Traveller-digest       Thursday, June 5 1997       Volume 1997 : Number 1406



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...
Re: is Cleon Scared?
Re: Dark Ages were way cool
Re: is Cleon Scared?
Re: FS Atm Question
Re: My TL-15 Xboat Design
Re: Windows in Starships?
Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...
Re: Xboats
Re: Deneb and Corridor in M:0
Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...
Re: Windows in Starships?
EA: What's wrong with...
The names in the Big Data File
Re: Is Cleon Scared?
EA Armor Conversion (was Strange Weapons for Starships...)
Gauss Recoil Compensation
Re: XBoat question

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 14:31:14 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...

>So machine guns could only be used in air combat or ground strikes. So if
>your ship isn't AF, it's not very usfull.

When the pirates think they've disabled the drives and come a puffing with
their backpack jets; spray 'em with your MGs.

Sir Charles Pancroft of Centry/Glisten used to stand in his airlock with a
buckshot shotgun but that was not included in the shipdesign ;)


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:01:00 -0400
From: Bill Prankard <BPRANKARD@theiia.org>
Subject: Re: is Cleon Scared?

>Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 12:56:58 MET
>From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
>Subject: Re: Is Cleon scared?

>- -> What if the Old Earth Union is at TL13 at Year 0? Would that explain 
why
>- -> the Imperium stopped expansion towards Terra, and didn't integrate 
until
>- -> the 500s (IIRC)? They waited until they reached a similar TL? And it 
fits
>- -> with the ongoing progress discussion.
>No, it sais somewher in TD 18, that there was a sizeable Empire in
>Solomani Rim Sector, above Terra, that pervented Cleon from getting
>there sooner!

Would this perchance be the Vegans?

Commander X
 

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 06:49:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Clark <clarkm@OIT.EDU>
Subject: Re: Dark Ages were way cool

> <Begin Apology>
> 
> Sorry to all the poor maligned Dark Age scientists I compared to
                                          ^^^^^^^^^^ 
> Neanderthals.  I have been soundly, repeatedly, and resoundingly
> refuted.  I
> hereby recant any reference private or public, to the inadequacies of the
> Dark Ages.  Blah, blah, blah, nevermind my last dozen or so posts.
> 
> <End Apology>

  Just change that to "engineers" and we'll let you slide - scientists had
nothing to do with it.  Sorry if we came on a bit strong, but I'm sure
you'd react the same way if I told you that Basic was the standard
Imperial programming language (well, maybe for Vilani computers...).

> <Begin Soapbox>
> 
> I also got resoundingly smacked by an authority in the field for saying that
> I couldn't find references to information on the net.  I was told that I was
> basically geek fodder.

  Sorry, sorry, sorry - I didn't mean to come across so strongly.  You
just happened to put one of my chains as far as research goes - as I said
my students are getting way guilty in terms of using computer searches,
esp. the Web, as their only resource.  

  Another list member mailed me privately to tell me about a student in
his department who failed her Ph.D. exams by using only the
computer-searchable part of Medline.  The committee fried her by bringing
up some key articles from the 1950s she had not heard of until that
moment, and could have found easily if she had used a more comprehensive
method to search.  I just wish your sceptical attitude toward the Web was
more widely shared. 

  Moreover, you are absolutely right about saying that you made clear that
you did not view your search as comprehensive - re-reading your posts made
that clear to me.  I really need to put the word "perhaps" in my posts
more often, as in "Perhaps you relied on the Web too much for your
information."

  I also agree the Web is a great resource for those who do not have a big
honking university library at close hand - I have become so used to that
by now that I forget how limited many local public libraries are.  I hope
the Web develops over the next few years into an even more comprehensive
source of information - it will do us all a world of good to have such a
potentially democratic source of information.

> Please note, I'm a programmer, not a historian.  My knowledge of the Dark
> Ages was from a liberal arts High School (and a good one at that).  If I
> don't know individuals in the field, that is why.  Frankly, the only history
> of technology book I've ever found was on the history of rocket technology
> and the only history of Roman invention was a Scientific American article on
> catapults from the 70s.

  That's one of the reasons I find this list so fascinating - I have a BA
in Mechanical Engineering, two years of college physics, a year of
chemistry, and no biology since the 9th grade.  The stuff that comes up
here, and the highly educated people who make things known to me in an
understandable way, are a real source of delight (not to mention things
like "foot-long prehensile clitoris," words I'd never thought I'd see on
the Traveller Mailing List), and have helped educate me about a variety of
things.

  I'm sorry to hear that you have not had a chance to read any history of
technology - there are some interesting things out there, especially in
the field of computing.  Feel free to ask if there are any topics you are
interested in - I'll be happy to reccomend where to start (that goes for
anyone on this list, by the way).

______________________________
Dr. Mark Clark
Oregon Institute of Technology

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:00:03 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Re: is Cleon Scared?

- -> >No, it sais somewher in TD 18, that there was a sizeable Empire in
- -> >Solomani Rim Sector, above Terra, that pervented Cleon from getting
- -> >there sooner!
No it was not the Vegans, i'll have a look in my books this evening!
 
Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:59:08 MET
From: "Volker A. Greimann" <GREI5001@uni-trier.de>
Subject: Re: FS Atm Question

- -> > I just read in TD 18 that planets with insidious Atms could not be 
- -> > settled before 318 or so. Question to the people with the statistical 
- -> > programms: Are there any worlds with Atm C that are settled?
- -> > If so those worlds should be set to Pop, Gov, Law, TL = 0 !
- -> 
- -> Rather, any such woulds must have *natives* rather than colonists.
Yup, that's a possibility as well, but: Are there Any worlds with 
this combo? 

Ad Astra,
V.A.G.       
- ------  Volker A. Greimann, also known as: Grei5001@uni-trier.de  ----
- -- Am Weidengraben 86,C6 - 54296 Trier - Germany - T+F: +49651148846 -
- ------- check out: http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Vault/4061 --------
- ---- Student of Law, Gamer, Illuminatus Primus, Slayer of Windows95 --

- -----  "Don't hold me up: I am just barely ahead of insanity!!!" -----

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 15:16:55 +0100
From: Timothy.Collinson@solent.ac.uk
Subject: Re: My TL-15 Xboat Design

Leonard wrote:

>If anybody has the CT Forms Supplement handy, give me the character
>count for the message form and the pixel count for the "picture" form.
>As well as the suggested prices.

I'm looking at the forms but not certain whether you want the physcial
space of the forms or the printed text on the forms or something else.

(The 'forms' -after the top few lines - are just blank areas; the image
form has a box the image must be fully within)


tc

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:13:12 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brett Fishburne <bfish@atlantech.net>
Subject: Re: Windows in Starships?

Take a look back to the Mercury spacecraft and you'll find an answer.  They
were real upset when a window wasn't being considered.

For star faring nations, however, the Star Trek solution may be viable.
There wasn't really a window on the bridge, but an image of how things
looked toward which everyone was directed.  I think this is reasonable.  A
more practical solution, however, may be a hologram field in the center of
the bridge which can display anything the captain cares to call up.  This
would make better use of space on the bridge and generate a situation more
like a modern submarine...

Brett Fishburne

At 11:51 AM 6/5/97 +0100, Chris Lloyd wrote:
>Warning: Lots of stuff snipped in order to change topic completely.
>
>Bill Prankard writes:
>> Frederick Paul Kiesche III writes:
>> >Any chance at all of penetrating windows
>>
>> [..] and the bridge didn't look to cool either!
>
>Having seen comments like this on several occasions, I'd like to ask,
>how many people have windows in starships in their games, and the
>bridge in a vulnerable position?  Does it make a difference if the
>ship is a military ship or a civilian ship?  What do your players
>actually use the windows for?
>
>Personally none of my ships have windows, and the bridge is located
>right in the centre of the ship along with all the other important
>sections.  As far as I'm concerned, windows are just too delicate to
>put on the hull of a ship.  The shuttle has already had a window
>cracked due to a paint fleck in a retrograde orbit, how much damage
>can you expect if a traveller ship encounters a speck of dust at roll
>over on it's way between two planets.  Not to mention the liability
>they are if it comes to hostile fire.  The only advantage I can see
>for windows is the passengers actually get to look out a "real window"
>and actually see the new planet, rather than just seeing it as a video
>feed from a camera on the outside of the hull.
>
>Is there anything I've missed?  Am I wildly out on how much people are
>going to be able to see through the windows?  Or have I missed the
>point completely?
>
>			Chris.
>
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 16:44:44 +0100
From: anders.backman@aniware.se (Anders Backman)
Subject: Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...

>So the trick is to be moving fast enough *towards* the other guy, fire
>off a few hundred rounds (at several credits each!) and hope he runs
>into them. The firing velocity is so low that you can ignore it.
>
>Given that 30 km/sec is not an uncommon relative velocity, that gives
>the equivalent of a 5 kilo charge of TNT per hit. Of course you aren't
>likely to get many.

The off course you can buy marbles, leadballs or whatever at much less than
1 Cr apiece and before passing the target toss several hunderd out the
airlock. The effect would be the same at substantially less cost;)


/Anders Backman
Aniware AB
anders.backman@aniware.se

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 11:10:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ethan Henry <ehenry@mag1.magmacom.com>
Subject: Re: Xboats

>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
>
>Data densities *now* are pretty amazing. Sure, we can't *practically*
>use "1 atom = 1 bit" but we've demonstrated that it is *possible*. My
>*personal* "guess" for the max density is storing bits as spin states
>in metallic hydrogen. That'd give you 1/10th of Avogardo's Number per
>cc.[1] Call it 2^200 bits per cc. That's a *lot* of storage.
>
>[1] assuming metallic hydrogen has a density of .1 g/cc

Well, I don't know if we need to exactly specify the mechanism, but 
it's sufficient to say that XBoats will probably have really, really
high data densities.

>> Think of it as a switched packet network with LOTS of space
>> between packets; you can ramp up packet density quite a bit before you
>> start seeing collisions. I wouldn't be surprised if the heavily traveled
>> interior lanes of the Imperium have _hundreds_ of X-Boats moving through
>> daily.

Hm, I suppose, but it's not exactly the kind of thing you'd want
to run telnet over... now, the cool thing would be trying to design
a database replication strategy for this kind of setup (well, cool
if you're into database replication strategies I suppose).

>Given likely data densities, I bet that they can just stuff more data
>storage modules into the Xboat. Consider the bandwidth of a postal bag
>(20-70 lbs) full of CD-ROMs. 

Ah yes, classic networks course question... what's the bandwidth of
a '63 station wagon full of backup tapes...

>What I want to know is just what they are using to *transmit* all this
>data. Bandwidth starts getting *real* scarce at these data densities.
>I'd think it'd be easier to tranship the data modules (remember that
>postal bag?). And given privacyu concerns, I bet the link is
>*physical*, say a few hundred optical fibers running at terabit rates.
>that'll handle your "megaterabytes" in 9 hours or less. (assume 1
>megaterabit of data, 1 terabit data rate, 256 parallel fibers, result
>is 32768 seconds)

But you'd still have to get the data to the XBoat tender...

Nicolas Lejeune asked why Xboats have no maneuver drives, even
for stationkeeping in orbit. It's because Xboats in the Sol system
(for example) never get closer than Saturn or Jupiter - they jump
into a piece of space more than 100 diameters away from anything,
then they jump back out once they've done their work. There are 
large XBoat tender ships that hook up, refuel the Xboat, d/load
the incoming information, u/load the outgoing information, back
off and send the XBoat on its way. Being an Xboat pilot is 
probably not the funnest job in the world... (How about a new
career: Space Trucker?)

As for physical link versus transmitted link, given that they have to
hook up to pump fuel, a physical link is possible, but the alternative,
the mystical "meson communicator" may have higher bandwidth than
the sort of EM-based comms we use today.

>> I suspect that the real bottleneck (other than jumpspace time) is dumping
>> these gargantuan amounts of data into the planetary networks. I suspect
>> that really BIG customers have dedicated X-boat tenders. and on some
>> routes, dedicated X-boats (Can you IMAGINE the traffic that say, Nassirka
>> generates to their headquarters and back out on a daily basis!!!???)
>
>See above. At 9 *hours* to dump that one load over a cable,
>broadcasting is right out. 

Well, it probably takes a few hours to re-fuel the XBoat, so 9 hours
for data transfer is probably more than quick enough. LHyd 
bandwidth may be lower than OC-8bajillion bandwidth.

The real problem isn't so much getting the data on and off the XBoat,
it's getting it on and off the tender... the tender probably has
several tight-beam meson comms running 24/7 just to keep up with
the data load. Or maybe there's big data storage missles being fired
back and forth all day long... that might make XBoat tenders pretty
dangerous places! (Sir! 20 data missles incoming and the tractors 
are out!)

>If I can ever get data on the proposed HDTV standards I can work up
>what the result would be as a type of "v-mail". Assuming 2048x2048x4
>billion colors at 120 frames a second I get 848,000 *days* of such
>video in 1 "megaterabit".
<other data types snipped>

Yeah, but what about the 3D video mail? :)

>No wonder mail is "free", and still pictures almost so.

They probably charge a certain amount just to discourage
excessive public use of the Xboat network... 

The funny thing is that the idea of XBoats pre-dates (IRL) the
concept of wide-spread computer networks... Marc and crew were
way ahead of things!

Ethan


- -- 
ehenry@magma.ca                                  http://www.magma.ca/~ehenry

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 00:52:09 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Deneb and Corridor in M:0

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
>>SDM
>>I think I disagree. I don't think the Vargr were a pushover, especially in
>>Corridor and the Coreward end of Deneb. Various CT and MT sources mention
>>the Vargr Pacification Campaigns which ran until the late 100s, early 200s
>>to ensure safe passage to the Marches. I can see a lot of the Imperial
>>fleet getting dragged behind the claw if the megacorporations started
>>screaming about raiders.
>HR-M
>The Vargr Pacification Campaigns dosen't start till 220 (and runs to 348).
>That fits perfectly with my theory. Read what I wrote: "When the Imperium
>moved into these areas it attracted the Vargr from further coreward..."

Apologies... that'll teach me from going from memory for dates.

>The sequence of events as I envisage them is something like this: First the
>Imperium moves into the largely empty areas in Corridor (or Eneri, if you
>insist), Deneb, and the subsectors just coreward of that. Eventually the
>Vargr discover all these yummy new targets and start moving in. They start
>with the colonies closest to them, so traffic trough Eneri and Deneb is not
>impeeded at first. Then the pressures grow bigger and the Imperium begin the
>Vargr Campaigns. The Campaigns end with the Imperium abandoning any colonies
>coreward of the Spinward Marches/Deneb/Corridor sector border (and with
>Eneri's name changed to Corridor).

I can subscribe to this argument - personally, I'd put a little more
emphasis on some Vargr being present in Corridor, Deneb etc. but not as
many as I first argued for.

>And just to avoid misunderstandings: The above is not what I claim canon is,
>it's what I think canon ought to be.

IMO it's a very valid interpretation of what canon should be... you've won
me over!

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Feel the guilt / like shackles round your feet / like a halo in reverse"
                     Depeche Mode "Violator"

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 17:50:50 +0200
From: Nicolas LEJEUNE <nlejeune@suresnes.marben.fr>
Subject: Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...

Anders Backman wrote:

>When the pirates think they've disabled the drives and come a puffing with
>their backpack jets; spray 'em with your MGs.
>
>Sir Charles Pancroft of Centry/Glisten used to stand in his airlock with a
>buckshot shotgun but that was not included in the shipdesign ;)

Yeah, maybe a _very_ short range defense. But if a ship with is power plant
down uses guns to kill the boarding team, I were the captain of the
boarding ship I would blow them immediatly. For the boarded crew, it's way
much interesting to capture the boarding team (if they can!) to get hostages. 

I still wouldn't use MG or other slug weapons on starships except if I want
to have ground and cheap attack capacity. For example a pirate who want to
attack low TL areas. On every all cases (known to me) Lasers are much more
efficient
- -----------
Nicolas LEJEUNE
   Engineer, Paris, France
   Traveller (TNE), and WhiteWolf RPG
   Mailto:nlejeune@suresnes.marben.fr 
   Mailto:marben@worldnet.net (Week-end only!)

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 17:54:48 +0200
From: Nicolas LEJEUNE <nlejeune@suresnes.marben.fr>
Subject: Re: Windows in Starships?

Chris Lloyd wrote:

>Having seen comments like this on several occasions, I'd like to ask,
>how many people have windows in starships in their games, and the
>bridge in a vulnerable position?  Does it make a difference if the
>ship is a military ship or a civilian ship?  What do your players
>actually use the windows for?
>
>Personally none of my ships have windows, and the bridge is located
>right in the centre of the ship along with all the other important
>sections.  As far as I'm concerned, windows are just too delicate to
>put on the hull of a ship.  The shuttle has already had a window
>cracked due to a paint fleck in a retrograde orbit, how much damage
>can you expect if a traveller ship encounters a speck of dust at roll
>over on it's way between two planets.  Not to mention the liability
>they are if it comes to hostile fire.  The only advantage I can see
>for windows is the passengers actually get to look out a "real window"
>and actually see the new planet, rather than just seeing it as a video
>feed from a camera on the outside of the hull.
>
>Is there anything I've missed?  Am I wildly out on how much people are
>going to be able to see through the windows?  Or have I missed the
>point completely?

Hmm, I understand your opinion about the (un)need of windows and the risk
of them. In my personnal case I assume that there are some materials which
are sufficiently strong to be used as Hull plating. For example 1 cm of
Superdense would be equivalent to 5cm (or 10cm) or transparent material. 
As the usefulness of windows, I agree that they're not necessary especially
with the accurate sensors. Personnaly I use windows but small one (like
those on wet ships). This is more a question of comfort than need. During
combat there is a mecanical device which can obscured the window with an
plate of Hull plating.

The question is in Jump space. Personnaly, the window have to be closed, or
maybe it's more fun to have wierd lights and flashes. Hmmm, maybe I'll keep
the second solution, sound more sexy. than just dark and cold ;-)
- -----------
Nicolas LEJEUNE
   Engineer, Paris, France
   Traveller (TNE), and WhiteWolf RPG
   Mailto:nlejeune@suresnes.marben.fr 
   Mailto:marben@worldnet.net (Week-end only!)

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 17:34:26 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: EA: What's wrong with...

...the following quote from the first page?

"Year 59 sees the continuing expansion of the Imperium under the rule of
Cleon I...."

___

Year 59?

Cleon I died of natural causes in Y53 at the age of 110.
Cleon II abdicated in 54 and went to play on the Frontier.
Artemsus ruled from 54 to 166.

<All from the library data in supplement 8, and the MT encyclopedia IIRC.>

Maybe we should club together and buy Greg a copy of the MTIE and
supplements 8 and 11....

Oh well - I still like the EA even with the little irritations!

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Feel the guilt / like shackles round your feet / like a halo in reverse"
                     Depeche Mode "Violator"

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:27:27 -0700
From: Scott Ellsworth <Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu>
Subject: The names in the Big Data File

I just noticed last night that a number of worlds were named quite
differently.

Any consensus on the "proper" names to use?  Are the FS names the Sylean
ones, and the ones in the file historical (for which read "random")?

I am working up a post on the sizes and locations of pocket empires in
Core.  Now that the mapper is getting out of alpha and into beta, I am
starting to notice just how extreme the mains are in the data.

Scott
Scott_Ellsworth@alumni.hmc.edu   http://users.deltanet.com/~fuz
"When a great many people are unable to find work, unemployment 
results" - Calvin Coolidge, (Stanley Walker, City Editor, p. 131 (1934))
"The barbarian is thwarted at the moat." - Scott Adams

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 17:24:31 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Re: Is Cleon Scared?

Volker responded:
>- -> What if the Old Earth Union is at TL13 at Year 0? Would that explain why
>- -> the Imperium stopped expansion towards Terra, and didn't integrate until
>- -> the 500s (IIRC)? They waited until they reached a similar TL? And it fits
>- -> with the ongoing progress discussion.
>No, it sais somewher in TD 18, that there was a sizeable Empire in
>Solomani Rim Sector, above Terra, that pervented Cleon from getting
>there sooner!

Just checked TD18. There is a reference to the Easter Concord/Solomani Rim
joining the Imperium in 426, bringing it 'one step closer' to Terra.
(Having been a client state since 305 S&A p24). This doesn't necessarily
mean the above is wrong. The Imperium would only recently have reached TL13
and so had not necessarily got the size or technology advantage (at that
point) to annexe Terra as it does in 588.

Now, S&A does mention the Terran Mercantile Community collapsing to a
smaller area and becoming the Old Earth Union in -1110 but it only mentions
the economic down turn. This doesn't mean that the technology development
stoppeded (IMO). It may only have slowed.

Now, whether Terra was forceably annexed or merged happily depends on the
source you are reading...

Dom

Dom

- ------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com-------
"Feel the guilt / like shackles round your feet / like a halo in reverse"
                     Depeche Mode "Violator"

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:27:40 -0700
From: Mark Bradley <MBradley@gwgate.swrcb.ca.gov>
Subject: EA Armor Conversion (was Strange Weapons for Starships...)

The Commander wrote:
<<... could some kind soul on the TML please post the EA USD damage =
equivalency?>>

Sure.

EA USP Conversion Chart:

Weapon Damage =3D> USP Rating
0                          =3D> 0
17                         =3D> 1
21                         =3D> 2
26                         =3D> 3
30                         =3D> 4
33                         =3D> 5
36                         =3D> 6
38                         =3D> 7
41                         =3D> 8
45                         =3D> 9
48                         =3D> 10
55                         =3D> 11
61                         =3D> 12
65                         =3D> 13
69                         =3D> 14
73                         =3D> 15
76                         =3D> 16
82                         =3D> 17


Which raises another question.  Unless I*ve just been eating too many of =
the Commander*s cookies, it looks like there*s there a pretty serious =
disconnect when it comes to converting EA armor values to starship armor =
values.  I*m not talking about the price discrepancy, I*m talking about =
the defensive value of the armor against weapons.

For example, using superdense (toughness 11), 20 cm thick armor gives a =
vehicle armor value of 30 (rounding up) which converts on the above table =
to a starship armor value of 4.  However, SSDS values the same 20 cm of =
armor at 10.  Similarly: 40 cm results in a VDS starship armor of 7 and a =
SSDS starship armor of 20; 80 cm results in a VDS starship armor of 9 and =
a SSDS starship armor of 30.

The problem becomes compounded by the fact that for different materials =
have the same armor values in SSDS, but different armor values in EA*s =
VDS.

EA is a great book and I realize the two are two different systems, but in =
EA Greg Porter specifically states that  *the above conversion can be used =
to get the starship equivalent rating of ground vehicles*.

Along a similar vein, we*re trying to figure out why a TL 15 10-ton =
fighter would mount a relatively weak laser from SSDS rather than a light =
plasma cannon from EA.  The above damage conversion table makes the plasma =
cannon much better=21

Any suggestions?

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

Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 11:47:57 -0500
From: Ryan Christensen <litefoot@feist.com>
Subject: Gauss Recoil Compensation

Hey all. I just had an interesting idea, but I need some more info to
flesh it out.

	Here's the basic concept:

	The reciever in self loading small arms - gauss and otherwise - recoils
against a stiff spring to absorb some of the recoil force and return the
reciever to the firing position, loading a fresh round in the process.

	On heavier weapons, a recoil carriage is included, which uses hydraulic
cylinders to take more of the recoil force, so that it's effect on the
vehicle is negligible/managable.

	So, why not encase the reciever of small arms in a modified gauss
barrel? This will accelerate the reciever to the front of the weapon, in
effect acting as a set of brakes. The timing sequence could be worked
out so that it only decelerates the reciever, not accelerate it against
the barrel assembly.

	If recoil is only felt after the spring in a normal reciever has
collapsed / been compressed to a certain point, this could have a
drastic effect on felt recoil.

	Now for the hard part: how do we work this into a design sequence?

	My first inclination is to choose a compensator energy, take half the
mass of an autoloader for the projectile in question, work backwards
through the muzzle energy equation, and install an appropriate gauss
barrel and required accumulators, with weight multipliers for the chosen
ROF.

	Example: A 4mm gauss weapon is designed with a muzzle energy of 3000J
at TL12. A compensator is desired to compensate 2500J of that muzzle
energy. Since the gauss bullet masses 1.05 grams, the autoloader mass
would be 31.5 grams. Half of that is 15.75 grams. Working backward
through the muzzle energy equation, we get a velocity of 563.44 mps,
giving a gauss barrel length of 5.63cm. An accumulator for 5000J is
required, massing 0.5 kg. 

	The recoil would then be calculated based on the difference between the
actual muzzle energy and the compensated energy - in this case, 500J. 

	Now, I know this is munchkin. I can't help it - it's in my blood. I
just like really wicked designs and all. The question is, would this
work, and what limits are there on this type of compensation?

	One last thing: I don't think this will add any length to the weapon,
but battery power would be required to pwer the compensator as well.

Ryan Christensen
litefoot@feist.com

PS - Krystyanos Technologies, Inc. would probably be willing to discuss
terms for the production of weapons using this wonderful new technology
with any interested companies. Especially Famille Spofulam - we fell it
would be quite in line with the rest of their products. <G>

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 09:53:24 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: XBoat question

On Thu, 5 Jun 1997, Nicolas LEJEUNE wrote:

> 
> Someone wrote :
> 
> > Since the Xboat has *always* been a maneuver-less ship with minimal cargo
> 
> I'm not  very clear with the Xboat network.
> 
> If those ship don't have maneuver drives, how can they land or approach
> orbital startports to change crew, refuel or repair. I assume that the data
> are transfered directly by communication devices at a range of nearly 100
> diamerters. 
> 
> They jump in at 100 diameter with 0 speed, transfert data to a grounded or
> orbital "post office" which will deliver mail after. Then wait that the
> "post office" send new delivery, and store  all the data in their banks.
> After the final acknoledge, the jumped to the next world.
> 
> Right?

Nope, not quite...see below
 
> Maybe there are other utility space ships which can refuel the Xboat or
> change the crew or attached itseft to the xboat to carry it top the nearby
> orbital station for repairing. 
> 

They're called X-Boat tenders...sort of like SDB's in that they have big
maneuver drives, and no jump drives, but with lots of databanks similar to
what are on the X-boat itself, and big fuel tanks. They go out and meet an
X-boat when it pops into a system, down/upload data, refuel and resupply
the X-boat and ...blammo...the X-boat's off again. I suspect that there
are spare X-boats in heavily trafficked systems to provide spares if
necessary.

This vaguely recollected from CT Book 6(?) Scouts...I can re-read it when
I get home. 

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1406
***********************************

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".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
