Traveller-digest     Tuesday, December 31 1996     Volume 1996 : Number 800



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

New ship old Subs
Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship) 
Re: Starship Construction
Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship) 
A merchant captain's view of showers
Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship)
Re: Tech and Starports
Re: Web Site Suppression
Re: 21st Century History
Alien generation?
Re: Starship Construction
Re: Water on Starships
Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #799
Anti-grav or Contragrav ?
Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship)
Re: Broken Links

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 19:10:06 +0000
From: "Tim Reynolds" <tim@premier1.premier.net>
Subject: New ship old Subs

InterStellar Business Wire: 

Founders Ship Works announced today the launching of  the first of
many Founder 5000 cargo ships.   These  5000 ton ships are designed
around a sphere haul, with Jump one and 1 g acceleration.  Gathery
Haulmart,  Design Engineer  for the project, said, " The Founder 5000
is designed on one principle and that is to make credits for the user.
 In order to carry out this mission  the objective was cargo space,
because, as any business man knows its how much you get there to sell
that keeps you in the black."  Mr. Haulment went on to say that
because the ship lacks armor and weapons it is best used on normal
shipping lanes. The Founder 5000 is their first interstellar design,
and they plan to launch another 5000 ton in system Lightening ship, to
carry the cargo from the Founder 5000 to its destination.  Founder
claims it will have a 3g acceleration ability using the latest
technology.


Founder Ship Works was officially started on Day One (Holiday) of the
First Year of the Imperium. Founder Ship Works specializes in large
cargo ships for both interstellar and system use.  It was founded by
several Interstellar companies  in order to use the newest technology
that the New Imperium has to offer.  For further information contact 
Johop Horis PR agent  for Founder Ship Works


Tim R
aka Grayman

PS
Someone want to know the construction time for submarines
Here are the times for the SeaWolf the US Navy latest Hunter Killer, 
and  for the Ohio Nucler Strategic missile sub

SeaWolf   tons 7,460 surfaced 9,137 dived  Time roughly 6 years
Ohio        tons 16,600             18750                2 years
  It seems tonnage is not the deteriuming factor in construction time 
My personal guess is the technology  and  amount of Internal 
equipment determines construction time.  The SeaWolf has been 
considered the Navy's most hi tech new toy and is a hunter so needs a 
lot of specilaized equipment.   The Ohio ia 18 years old its main 
tonnage comes from the 24 trident 1 or 2 which probably count for 
most of the wieght.  Its quicker t obuild since the Tridents are 
built by Lockheed and then added later.

This information comes from Janes Fighting Ships 1996-97

I hope this helps

        
 
   

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 19:19:40 -0600
From: John Kovalic <muskrat@msn.fullfeed.com>
Subject: Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship) 

>From: Glenn Hoppe <starcity@eagle.wbm.ca
>>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!

This, too, caused me much joy.

 Now, if someone would just tell IG that what they're doing with people's
credit cards and JTAS postage is ILLEGAL, things may start moving in the
right direction again.

Since there obviously has to be a second printing of T4's main rulebook, to
correct the many mistakes in it, I'd suggest getting any designer started
on that immediately. Get it to look halfway decent. STARSHIPS is beyond
help, while Alien Archive and Central Supply seem at least able to stand on
their own (though each use different font sizes (sigh)).

John Kovalic.

PS. Any other Mac artists out there? I'm looking for a good layout program
that has easy-to-use grid capabilities.



********************************************************
           "This must be Thursday. I never COULD get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                     - Arthur Dent
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*                                 "Wild Life": a Web comic --
*
*              MUSKRAT CENTRAL: http://www.msn.fullfeed.com/muskrat/
*
********************************************************

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

Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 01:52:13 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Starship Construction

At 07:00 PM 12/30/96 +0000, you wrote:
<snip>
>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.
>
<snip>
>

I would tend to presume multiple shifts. Shutting down and restarting some
types of equipment may be more complicated that what can be justified for
only 8 hours of work. 

Garry

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 20:07:27 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Subject: Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship) 

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996, John Kovalic wrote:

>  Now, if someone would just tell IG that what they're doing with people's
> credit cards and JTAS postage is ILLEGAL, things may start moving in the
> right direction again.

Remember, IG is on vacation (read: unavaiable for comment) until the 
2nd.  Both Marc and Tim have said they will be talking with Courtney as 
soon as they can after his return, to try to straighten that mess out.  
Once Courtney is aware of the nature of the situation, I have a feeling 
the charges will be credited back.  I'm hoping for good news on this 
front by the end of the week or the beginning of next week; we'll see 
what happens.


- -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! :)
       .....Official Reporter of Imperium Games Product Info.....

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 18:09:30 -0800
From: "Glenn M. Goffin, Esq." <sudet@well.com>
Subject: A merchant captain's view of showers

>From: Neveron@aol.com 
>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. 

Wait a minute.  You already have water, hydrogen, and oxygen aboard ship, and plenty of 
power.  Does it really cost anything more to recycle them as we've discussed?  How much 
more fuel will you use running the recycling?  

You will have to pay for the recycling machinery, but that's never been listed 
separately in ship design sequences.  (It should be deemed part of the "life support" 
cost item.)

>The crew should be happy they have jobs.

No, the ship owner should be happy to have employees generating wealth for him.

[patriarchal rant deleted]

>Washing up in a fresher is not as enjoyable as a hot shower, but people will
>accept it as a necessity. 

If it turns out to be a necessity, they will.  Query whether passenger liners will incur 
the extra expense (maybe that's the cost differential between high and middle passage).

>Fabrics will be designed to be cleaned in sonics, some may even require sonics to be 

[deletion of items with which I can agree in principle if it water turns out not to be 
feasible]

- --Glenn

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 20:15:00 -0600 (CST)
From: "Joseph E. Walsh" <ransom@connect.iconnect.net>
Subject: Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship)

On Mon, 30 Dec 1996, Glenn Hoppe wrote:

> 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! :-)

How 'bout that, eh? :)  Now, if only we were in a situation where TML was 
once again producing more positive stuff than bad, we'd be home free. 
[G]  M0 and First Survey will probably generate some good stuff, but I 
think it's too late to do anything about the graphic design of those 
two.  But maybe everything will be fixed soon after...we can hope! :)


- -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! :)
       .....Official Reporter of Imperium Games Product Info.....

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

Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 02:18:21 +0000
From: Garry Ward <Garry.E.Ward@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Tech and Starports

At 12:23 AM 12/30/96 +0000, you wrote:
<snip>
>As to whether or not the Imperium actually owns a specific starport,
>leases it, runs it at the request of a local government, has a local
>government run it for them, lets out 10 year contracts to the lowest
>bidder to operate and maintain it, or some other variation,
<snip>
>
>For me, starports within the Imperium are Imperium bases (by and
>large), Imperium law and maximum TL are applied inside starports,
>UWPs are applied outside starports, and all sorts of relationships
>can exists between individual worlds and the Imperium that governs
>the space between them.
>
>Cheers,
>     David
>-- 
>

One variation that I have been considering, given that the Starport Down is
also Imperial territory, perhaps that chunk of land certain nobles are
granted in association with their titles is the very land on which the
downport is built. Part of the nobles income therefore is derived from the
operations of the port.

Of course, that could also mean that the noble is RESPONSIBLE to the Emperor
for the proper running of the port and conformance with the Imperial
Policies and Procedures on Starport Operation. Consider the Charlton Heston
movie 'The Warlord'. His character of Sir Chrysagon was assigned a territory
with the proviso that it belonged to him and his heirs as long as the Duke
was satisfied with it's management. The land was still belonged to the Duke;
just administered by the Knight. When Chrysagon's action endangered the
fief, he lost it to his brother Drago's political machinations. Imperial
Nobility may have the same situation to content with.

Whole new set of problems for an ennobled PC to worry about, and not just
wander off with title and cash in hand.

Garry

  

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 21:25:36 -0500
From: "Harold D. Hale" <hdhale@siscom.net>
Subject: Re: Web Site Suppression

John Lambert writes:
 
>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

   Actually what they are trying to do is get people to stop using
copyrighted images, filmclips etc. on their personal Web pages. They
were hired by Paramount to do this.  

   Though the Federation in Star Trek is this idealic place where
Liberalism wins the day, the same can't be said of Paramount's treatment
of sci-fi fans and particularly sci-fi gaming enthusiasts.  They are
quick to call in attorneys, and have pulled the license out from under
FASA to stop them from producing the Star Trek RPG (on the excuse they
violated their license agreement--which they didn't), and another
company to stop them from producing a collectable card game based on the
"Next Generation" storyline (with virtually no notice).  Paramount is no
friend of the gaming industry, and if I were looking to do a new scif-fi
game, Paramount is the *last* place I would go for a license.
   
   Remember that the next time you consider going to see Paramount films
in the theatre.

> It should make us appreciate the support and lattitude from FarFuture
> and Imperium Games for free exchange and development with Traveller. 

   For all of their understanding and the latitude they give people with
regard to Web page development and the use of copyrighted material
(which I applauded vigorously), IG in particular has dropped the ball
with regard to negotiating licensing agreements.  I know of two people
who have been quite serious about obtaining a license agreement with IG
only to have negotiations dragged out for several months and then be
terminated by IG with no explanation.  Both individuals have decided to
take their capital and invest it in other RPGs.  

   Sorry if this has turned into yet another IG et. al. bash, but I
think that it's yet another indicator of just how seriously the vast
majority of people currently producing Traveller take their job--it is
something they do part time when they aren't busy with their primary
projects--which makes Traveller on far too many occasions an
afterthought.  Because of that, we are seeing problems crop up that
range from poor editing to retread, unrelated art to a total lack of
strategic vision on the business side of the house.  My apologies to
people like Tony Lee who is probably busting his ass every day on this
project, but there are quite simply too few of people like him
associated with it.

Regards,

Harold

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 23:39:36 -0500
From: Constant Hazard <hazard@potomac.net>
Subject: Re: 21st Century History

- ------------687028D26020
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Leonard Erickson wrote:
>
> > 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!

Well, your calculation incorrectly assumes the expedition is a constant
20% of c.  Their destination is definitely much closer than 400 light
years away, as it probably would take them a long time to accel and
decel to and from that speed.

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

Very true...  Any trip that is going to take that long has to have a
definite destination.  Just where were these STL colonization missions
going?
- --
                          David  Kent
                             -aka-
                        Constant Hazard
                    \----------------------/
                     \ hazard@potomac.net /
                      \------------------/


- ------------687028D26020
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

<HTML><BODY>

<DT><TT>Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
&gt;&nbsp;<BR>
&gt; &gt; An Expanded Timeline of Terran History, 21st century (25th</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; &gt; century pre-Imperial).<BR>
&gt; &gt;<BR>
&gt; &gt; -2471&nbsp; 2050&nbsp;&nbsp; ESA Longrange expedition leaves
Solar system;</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; &gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
begins to accelerate to twenty percent of</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; &gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
lightspeed.&nbsp; Considered the most ambitious of</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; &gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
several large STL colony missions launched</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; &gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
before the development of jump drive.&nbsp; (Three<BR>
&gt; &gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
ships, three hundred thousand colonists, and</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; &gt;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
a projected 2000 year flight.)<BR>
&gt;&nbsp;<BR>
&gt; Just where the heck were they *going*? 20% of c * 2000 years</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; = 400 light years!</TT><BR>
<BR></DT>

<DT><TT>Well, your calculation incorrectly assumes the expedition is a
constant 20% of c.&nbsp; Their destination is definitely much closer than
400 light years away, as it probably would take them a long time to accel
and decel to and from that speed.</TT></DT>

<DT><BR>
<TT>&gt; This is a perfect example of *why* long range STL</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; colonization is a *bad* bet unless it is *proven* that FTL</TT></DT>

<DT><TT>&gt; isn't possible.</TT><BR>
<BR></DT>

<DT><TT>Very true...&nbsp; Any trip that is going to take that long has
to have a definite destination.&nbsp; Just where were these STL colonization
missions going?<BR>
- --&nbsp;<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
David&nbsp; Kent&nbsp;&nbsp;<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
- -aka-<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
Constant Hazard<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
\----------------------/<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
\ hazard@potomac.net /<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
\------------------/<BR>
&nbsp;</TT></DT>

</BODY>
</HTML>
- ------------687028D26020--

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 22:46:02 -0800 (PST)
From: "Peter J. Miller" <pmiller@linkeasy.net>
Subject: Alien generation?

Hi,

Wasn't Alien Archive (AA) supposed to have an alien generation system in it?
Does it have one?  If so, what's it like, can we get some feedback on this?
Forgive me if this has been mentioned in one of the reviews, but I only
scanned them.

BTW, just visited IG's homepage, here is the direct quote from their product
list regarding AA, I guess it was supposed to have a generation system:

ALIENS ARCHIVES
RELEASE DATE: November 1996
TRAVELLER has produced volumes of information on the universe's many alien
races, however, we plan to include several more minor races. By compiling old
materials, as well as adding an alien race generation system, players can
integrate alien races into their travels and adventures. Timothy Brown.

Hmmm...was it there?

/\___________________________Peter John Miller____________________________/\
||           "Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night..."          ||
||     Traveller, IG materials and the Home of the Imperium Games FAQ!    ||
||            On Peter's World - http://www.dragonfire.net/~pm/           ||
\/------------------------------------------------------------------------\/
   Great graphics, and the LOWEST prices on the net - www.irevolution.com

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 22:45:43 -0800 (PST)
From: "Peter J. Miller" <pmiller@linkeasy.net>
Subject: Re: Starship Construction

>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.

Great to see someone work out something that seems to be ignored greatly in
SF games. Thanks very much.

However (the big BUT! <g>), I'm not sure I agree with your final figures.
Not that your math is wrong or anything, but the times seem really long, I
mean, 3 months for a Ship's Boat, 4 years for a Patrol Cruiser.  I
understand these take long, but still.  I'd be interesed in seeing more of
the precise calculations.  Could you give one example, and show each
calculation that gave you the final result.

Thanks,

/\___________________________Peter John Miller____________________________/\
||           "Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night..."          ||
||     Traveller, IG materials and the Home of the Imperium Games FAQ!    ||
||            On Peter's World - http://www.dragonfire.net/~pm/           ||
\/------------------------------------------------------------------------\/
   Great graphics, and the LOWEST prices on the net - www.irevolution.com

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 22:55:39 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov>
Subject: Re: Water on Starships

Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:18:11 PST, shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
>> 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").

[Stuff about translational and rotational thruster deleted.]

Obviously, if the ship has a net force not directed through
the center of gravity it is going to start to rotate.  However,
a starship in traveller has thrusters which it can use to
control such rotation (they don't need to be separate
for the thrusters that provide thrust, ie your rotational
and translational thrusters).  Pumping water is a very slow
and crude way of mainting a flying object in a level position
(this is why airplanes don't do it).

>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).

Well no.  Rotation is caused by applying thrust around the center
of gravity.  If you want to rotate them you apply sufficient
thrust for sufficient time to ge the rotation you want.  If you
don't want rotation you apply your thrust through the center
of gravity (and if some weight pushes that off you adjust the
thrust).  This is how a helicoptor works and it doesn't need
to pump water around (and would find such an approach inadequate
if it tried it).

>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!

This is why you control it.  If you can't control your thrust
you aren't going to go where you want, no matter how much water
you pump around.

>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.

Um no.  A Traveller ship can produce enough thrust perpendicular
to the main axis to be able to fly horizonally.

>And it's a lot cheaper to
>redistribute the mass on the ship than to burn extra fuel in the
>thrusters!

No it isn't.  From harrier jump jets to helicopters to tilt
engine aircraft to saturn rockets; none of them try and move
mass rather than redirect thrust.  There are too many factors
involved (from mass changes to wind factors) and it's just
too slow.

>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.

A ship with the kind of thrust a Traveller ship (and hence any
ship with VTOL capability) isn't going to be as sensitive to
mass balance as you indicate it is.

>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.

And all those things need to be controlled on a time scale of
fractions of a second.  That is why the Space shuttle, Harrier
Jump jets, helicoptors, etc. all use thrust control.  Moving
water around just isn't fast enough.

____________________________
(Disclaimer: Would NASA have ME speak for them?)
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 23:05:23 -0800
From: "David P. Summers" <DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1996 #799

> 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!

Actually, in something as complex as a starship you aren't
going to armor each individual component that would cause
troubles if hit.  By the time you do that you could use
the same mass to armor the hull and protect the whole
ship.  You might just compartmentalize the ship and put in
safety systems, but you aren't going to armor individual
system.

(if your ship is being cut into by an enemy laser,
shrapnel from air tanks is only one thing on a long
list and you don't need to worry about the pressure
because you  are going to be venting your atmosphere
to space.

____________________________
(Disclaimer: Would NASA have ME speak for them?)
DSummers@Mail.ARC.NASA.gov

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

Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 10:24:13 +0200
From: Antti Lahtinen <lahtinen@ee.tut.fi>
Subject: Anti-grav or Contragrav ?

Steven Bonneville wrote:
> ...and the T4 contragrav drives are annoying enough that this
> would make a lot of sense.

        (Sorry, jumping off the subject...)

        I thought that contragrav lifters were used only in TNE,
        and T4 uses anti-grav thrusters.

        Contragrav lifter (CG) was TNE device that countered
        external gravitic attraction within affected volume,
        and thus allowed objects to "float" within gravity
        fields. As the required energy depended only on the
        size of this affected volume, any amount of mass within
        this volume would float with the same input energy.
        (It was relatively easy to design perpetual motion
        powerplants with CG lifters.)

        Anti-grav thruster (AG) was MegaTraveller device that
        generated direct thrust using gravitic repulsion. While
        AG thruster worked well within strong gravity fields,
        it was virtually useless in deep space as there was no
        gravity fields to push against.

        So, which system should be used in T4 ?


        Antti Lahtinen     :     Justice is Only a Wish of a Weak
        lahtinen@ee.tut.fi :

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

Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 13:09:00 +0100 (MET)
From: Thomas Biskup <tb@saranxis.ruhr.de>
Subject: Re: JTAS subscriptions (possible relationship)

On Sun, 29 Dec 1996, Ernest N Rowland wrote:
> I think part of the problem is expectations versus reality.  If we were new to
> Traveller, the problems would be annoying, but not necessarily fatal (assuming
> we would know where to find the errata!)

The main problem is that the first products were extremely weak as far as
their usability for new Traveller players and GMs (like me) is concerned.
I can get around most of the pretty annoying problems in the main rules
(although this means that I have to rewrite more than 50% of the rules)
but the extremely weak follow-up product 'Starships' was another bad blow.

You must consider that new fans are not as likely to forgive such botches
as are 'oldtimers'.  When I want to try a new game I'm willing to buy the
rules and maybe a supplement or two.  If by then I don't have enough to
play the game without needing to reinvent the wheel, the game usually will
be rated as 'not worth the trouble'.  For T4 this currently *is* my
estimation.  I paid $25 for the softcover (actually about $37.50 due to
dollar <-> german marks conversion in rpg shops), I luckily got Starships
for free and right and thse materials are by far not enough if I want
to play in Milieu 0.  Now it seems that they want to pull off another
bloke by charging even more on my JTAS subscription, which I definitely
won't allow them to do :-|

All this is causing me some headaches and as much as I hate it I probably
will give up on Traveller (right now I'm waiting to see the latest two
products; if they are really shining, IG might get another chance from me)

> I'm happy that Traveller is not yet dead, and I want to give my support to IG 
> and GoldRush and DGP(?)

Right now I'm more enthusiastic about whatever GRG might be doing than
about what IG still might produce.  They have done good stuff in the past
while everything I've seen from IG did not hold up to my standards.

Oh well... a Happy New Year to you all!

Thomas Biskup.

- --
Thomas Biskup                               email to: tb@saranxis.ruhr.de
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"Would you choose one life over one thousand?
 I refuse to let arithmetic decide questions like that."
                          -- Data and Picard, "Justice", stardate 41255.6

 

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

Date: Tue, 31 Dec 1996 11:50:38 +0100
From: Tommy Grav <tommyg@ifi.uio.no>
Subject: Re: Broken Links

David J. Golden wrote:
> 
>         I was just verifying a couple of the links on my website, and found some
> that don't work--apparently some Traveller pages went off the air, moved,
> or I just had the wrong URL. Can anybody give me hand? All of the following
> apparently don't work.
> 
>         http://www.ifi.uio.no/~tommyg/Traveller/
>         http://www.datasync.com/~tiger/trav/bard.htm
>         http://eeyore.lv-hrc.nevada.edu/~indy/traveller.html
> 
> --________________________________________________________________
>    Dave Golden                           PGP Public Key available
>    goldendj@usa.net     http://www.usa.net/~goldendj/default.html
> 
>  "He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his
>   enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes
>   a precedent that will reach to himself" -- Thomas Paine


Well, the first one is mine, and from here it should work. I haven't 
done anything to it in ages though. But I'm working on it :)

- -- 
Tommy Grav 
Email: tommyg@ifi.uio.no
WWW-Page: http://www.ifi.uio.no/~tommyg/Traveller.html
"Sooner or later the worst set of circumstances are bound to occur."

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

End of Traveller-digest V1996 #800
**********************************
