is
the *densest* common liquid, it's the best candidate.

Just remember, it's all a matter of moment arms and moments of inertia.
And they have to balance or bad things happen, regardless of tech level.

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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:49:17 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Water on Starships (long)

In mail you write:

> On Fri, 27 Dec 1996, Leonard Erickson wrote:
> [snip my solid waste rant]
>> > for lots of space and time to do this job.
>> 
>> That's for reprocessing "solid" waste. Reprocessing *that* will take
>> space and time (though not as much space as you might think).
>
> Explain this please, in email - I think the list is probably tired of this
> crappy subject matter.  It may be useful in my large habitat adventure
> though.

I don't have details handy, but there are systems available *now* that
partially reprocess sewage, and do it in a space small enough to make
them practical inside a *house*. Do an article search on "composting
toilets". 

Some day I'll have the time, disk space and access to research a lot of
this stuff.

> [snip somemore]
>> The H2 and O2 are recombined into water which is fit for *any*
>> use. The solids are packed into blocks, and wrapped to be disposed of
>> or sold (they'll have been sterilized in the process of releasing the
>> water, so they make good fertilizer). 
>  
> This is what I was kind of arguing for, but I like (and should have
> thought of) the idea of making "Shit Bricks" out of the stuff, rather
> than keeping it in semi-liquid form.

Anybody who has *ever* had to deal with a "honey tank" will go quite a
bit out of their way to avoid having to deal with it again! And since
heat is essentially "free" onboard ship, why not bake it dry? :-)

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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:56:12 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: O2 sources

In mail you write:

> I once read (on sci.fusion) that fusion proton-proton systems can, in
> theory, produce energy AND oxygen, but past oxygen, the needed fusing
> energies get too high. Prior to  the Cold Fusion/PNF hrumpus, I allowed
> fusion plants to be run full bore, with no power out, to produce oxygen.
> Yes, it is inefficient... 100ppm is the figure I allowed for plant
> products... just a Severe WAG.
>
> Theory supports some o2 out, but I don't know HOW much of the fusion
> plant's actuall energy production is needed for sustaining the reaction.

You do have some oxygen at one point in the Bethe cycle if I'm
remembering correctly. But it gets turned back to carbon, if you take
it out, you'd have to replace it with more carbon *and* hydrogen.

The temps required for fusing heavier elements so up *very* fast. And
the energy output drops pretty fast.

Consider: The basic reaction we are assuming is 4 H(1) -> He(4) + energy.
That liberates something like .1% of the mass as energy. Now if we go
farther and generate oxygen from the helium (by whatever path), the
reaction for *that* is:
	4 He(4) -> O(16) + energy
Compare the mass of 4 helium atoms and one oxygen atom and you'll find
that the mass difference is *really* small. And if you want to squeeze
all the energy you possibly can out, you keep fusing things until you
hit iron. Fe(56) is *the* most stable nuclear configuration. You can't
get energy out of it by fusion *or* by fission.

Silly idea time. While I seriously doubt that this would produce enough
excess energy to be worth it, a trick that might be possible at high
tech levels is fusing your hydrogen all the way to iron, then using
artificial gravity to form miniature black holes out of the iron. The
black holes give off Hawking radiation, which can be tapped for power,
then you collect the hydrogen that is left and feed that back into the
fusion reactor. In essence, you have a total conversion power plant. :-)

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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 14:12:09 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: 21st Century History

In mail you write:

> An Expanded Timeline of Terran History, 21st century (25th century pre-
> Imperial).
>
> -2471  2050   ESA Longrange expedition leaves Solar system; begins to 
>               accelerate to twenty percent of lightspeed.  Considered
>               the most ambitious of several large STL colony missions 
>               launched before the development of jump drive.  (Three
>               ships, three hundred thousand colonists, and a projected
>               2000 year flight.) 

Just where the heck were they *going*? 20% of c * 2000 years = 400
light years!

This is a perfect example of *why* long range STL colonization is a
*bad* bet unless it is *proven* that FTL isn't possible. 

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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 14:15:38 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Air on ships

In mail you write:

>>> Dive tanks are pressure limited because they tend to get 
> banged into  things.  Stationary tanks can run at higher 
> pressures safely. <<
>
> Given the fact that every ship design in existence caters 
> for the probability of combat, I would expect shipboard oxy 
> tanks to be _at least_ as robust as divers' tanks. If 
> shrapnel or laser beams hit the thing, and it blows, you've 
> got (a) more shrapnel flyin' around and (b) double 
> atmosphere pressure in your ship - ouch! 

Dive tanks are intended to be safely used by people who aren't too
bright. Tanks in a ship, even one expected to go into combat can have a
*much* lower safety factor.

As for shrapnel or beam hits on the tanks, if that happens, the tank
will be venting to *outside*. So you won't get double pressure. 

>>> > Jaunting is the name of the teleportation power that 
> is central to The   Stars My   > Destination.    ...and the 
> '70s kids SF TV series _The Tomorrow People_. <<
>
> Whoops! Someone's just given his age away!

They show it on one of the cable channels *now*. I've even caught a few
episodes. It seems to be an Australian import.

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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 12:35:29 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Tech and Starports

In mail you write:

> Anyway, I agree with Leonard and others who have suggested a "3rd world" 
> model for low-tech planets with good starports.  Obviously, the locals on
> a TL 8 world did not build their own Class A starport.

However, they may have built a lot more than you might think. Economics
being what they are, if something can be built or "mostly" built by
lower tech, it *will* be. 

For example, concrete goes back to Roman times. So even on a very *low*
tech world, expect to see runaways being done by "native" labor. The
people backing the port will supply the rebar, and engineers to
*assist* the locals. The locals will do the work *and* supply much of
the materials and labor. This is much like the way things get built in
the third world now. They use mass labor instead of power equipment
whenever it is cheaper. And "cheaper" is often a matter of "it costs
the same, but we'd have to import more bulldozers..."

Similar things will apply to other types of construction. Interesting
real world example (and *not* third world). In Hong Kong they use
*bamboo* for scaffolding around buildings being worked on. And it
actually works better than the steel kind!

So throw things like the local equivalent of "elephants" being used as
tow tractors to haul ships to hangars at your players. 

> This will make for some fascinating worlds, which have a feel somewhere
> between"cyberpunk" and the new game Fading Suns.  While this is certainly
> not the mainstream of Traveller, such worlds will provide a fascinating
> level of diversity to the Imperium.  Where else can you have worlds with
> both TL 7 cars and TL 12 grav vehicles existing side by side, or even TL 5
> "model T's", horse carts, and grav vehicles all in the same city.  Such
> worlds would provide many scenarios for GMs interested in social politics. 

I expect that the Imperium *and* the locals may go in for something
like the "appropriate technolgy" movement. This boils down to "use high
tech where you *need* high tech, use low tech where it does the job ok"

This won't affect individual purchases much. But companies and more
intelligent governments will spend money on high tech stuff that is
*useful* rather than high tech just to have high tech. 

Another real world example: Aswan High dam in Egypt was built to show
how modern Egypt was. It has been a net *loss* to the country. It is
silting up rapidly (I think they figure it has less than 10 years
left), and the power it generates is barely enough to power the
factories that produce the fertilizer that they have to use now that
the annual floods don't replace the topsoil.

Most third world countries have such "showpieces" that actually do
*nothing* for the country. Only dictatorships are likely to have such
in Traveller, as there will be *far* too much historical evidence
showing how stupid such things are.

Of course the players *could* be hired to carry out some job associated
with such a "useless" project. Which will put them between the
"planetary pride" people and the "bread not guns" people. :-)

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

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 19:20:09 -0500
From: Neveron@aol.com
Subject: A merchant captain's view of showers

Water costs money. Oxygen and hydrogen cost money. Space in the hold IS
money. Electricity costs less money.  The electrical power required to run a
sonic fresher is minimal, even with the ion generator grid. The crew should
be happy they have jobs.
 -Conclusion-
 THIS IS NOT THE BLOODY LOVE BOAT! THERE IS NO LIDO DECK, THERE IS NO
SHUFFLEBOARD, AND THERE ARE NO SHOWERS! USE THE BLOODY  FRESHER LIKE EVERYONE
ELSE!
Washing up in a fresher is not as enjoyable as a hot shower, but people will
accept it as a necessity. Fabrics will be designed to be cleaned in sonics,
some may even require sonics to be properly cleaned. The far future analogy
to "Dry Clean Only". Obviously, fine hand washables can be water washed in
small loads in the sink, so long as the crew member in question doesn't leave
pantyhose hanging in the cargo hold. (I hate that) Coin Op laundry exists at
starports if a crew member needs to water wash larger items. This is why they
get shore leave.


shs*
- -Pete, Can I have a Light Saber?

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 16:26:50 -0800 (PST)
From: "John R. Snead" <jsnead@netcom.com>
Subject: SSDS Spreadsheet problems

Dave Golden just listed the URL for a SSDS spreadsheet:

 http://www.usa.net/~goldendj/Traveller/Admiralty/NavalArchitect/SSDSSheets.zip


I tried the URL, downloaded the spreadsheet and can't get it to unzip.  
I'm using a recent zip program, so I'm wondering if there is a problem 
with the file.  If anyone has been able to run the spreadsheet I'd 
appreciate either tips on how to unzip it, or (if possible) a uuencoded, 
zipped version emailed to me.

Many Thanks


- -John Snead jsnead@netcom.com

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 19:51:29 -0500
From: "Falin \"Dark-Claw\"" <jhyatt@mail.wincom.net>
Subject: Re: SSDS Spreadsheet problems

> From: John R. Snead <jsnead@netcom.com>
> 
> Dave Golden just listed the URL for a SSDS spreadsheet:
> 
>  http://www.usa.net/~goldendj/Traveller/Admiralty/NavalArchitect/SSDSSheets.zip
> 
> 
> I tried the URL, downloaded the spreadsheet and can't get it to unzip.  
> I'm using a recent zip program, so I'm wondering if there is a problem 
> with the file.  

I tried to download the zip file and got a corrupted zip file so please add
 me to the mail list if you are going to mail this out

thanks

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 96 18:59:29 -0600
From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@eagle.wbm.ca>
Subject: Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship)

Joe Walsh wrote:
>During the pause above, I got a phone call from Marc Miller.  He told me 
>that he is actively discussing a change in graphics design for T4.  
>Specifically, he wants a true graphic design specialist working on the T4 
>product line.
>
>So, there ya go - a real-time example of product improvement in the T4 
>line! :)

<Glenn throws his arms in the air> Hallelujah! 

It's good to know that there are concrete examples of how customer 
feedback on this list improves Traveller products.

I'm glad Marc realizes the importance of good graphic design, and that 
recent products have fallen short. My optimism has been renewed. Thanks 
for the inside scoop, Joe! :-)

- -- 
===== Glenn Hoppe =====\ /--- MailTo:jumpspace@geocities.com ----
\ . . Enter Jumpspace --X-> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/8275 \
 ----------------------/ \========== Eschew Obfuscation ==========

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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #799
**********************************
