Traveller-digest       Thursday, June 5 1997       Volume 1997 : Number 1407



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Xboats
Re: Windows in Starships?
Re: TNE Forms
Formula for gravity
Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...
Re: XBoat question
Re: 3D starmap question
Re: Windows in Starships?
Re: Windows on Starships
Pocket Empires
Re: Windows in Starships?
Re: XBoat question
FS Rewrite - collected Corridor Library data.
Re: Kinetic Kill BB's For T4
Re: XBoat question
Re: Pocket Empires
Re: Windows on Starships
New old Library Data on the Web!
Re: Windows in Starships?

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:06:34 -0700 (MST)
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU>
Subject: Re: Xboats

On Thu, 5 Jun 1997, Ethan Henry wrote:

> 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).

Database replication with a minimum of two week lag between
replications???? Oh...my aching head!

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

ARRRGGGH! 3-d SPAM!!! THe Horror! The Horror!
 
> >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!

Uhhh, no...the fooundations for the Internet were laid in the 60's and
IIRC, the first ARPAnet was running by '72. Then again, we hada telephone
network starting in the late 1800's and Telegraph networks in the MID
1800's.

And the X-boat network is far more analogous to mail trains and ships than
data networks. My reference to it being a 'packet' network was said half
in jest...yes the '63 station wagon full of DAT tape has got bandwidth
like you wouldn't believe...just a real slow transmission
rate...especially if you hit a coast ;-)

But this illustrates, on a level that many of us can start to understand,
just exactly HOW much like the 18th century the Trav universe is...when
there's weeks or months of lag time between sender and reciever, any even
remotely centralized system cannot function. Who knows, with the massive
decentralization of wide area enterprises mandated by this fundamental
limit of communication, there may well NOT be a whole lot of data to be
sent back and forth from the main to the branch offices.

Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:20:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: Douglas <douglas@*teleport.com>
Subject: Re: Windows in Starships?

On Thu, 5 Jun 1997, Chris Lloyd wrote:

[snip]

> 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?
>

Depends on the campaign.  In CT, I used 'em because I didn't know better,
tho' towards the end I was designing them out.  In MT, generally I only
put in windows for specific reasons, none of the control spaces relied on
them.

In TNE, however, windows in control spaces became a design 'feature'.
After Virus, who is going to depend totally on electronic feeds for
starship maneuvering.  A pilot may use the electronic information for all
his maneuvering data, but there at least with a window to eyeball confirm
what the instruments are telling him (or her or it), the pilot doesn't
have to worry about being guided into a mountain!

I have not really started to design for T4, so that is not yet an issue.

 >
> 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.
>

Use diamond sheets for your viewpanes.  If it can punch through that, it
will come through the hull anyway.  Maybe with armored panels (ala
'Seaview') to close in case of radiation hazards.

[snip]

- --------------------------------------------
Any sufficiently reliable magic is indistinguishable from technology
                                              -Merlin

douglas@teleport.com
http:\\www.teleport.com\~douglas\

MCSE: Windows95, Windows NT 3.51 Server, Windows NT 3.51 Workstation, 
      Exchange Server, Basic Networking, TCP/IP
- --------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 12:41:33 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: TNE Forms

Kenneth,

I am interested in the lot too.


- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:27:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Formula for gravity

> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 22:25:51 -0500
> From: Andy Holzrichter <jhereg@southwind.net>
>
> Now that we have the surface area, does anyone have a formula for gravity?

In convenient Traveller units, the formula is:

  G = d * S / 8

where

  G = surface gravity, Terra = 1
  d = planetary density, Terra = 1
  S = UPP size digit, Terra = 8

Terra's not really exactly 8,000 miles in diameter, but the error is less
than 10%.

Planetary densities for rocky worlds typically should run from around 0.7
to perhaps 1.2, with larger worlds probably tending to have higher
densities.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 12:39:30 -0500
From: Sam Thomas <sinbad@dfw.net>
Subject: Re: Strange Weapons for Starships...

At 02:31 PM 6/5/97 +0100, Anders Backman wrote:
>>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 ;)
>
Well I had some players that had installed some custom options. The ship
that they owned had main corridor that did a 90 degree bend into a U shaped
section. This left one wall facing down the main corridor. That wall had a
very decorative wall art on it. Actually the wall art was a plastic
explosive base with metal and ceramic fletchettes set on top of it.
Translation a very large "claymore" mine with the direction "Face" down the
main corridor. They only had to use it once when "pirates" were boarding.
Net result no alive pirates on their ship. Flechettes make it very hard to
patch vacc suite holes in a vaccum. Also the all of the fixtures in the
main corridor were built to take the blast and fletchettes.
- -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
(c)1997 Sam Thomas  |Email:sinbad@dfw.net|
Sinbad Sam, Owner and Operator of Sinbad Sam's Saloon 
Chief Weapons Designer For Reddkneck Arms and Munitions
- -----------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:24:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Douglas <douglas@*teleport.com>
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?

Yes and no.  There is a X-boat tender which picks up and services the
X-boats after they jump into the system.  The pilots are given time off to
recover before being sent on the next jump.

> 
> But then, how can they be sure that they always be near 100 diameter of the
> next world. How can they compensate the gravitationnal field which will
> attracked them to every world. their speed will always increase toward
> inside of 100 diameter. So when they'll be inside 100 diameter the jumps
> would be much more dangerous.
>

Which is why the Scouts used to be a popular way of getting rid of
charactors that the players were not satisfied with, but not tee of the GM
by tossing outright.  

> Could anyone explain me why the Xboat don't have any maneuver drives even a
> 0.05G just to correct the low speed of the ship and stay on stable orbit?

Actually, the explanation is pretty simple.

Lowest bidder!  :)

- --------------------------------------------
Any sufficiently reliable magic is indistinguishable from technology
                                              -Merlin

douglas@teleport.com
http:\\www.teleport.com\~douglas\

MCSE: Windows95, Windows NT 3.51 Server, Windows NT 3.51 Workstation, 
      Exchange Server, Basic Networking, TCP/IP
- --------------------------------------------

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:36:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Re: 3D starmap question

> Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 02:12:16 -0500
> From: "The Druid" <tntsrv@10mb.com>
> 
> I have not been on the mailing list for quite a while, 
> and wanted to know: what is the current trend on 
> 3d starmaps? Last I checked, it was greatly dissapproved of.
> If you would not mind posting a comment, it would be appreciated;

I can't say that "disapproved of" is the right term.  I think most people
on the TML would *like* to use 3D starmaps, all other things being equal.
Unfortunately, all other things aren't equal.  3D maps have two inherent
disadvantages:

(1) Moving to them now would invalidate 20 years of Traveller canon --
    this isn't a problem if you're creating your own background, of
    course.

(2) Creating and using 3D maps is very difficult.  Using flat maps, it's
    impossible to glance at a region and determine where star systems
    really are relative to one another.  Showing 'true' relationships
    requires a computer display system a la VRML, or building a physical
    three-dimensional model.  Either is costly and inconvenient.

2300 AD and SPI's Star Force are the only (relatively) successful games I
know of which have attempted to portray 3D star relationships.  Both used
flat maps with numerical Z-axis information, with SF adding supplementary
color-coding.  Neither was especially easy to work with.  Trying to map
the much larger volume of Traveller known space in the same way would be
*very* difficult.

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--    Home Page: http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |      Member of The HTML Writers Guild: http://www.hwg.org/   
       "Every man and every woman is a star."

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 13:59:47 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ethan Henry <ehenry@mag1.magmacom.com>
Subject: Re: Windows in Starships?

>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...

iJust a quick reminder - NOTHING in Start Trek
is remotely viable! The Enterprise had this great,
fancy holodeck, but did it have a REAR VIERW MIRROR??
NO!

The holotank idea is much, much better then the
"forward viewscreen". It allows the Captian and
crew to see the ship and it's surroundings in 
a full spherical field of view.

IIRC, there were actual Star Trek episodes where
the major plot element was that the Enterprise
couldn't see what was happening behind it! Sheesh!

SOM also uses the holotank idea, I believe.

Ethan

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

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 14:31:04 -0400 (EDT)
From: pierre-louis constantin <Pierre-Louis.Constantin@DMI.USherb.CA>
Subject: Re: Windows on Starships

Hello!
 
	It will be possible at high tech levels (possibly as low as
TL10) to have TRANSPARENT metals that let certain wavelengths
through.  Those metals could be made to let visible light through,
for instance, and be opaque for X-rays and otehr wavelenghts.  They
would be just as hard as the rest of the hull.  One such Traveller
material might be Crystaliron.   In fact, in my games, starships made
in Antares can have clear hulls as an option, especially for
exploration, safari and tourism ships.
 
	Scientists are already working on these materials... I read
about this stuff in an old Economist, I think. :)
 
	So ship windows wouldn't be a weak point after, except of
course if you use a laser that has the same frequency as what the
window material lets through. :)


- -- 
Pierre-Louis Constantin, ift. a. 	"He whose name was writ in E-mail."
(: "I hate fanatics with a passion; all extremists should be shot." :)
	    How's my surfing? http://www.dmi.usherb.ca/~constanp/

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 19:35:20 +0100
From: Bruce E J Lewis <bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk>
Subject: Pocket Empires

Hi,

	I may pick up Pocket Empires tomorrow night. can anyone tell me if it's
worth getting, or does it suffer from the same blight as Starships and
First Survey? I can't remember seeing a review anywhere, so I would
appreciate a few people who have bought it letting me into a few of its
darkest secrets.

	Many thanks in advance...


Bruce E J Lewis - mailto:bruce@legend.ftech.co.uk
Telephone - 0956-506527

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 11:32:13 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Windows in Starships?

At 11:51 AM 6/5/97 +0100, Chris 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?

My ships always have a least a few windows.. If they are designed for
rentry, the pilot at least needs to see where he's going, because the Mk 1
eyeball is always the sensor of last resort.  Airlocks will have viewports
in the inner and outer doors to allow spacers to inspect the next area for
any hazards before continuing to cycle through.  Passenger/crew cabins make
do with view screens.

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
|  Creative Planetologist, THUDDer, 20 year vet  |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "One who, on being told that this is a game   | 
|  about politics and intrigue in 17th century   |
|  Italy, asks to play a ninja."                 |
|   -Andrew Rilstone's definition of "munchkin"  |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 11:37:05 -0700
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: XBoat question

At 01:56 PM 6/5/97 +0200, you wrote:

>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. 

The IISS maintains a fleet of 1000-ton tenders.

>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?

That's it.  They also send a message to the X-boat(s) waiting at the
100-diameter limit, so that they can jump almost immediately.  A tender
then comes out to refuel/resupply the X-boat, possibly replaceing the pilot.

<snip>

>But then, how can they be sure that they always be near 100 diameter of the
>next world. How can they compensate the gravitationnal field which will
>attracked them to every world. their speed will always increase toward
>inside of 100 diameter. So when they'll be inside 100 diameter the jumps
>would be much more dangerous.

Since the boats need to be tended before they can jump again, this isn't as
bad a problem as you might think.  Each boat contains the best in
navigation computers and the most recent updates from the IISS on
coordinates, so the chance of mis-jump is small.

- --
+------------------------------------------------+
|   Douglas E. Berry         dberry@hooked.net   |
|  Creative Planetologist, THUDDer, 20 year vet  |
|         http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/         |
|************************************************|
|  "One who, on being told that this is a game   | 
|  about politics and intrigue in 17th century   |
|  Italy, asks to play a ninja."                 |
|   -Andrew Rilstone's definition of "munchkin"  |
+------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 19:43:27 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: FS Rewrite - collected Corridor Library data.

Hope that these will help those of you working on FS:

Dom
___

Notes on Corridor sector Library Data taken from TD18, MTJ2, MTJ3 and MT
Imp Ency.

The following library data notes can hopefully help those of you doing the
FS rewrite to ensure that worlds fit what has been published:

This is summarised as much as possible and focussed to be relevant to the
M0 (0 to 400ish)

Antiquity (Corridor 0806 A223420-C): One of the best preserved Ancient
sites in existence. Discovered in 385, the site is unique in that many
parts of it are still operational.Note that this would be a good site for
the R(n) remark....

Khukish (1606) Vilani world, founded long before 3I, based on exploitation
of sea life, tech level F, pop 9 in 1120, described as 'old subsector
capital'
Shishkala (1607) described as 'agricultural partner world' to Khukish, so
may be colonised in FS.

Plunge (2405) settled underground caverns 'five centuries' ago. Maybe a
little late for FS.

Kaasu (1209) - home of Corridor Chronicles (founded 183) reached TL 16 by
1120, settled by Vilani miners.Mentioned as sector capital until occupation
by Vargr in 1119.

Depot (1511) surveyed by HA Enders (maverick interstellar explorer) in
first century of Imperium and passed over in favour of more easily
developed worlds. Settled by navy to protect the Spinward expansion early
on. Star named after Enders.

Neghu Oug (2804) - settled by Vargr and has a large aquatic mammal native
called Ojehshodu. These are sentient, but didn't object to Vargr
occupation. In 972 it is suggested, but never proven, that they psionically
manipulate and control the Vargr govt.

Tarin Sink (1432) colonised in late 300s by nine extended families. Later
on Imperium placed research facility - eventually RS epsilon, clearing
house for unexplained phenomena. Isolated in Great Rift.

Sashrakusha (3131) site of nonhuman minor race Xapoqi who are very long
lived nd live off UV radiation, also nearly imobile. Only realised they are
sentient in 700s through use of NAS scanners. Initially surveyed in first
Imperium.

That's all the references I can find at the moment. Hope it helps...

- ------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, 5 Jun 1997 13:53:31 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Peter  H. Brenton" <pete@cummings.uchicago.edu>
Subject: Re: Kinetic Kill BB's For T4

On Wed, 4 Jun 1997, Leonard Erickson wrote:

> In mail, sinbad@dfw.net writes:
> 
> > "Bighot"tm Kinetic Kill BB's are a 1 cm diameter sphere of Bonded
> > Superdense armor material. Each has a volume of 0.0000005 m^3 and mass of
> > 0.0000075 tons.
[snip]
> 
> It's reasonably easy to design a deployment method that will spread the
> projectiles in a manner that approximates a flat disk. Assume equal
> spacing at 1 BB per 100 sq m.
> 
> > The .1 m^3 RAAM page module can carry up to:
> > Number: 153,438 projectiles                     
> 
> Spread covers a circle 2.2 km in radius. 
> 
> > The 1 m^3 RAAM page module can carry up to:
> > Number: 1,814,953 projectiles                   
> 
> Spread covers a circle 7.6 km in radius.
> 
> > The 10 m^3 RAAM page module can carry up to:
> > Number: 19,072,352 projectiles                  
> 
> Spread covers a circle 24.6 km in radius!
> 
> Narrow the spread and you increase the number of hits. But at 100 m^2
> per BB, that's one in each 10x10 meter "square". That's gonna give
> *more* than 1 hit per 100 dtons!

How about a few more details Leonard and Sinbad;

At what range (from the target ship) does the warhead have to "deploy"?

Once a missile deploys, how easy at 2g can a ship get out of the
"footprint"?

How about 3g? 4g? 6g? 9g?

How easy is it to hit/destroy the carrying missile before deployment?

To what extent are ships armored against "debris" in space which closely
approximates the kinetic energy of a single BB?

Could the BBs be "stealthed" against standard PEMS and AEMS sensors?  If
so, what is the *maximum* range that the bbs could be deployed and keep
their "footprint"?

I remain (at this point) unconvinced after all the debate (a long time ago
now) about bb warheads that starships are susceptible to such warheads.
Then again, I don't think impact missiles should work either, but suspend 
disbelief in favor of game mechanics.

Convince me.

Pete

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 97 15:36:00 PDT
From: Glenn Myers <gem188@ansyspo.ansys.com>
Subject: Re: XBoat question

Bruce Johnson wrote
>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.

Actually, I believe the best source is Supplement 7: Traders and Gunboats. 
It gives a good description of the X-Boat procedures and has deckplans of 
the tenders.

Bye
_____________________________________________________
Glenn E. Myers
ANSYS Inc.                Email: glenn.myers@ansys.com
275 Technology Drive      Phone: (412) 514-2913
Canonsburg, PA 15317      Fax:   (412) 514-3118
_____________________________________________________

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 14:29:24 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Peter  H. Brenton" <pete@cummings.uchicago.edu>
Subject: Re: Pocket Empires

On Thu, 5 Jun 1997, Bruce E J Lewis wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> 	I may pick up Pocket Empires tomorrow night. can anyone tell me if it's
> worth getting, or does it suffer from the same blight as Starships and
> First Survey? I can't remember seeing a review anywhere, so I would
> appreciate a few people who have bought it letting me into a few of its
> darkest secrets.

Well, I'm only partway into it, but I'll bite anyway.

#1 - This book is not in any way I have found or heard of, basically
flawed the way both Starships and First Survey turned out to be.

#2 - What I have read is well written, clear, and interesting.

#3 - ITS SOLO PLAYABLE!  What the book seems to contain (and I'm only a
smidge into it, again) is an independent, background creating game with
the T4 task system and background as a basis.  The "players" are family
members of an individual empire which has an Economic, Military, and
Social identity that develops over time (in turns measured in years and
decades) and as planets are added to the empire.

A friend of mine ran a game once which was a turn based empire building
game.  We started with a certain group of planets which had a productive
value, a bunch of ships, and a few colorful generals and administrators.
This is (I think) just like that game.  In fact, it is similar to the game
"Stellar Conquest" except that the latter was played on a board with a few
other players involved.  I can see this being played the same way.

Pete

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 13:41:48 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: Windows on Starships

pierre-louis constantin wrote:
> 
>         So ship windows wouldn't be a weak point after, except of
> course if you use a laser that has the same frequency as what the
> window material lets through. :)

Since there are Traveller hulls with fields to strengthen the bonding
of the atoms, is it too much to presume that there would be fields
to alter the window frequency? What about polarization?

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

Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 21:31:41 +0200
From: "Mark Seemann" <mark@dk-online.dk>
Subject: New old Library Data on the Web!

Hello all

I'm very pleased to announce the launch of a big project of mine (one of
those project which'll make you wonder if I have a life or not) - a very
big collection of Traveller Library Data, gathered from more than 45
canonical sources and severely hypertexted!

There's more than 700 kB raw html files, so chances are that the
information that YOU seek is there! Check it out! The location:

http://www2.dk-online.dk/users/mark_seemann/library/

Mark Seemann
mark@dk-online.dk
http://www2.dk-online.dk/users/mark_seemann

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

Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 13:39:49 -0600
From: Erwin Fritz <efritz@glja.com>
Subject: Re: Windows in Starships?

Ethan Henry wrote:
> 
> iJust a quick reminder - NOTHING in Start Trek
> is remotely viable! The Enterprise had this great,
> fancy holodeck, but did it have a REAR VIERW MIRROR??
> NO!
> 
Actually, the Enterprise bridge's viewscreen could be used to see
in any direction. This applied both for the original series and
the Next Generation.

> The holotank idea is much, much better then the
> "forward viewscreen". It allows the Captian and
> crew to see the ship and it's surroundings in
> a full spherical field of view.

Agreed completely.

> 
> IIRC, there were actual Star Trek episodes where
> the major plot element was that the Enterprise
> couldn't see what was happening behind it! Sheesh!
> 

Which one?

Back to Traveller: in CT, the Far Trader has a bridge window.
There is also a window in the captain's cabin. Both, judging from
the deck plans, are treated as bulkheads.

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

End of Traveller-digest V1997 #1407
***********************************

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
