Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 25 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1012



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Plankwell
Re: GT Weapons Question
Re: GT Weapons Question
Re: I Need Some Radiation
Re: Thrust effects (was HEPlar lives!)
Re: Thrust effects (was HEPlar lives!)
Re: 
USL ships landing
Re: Orion Drive Modules
Re: Hudson-class Lander (GTL9)
RE: Streamlining
GURPS Design: Electronic Warfare Module (Take Two)
RE: Streamlining
Re: Strephon and Iris 
GURPS Design: Quiet Power Module
RE: Another look at aliens
Atlantis class redesign

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

Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 23:18:05 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Plankwell

From: Jesse DeGraff <fenris@slip.net>
Subject: RE: Plankwell


>I happen to have fighting ships :)  One thing that concerns me about the
>design of the Plankwell is the VERY short tunnel for the spinal mount.
>Would that work???  Anyway, it's a pretty simple design to model.  Maybe
>when I've got a few spare minutes...
>
>Jesse


    Well, Jesse, it is from High Guard, & you know what Kevin says, don't
you?  "There is only one Traveller & High Guard is its product."

Legate Legion
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com
http://www.futureone.com/~legate/index.htm

"A man may fight for many things; his country, his principles, his friends,
the glistening tear on the cheek of a golden child. But personally, I'd
mudwrestle my own mother for a ton of cash, an amusing clock, and a stack of
French porn." - Edmund Blackadder

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 02:23:51 -0400
From: Juliean Galak <jg42@cornell.edu>
Subject: Re: GT Weapons Question

At 12:54 AM 8/25/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Re: GT Weapons Question
>
> > Bont writes:
> > > Is there any reason why the GT Shipboard weaponry is designed
> > > with a cyclic rate of 1/2 when the power cells take 60 seconds to
> > > recharge, effectively reducing the RoF to 1/60?
> >
> > The GURPS Vehicles weapons design sequence doesn't support lower intrinsic
> > rates of fire. > > If you design the weapon with a cyclic rate of 1/60 to
> > keep in time > with the power cell recharge time, you can get a much
> > lighter (and > thus much more powerful) Energy Weapon.
> >
> > No, you can't.
>
>Then what the Hell is the Power Requirement step for (yelled in
>confusion ... not anger)?
>
>If you have a TL10 2000 kJ weapon with a cyclic rate (RoF) of 1/2
>then you require 2666 KW of power.
>
>If you have a TL10 2000 kJ weapon with a cyclic rate (RoF) of 1/60
>then you require 88.87 KW of power.
>
>Is that per Second?  If so, then it appears to consume much less
>power at a lower cyclic rate.  What am I missing?

IMHO, the way the formulas are presented in VE2 are a bit confusing.  Look 
at it this way:  a 1000kJ laser has an EPS (energy per shot) of
1000*2.666=2666kJs.  Remember, kJ is power, but kJs is energy, which is 
what a battery stores.  So, to fire this gun once, it takes 2666kJs.

Now comes the rather confusing question of ROF.  Basically, there are two 
ROFs that play a part here.  First, the intrinsic ROF of the weapon.  This 
is the highest ROF that the weapon can sustain given unlimited energy.  So 
if we say that the intrinsic ROF of this weapon is 1, then hooking it 
directly to a 2666kJ (or greater) fusion plant would allow it to fire at 
one shot per round (second).  even if we gave it excess energy, that's the 
fastest it can shoot.  The official SJG ruling is that the lowest intrinsic 
RoF allowed for GT is 1/2.

However, the intrinsic RoF is only attainable if the weapon is given 
sufficient power.  If power is insufficient, then a lower RoF is 
required.  This 'effective' RoF is what's given as 1/60 in the book.  It 
simply means that the weapon is only given a battery with 2666kJs, enough 
for one shot, and then it takes a full minute to recharge that weapon.  If, 
OTOH, the battery was recharged twice as fast, an effective RoF of 1/30 
would be attainable.  However, regardless of how much energy, the effective 
RoF can never exceed the intrinsic RoF.

So when do you use which?

For any calculations regarding the size/weight/price of the weapon: 
intrinsic ROF.

For calculating battery size: Use EPS without factoring in the RoF

For calculating fusion slice: Give enough power to maintain the effective RoF

For calculating aiming bonus: use effective RoF.

Hope this clarifies the issue.

           -- Juliean Galak (a.k.a. Falcon)
	     Gearhead-in-Training

- --
Gerfalcon Enterprises - GURPS Traveller Ironmongery for the 5th Millenium
IMTU tc  t4+ tg++ tt? ru ge++ 3i+ c+ jt au@ st+ ls+ pi-(+)
	ta- he+ kk-- hi+ as++ va++ dr+ so+ zh++ vi+ 0601
jg42@cornell.edu        "I do not agree with a word you say, but I will
                          defend to the death your right to say it."
                                              -- Francois Marie Voltaire
#include <disclaimer.h> "Imagination is more important than knowledge"
                          			     -- Albert Einstein
for PGP public-key and
more quotes, finger: jg42@gerfalcon.tzo.com
WWW Page: http://www.cadif.cornell.edu/~falcon/Traveller/              

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:11:59 +0100
From: Phil Kitching <postmark.design@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: GT Weapons Question

At 02:23 25/08/1999 -0400, Juliean Galak <jg42@cornell.edu> wrote:
>IMHO, the way the formulas are presented in VE2 are a bit confusing.  Look 
>at it this way:  a 1000kJ laser has an EPS (energy per shot) of
>1000*2.666=2666kJs.  Remember, kJ is power, but kJs is energy, which is 
>what a battery stores.  So, to fire this gun once, it takes 2666kJs.

Um, kW is power, kJ is energy (equivalent to kWs).

HOLD ON!

J = Joules. That's a metric unit!

Shouldn't GURPS do this calculation in horsepower or therms?

Phil Kitching
- --
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo/
  Postmark Design Bureau, Emerging Technologies Division.
 "Microwaving half-baked ideas from across the Galaxy"

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:52:39 +0100
From: Phil Kitching <postmark.design@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: I Need Some Radiation

At 00:34 24/08/1999 PST, shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:

>Probably leave him floating. Picture yourself holding onto a similar
>grip attached to a rope going over a pulley. Your feet are *securely*
>fastened to the floor. 
>
>At the start, the grip is pulling upwards gently (say there are a
>couple of pounds on the end of the rope. (zero G). When they
>hit 3g of thrust, it is pulling upwards with *three times your weight*.
>(ie someone just *dropped* weights equal to 3 times your weight into
>the "basket on the end of the rope).
>
>I doubt that anybody could hold onto it. 

That's more than 3G instantaneous load.

A better picture is that the rope is held taut and the basket is sitting
on a chair, then someone knocks the chair away.

I've no doubt that I couldn't hang on, even if it wasn't for the fact
that I'd be watching the ship's thruster glow before I realised that
it might have been an option.

A player with a strength 12 character and zero G comabt 4 isn't going
to let go until they're looking at a failed dice throw.

Phil Kitching
- --
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo/
  Postmark Design Bureau, Emerging Technologies Division.
 "Microwaving half-baked ideas from across the Galaxy"

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:44:29 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Thrust effects (was HEPlar lives!)

In mail you write:

> Leonard Erickson writes:
>
>> The problem is *wind*. USL is "unstable" in a wind. I won't go into
>> details, just note that the wind forces act thru a point *other* than
>> the center of mass. And where the point is depends on the angle. Thus,
>> in the presence of even a *light* wind, the vehicle will tumble
>> wildly. 
>
> No, its much too heavy for that.  Your average 200-ton unstreamlined ship 
> has a terminal velocity in air of somewhere around 700 mph, a typical heavy 
> wind (say, 35 mph) will accelerate it at .002 Gs or so.  Assuming the ship 
> can turn moderately quickly, this is flatly ignorable.

Oh? I suggest you ask the skipper of a supertanker about how
"ignorable" the way off center "sail" area of his superstructure is.
Luckily, it's at the *tail* of the vessel, so it helps keep the ship
pointed into the wind. It's a royal pain if you *don't* want the ship
pointed into the wind. And this is with much of the ship immersed in a
medium (water) that helps *damp* the effects.

Remember that a "200 ton" ship is 200 *displacement* tons. It doesn't
*mass* 200 tons. 

The force exerted by the wind is:

P = 0.5 D V^2 cos^2 A,

P = Pressure, N/m^2 (multiply by 0.000146 for psi)
D = Density, kg/m^3 (=1.225 for sea-level air on Earth)
V = Velocity, m/s (multiply by 2.24 for miles per hour)
A = Angle from perpendicular

So, let's try perpendicular impact at 35 mph, in sea-level air.

P = 0.5*1.225*2.24*35
P =  48.02

That's 48 newtons per square meter. Assume the ship has 100 meters of
cross sectional area in the plane of the wind (it likely has *more*).
That gives 4800 newtons of thrust. 

Assuming the ship really *does* weigh 200 tons...

F = m*A
4800 = 200,000*A
A = 0.024

That's 10 *times* the thrust you guessed. And if the ship has a cross
sectional area of 1000 m^3, the thrust is 0.24.

And the important part is that the thrust is *off center*. It imparts a
*turning* moment to the ship. 

>> Engine thrust is fixed with respect to the hull. And any "deflections"
>> are figure with respect to the hull, not with respect to the outside
>> world. 
>
> Given that ships can turn, this simply isn't true.  Manuevering thrusters 
> are plenty to overcome wind effects.

No, it *is* true. Manuevering thrusters *can* turn the ship. But the
main drive thrust is fixed. There's no real advantage in making the
main drive "steerable" that way, and lots of disadvantages. 

And I *wouldn't* count on thrusters intended for changing heading in
vacuum being able to overcome any sort of significant wind forces in an
atmosphere. 

As I recall, we worked out some time ago that a ship didn't need to be
able to use even .1 g for manuevering thrusters. They'd actually whip
the ship around so fast that it could *cause* problems. 

But it won't take a lot of wind to generate more force than the
manuevering thrusters. 

>> Heck, look at hot air ballons. They are streamlined (really!) and move
>> slowly. And even then, sudden updrafts and downdrafts are a danger. 
>
> They're also 3 orders of magnitude lower density than a spaceship.

Your ship on CG is *just* as light as a hot air ballon. :-)

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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 00:35:14 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Thrust effects (was HEPlar lives!)

In mail you write:

> Nick Bradbeer writes:
>> >Sorry, suspect I was mixing up TNE and T4.  Ok, I guess all the grav
>> vehicles in TNE are impossible, since using HEPlaR in atmosphere is
>> suicide. 
>  
>> The whole problem can be handwaved by the presumption that one accepts a
>> ludicrously-low-Isp-drive without also requiring a
>> ridiculously-high-exhaust-velocity. In my head, that's easier to accept
>> than the concept of a reactionless drive. Sure, it'd never work *really*,
>> but at least it uses principles I'm familiar with, rather than some strange
>> mystical science.

You've got Isp *backwards*. High Isp = High Ve. And Isp is simply the
exhaust velocity times acceleration due to earth's gravity (9.8 m/s^2,
used as a conversion factor from "mas" units to "weight" units).

> Actually, if a drive has an exhaust velocity of less than Isp*9.8 
> meters/second, it violates conservation of momentum and is just as bad as a 
> reactionless thruster.  My personal favorite is total conversion thrusters, 
> where the majority of the energy is assumed to escape in some invisible way.

Actually, such a drive is flat out impossible because Isp is *defined*
as exhaust velocity times 9.8 m/s^2. 

But I'm sure there are dodges that can be used. The one I'd look into
is similar to the stunt they do with jet engines in some applications.
"High bypass turbofans" for example. 

Have a "shroud" around the HEPlaR unit. The exhaust of the HEPlaR, even
at *really* low power will create a partial vacuum behind the shroud.
This wil suck air into the shroud and out the back. This provides a lot
of extra thrust without increase full needs to much. And it provides a
"sheath" of air around the HEPlaR exhaust. 

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

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 12:56:02 +0100
From: Phil Kitching <postmark.design@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: 

At 17:59 24/08/1999 -0400, "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net> wrote:
>>At 03:46 24/08/1999 -0400, "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net> wrote:
>>>>1)  Inertia.
>>>>
>>>>There are no inertial dampers outside the bad guy ship.  What will
>>>>happen to the PC as he holds onto the bar?  Can he withstand the force
>>>>of the ship moving and ride on the outside of the thing?  Or will the
>>>>ship leave him floating in its wake?
>>>>
>>>
>>>Holding on: simple... if he can hold on when somebody suddenly tripples his
>>>weight (Sorta like suddenly removing the counterbalance on a weight around
>>>his midrif) while rotating him to a new "Down" direction, maybe. I'd say
>>>rather slim odds, tho... and probably some broken bones.
>>
>>I'd strongly suggest considering dislocated shoulders, elbows or fingers
>>over broken bokens
>
>I was thinking of greenstick fractures, from torsional stresses to the
>arms, plus the invariable body slams against the hull, especially if
>tethered.

So now you have the possibility of broken ribs or a dislocated pelvis.

(try Jackie Chan's autobiography for an insight into breaks an dislocations
 from hits and falls - he's dislocated joints you've never thought of.)

I hope there aren't any edges or protrusions - just slamming into the
door handle could be very painful.

So...

When the poor PC, having been battered into submission
(dislocated shoulder, greenstick fracture to the arms, twisted knee,
 broken ribs and torn ligaments in the fingers), finally lets go...

Then you want to have them drift through a radiation zone from the engines.

(Presumably causing several cancers throughout their body as well as
 leaving them unable to have children, even after the initial bleeding
 gums and hair loss effects have been cured.)

There's a chance that the effects of damage to the vacc suit could cause
lung damage due to exposure to vacuum. The PC will probably be fried from
inside and out when looked at by an active sensor designed to work at
1 million km, causing internal organ damage and surface burns (this might
break the vacc suit's cooling system, leaving them cooking on the side
facing the star and possibly frostbite on the other side).

Then someone will probably fire a sandcaster between the ships and,
as the battle moves away, the PC will be stuck in the sand cloud,
unable to signal for help. When someone finally returns to look for
they'll probably be running out of air and risking brain damage.

<joke>
	Just one question Kenneth:

	"Did the person playing this character criticise your task system?"
</joke>

Phil Kitching
- --
  http://www.btinternet.com/~salvo/
  Postmark Design Bureau, Emerging Technologies Division.
 "Microwaving half-baked ideas from across the Galaxy"

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 08:46:39 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: USL ships landing

Charles Collin wrote:
>>>>>>>>
One of the things that came up last time we debated this topic (it was
_mostly_ pretty civil :-) was that in CT it mentions somewhere that USL
ships can land on worlds with no atmosphere.  They therefore must have the
landing gear and bracing to do this.
>>>>>>>>>
I think this is going to depend on the ship. The classic Broadsword
class mercenary cruiser is made to land - it has landing legs with
elevators in them - but some other unstreamlined ships simply aren't
shaped for landing on anything but a spacedock or a very specialized
landing cradle.

Consider the classic Lab Ship (a wheel design, it can even spin),
or the Merchant Cruiser Leviathan. Tough to figure out where landing
legs would even go on such a ship.

IMO, whether or not a particular unstreamlined ship can land should
be the GM's decision, based on the size and design of the ship.

Walt Smith

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:08:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Prior <robert_prior@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Orion Drive Modules

>> An interesting description of an Orion drive was in "Footfall" and then one
>> was shown in "Deep Impact".
>
>Or, for a less spectacular (non-nuclear) variant, there's the
>explosive-shell craft in _King David's Spaceship_.

Hm. Could one of our friendly neighbourhood physists provide some
calculations for this, in terms of (say) kilos of TNT. Might be fun to whip
up a few designs.

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:08:44 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Prior <robert_prior@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: Hudson-class Lander (GTL9)

>> From: Robert Prior <robert_prior@sympatico.ca>
>
>> I always heard "The Generals Are Born Again" in the background whenever I
>> read Rebellion Era TNS stories.
>
>und die Generale
>na, gerade die!
>die reden von Heldentot
>von grossen Heldentot
>
>I've forgotten who wrote the song.  I listened to it in German class
>back in college 20 years ago.  There are other verses about die
>Finsterlinge who talk of beautiful red dawns.
>
>(and the generals/yeah, exactly them/they talk about the death of
>heros/about great hero-deaths)
>
>--Glenn

Hm, I was thinking of  the Oster Band's song:

The generals are born again
(Born again, born again)
The generals are born again,
They're going to change the world.
Their armour is seeming right
(Seeming right, seeming right)
Their armour of righteousness is going to change the world.

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:07:18 -0400
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>
Subject: RE: Streamlining

Juliean Galak writes:
>I'm having a hard time justifying that IMTU.  In fact, IMTU that's 
>precisely the system I use.  IMHO, it's really cool to watch a multi-kdton 
>freighter slowly lower itself to the pad.
>
>The reason I brought this up to begin with was to find reasons why this 
>_can't_ be done, since that seems to be the OTU claim...

	Just because something is not done does not mean that it
	cannot be done.  Drawing on the various posts on this subject,
	one might assume that:

	1) non-streamlined ships are unstable in atmosphere and
	   require specific software to fly

	2) even with this software, unstreamlined ships in
	   atmosphere move slowly and are unable to handle stormy
	   weather

	3) landing unstreamlined ships requires special docking
	   facilities on the ground that are specific to that
	   particular class of ship (and may also require special
	   modifications to the ship).

	4) using a highport with connecting shuttles is more cost-
	   effective, entails less risk to the ship, shortens the
	   turn-around time, and makes it much easier to load/
	   unload

	With this approach, the PC's could try to enter an atmosphere
	with an unstreamlined ship in extremis, but there will be risk
	involved and landing would tend to be a one-way affair.

Peez

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 99 14:13:35 +0000
From: igor@truserve.com
Subject: GURPS Design: Electronic Warfare Module (Take Two)

Following some suggestions from people, here's my second take on a EW module...

Note: I believe the price of the RDF was correct - RDFs have a x5 price modifier over 
the normal radio, recieve-only cost. And I included a macroframe computer to handle all 
of the decoding and signal analysis in real-time...also, someone questioned the area 
jammer, seeing that it only has a range of 60 miles. While I agree this is rather short 
ranged, I also think I proper EW vessel would have one...the 60 mile mark seems awfully 
short to me - can't we beat that already in the real world? And would performance be 
improved in space?

Module contains:
  Radio Direction Finder (extreme range, receive only, very sensitive).
  Radar/Ladar Finder
  Radio Jammer (extreme range)
  Area Jammer (Rating 12)
  Deceptive Jammer (Rating 12)
  Blip Enhancer
  Complexity 8 Macroframe Computer, Hardened
  Computer Terminal
  Roomy Crew Station  
  Rechargable Power Cell capable of powering entire
    module (except area jammer) for 32 hours (7,246,656kWs).
  Fusion Plant (1313kW)

Radio Direction Finder    5000.0    100.00     $7,500    0.005
Radar/Ladar Finder          15.0      0.30     $1,500    0.000
Radio Jammer               250.0      5.00     $1,500    0.400
Area Jammer                250.0      5.00    $50,000 1250.000
Deceptive Jammer           500.0     10.00   $500,000   50.000
Blip Enhancer               50.0      1.00     $5,000    2.500
Computer, Hardened        3000.0     60.00 $2,500,000   10.000
Computer Terminal           10.0      0.50       $250    0.000
Crew Station                40.0     40.00       $100    0.000
Rechargable Power Cell     406.4      4.06    $40,643    0.000
Power Cell Space             0.0      8.12	   $0    0.000
Fusion Power               262.6      5.25    $13,130    0.000
Power Access Space           0.0     10.50         $0    0.000
Waste Space                  0.0      0.25         $0    0.000
           TOTALS         9784.0    250.00 $3,119,623 1312.905

Spaces: .5
Weight: 4.9 tons
Cost: 3.12MCr

Andy

+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/                    |
| Work: andya@cms-ia.com - http://www.cms-ia.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+  |
|       vi+ da+                                                      |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+    |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                           |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:11:11 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: RE: Streamlining

At 10:07 AM 08/25/1999 -0400, you wrote:
>Juliean Galak writes:
> >I'm having a hard time justifying that IMTU.  In fact, IMTU that's
> >precisely the system I use.  IMHO, it's really cool to watch a multi-kdton
> >freighter slowly lower itself to the pad.
> >
> >The reason I brought this up to begin with was to find reasons why this
> >_can't_ be done, since that seems to be the OTU claim...

I always figured that it could be done if enough time was allotted to the 
process.  Even in Adv 7, Broadsword, it has the Broadsword "grounded" at 
the starport.

Kurt Feltenberger

"To our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations,
    may she always be in the right, but our country, right or wrong!"
      ~Stephen Decatur


mailto:kurt@blazenet.net

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 16:15:47 +0000
From: "Carlos Alos-Ferrer" <Carlos.Alos-Ferrer@univie.ac.at>
Subject: Re: Strephon and Iris 

> From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>

> Considering that Longbow II was partially psionic in nature, and it was Imperial policy to stomp on psionics, I'd say it
> was something *too* serious to trust outside of the 'need to know' circle.  Remember, Longbow II detected the Empress Wave
> inbound.  That's pretty serious, IMNSFBHO.

Yep. And still Tranian at least should have known it. Unless he was 
a convinced anti-psionics type in private as well as in public.

> Also, Lucan and Varian were never considered to be viable candidates for the Throne, thus were only given the *basics*. 
> If something had happened to Iphegenia, this 'oversight' would have been corrected of course.

Hmmmm.... was VARIAN taught only the basics? Is there a source for 
that bit of data? He was *before* Lucan, so maybe it was just Lucan 
who was left to himself... and maybe that's the reason he got jealous 
enough to want to usurpe Varian's right.

Carlos Alos-Ferrer

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 99 14:28:39 +0000
From: igor@truserve.com
Subject: GURPS Design: Quiet Power Module

Someone suggested providing fuel cells to my vessel to operate in no-emissions mode - I 
thought power cells would be better....

QUIET POWER MODULE (TL 10)
  Provides 148,780,800 kWs of power, or 1722 kW of power for 24 hours.

                            Weight    Vol       Cost     Pow
Rechargeable Power Cell     8331.7    83.32   $833,172    0
Power Cell Space               0.0   166.63         $0    0
     TOTALS                 8331.7   250.00   $833,172    0

Spaces:   0.5					
Tonnage:  4.2					
MCr:     $0.83 					

Comments?

In a related note - is my math correct in figuring that the TL 10 maneuver module 
requires 4000 KW of power (40 tons thrust = 80,000lbs * .05 = 4000).

   Andy


+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/                    |
| Work: andya@cms-ia.com - http://www.cms-ia.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+  |
|       vi+ da+                                                      |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+    |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                           |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 10:32:31 -0400
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>
Subject: RE: Another look at aliens

Christopher B. Thrash writes:
>>> "Complete co-competitors cannot co-exist." (C4, for short.)

>>Except this is the same trap all those social darwinists fall into; in
>>fact what you are describing _is_ textbook social darwinism.

>I don't think so. Consider this: At what point does competition between
>intelligent species cease to be social or economic, and become biological
>or ecological? Before there can be trade, there must be a social
>contract; before there can be a social contract, there must be
>fundamental trust and understanding.

	Darwinian evolution is driven by the reproductive success
	of replicators.  These replicators are typically organisms
	but, as has been pointed out on this list, it may sometimes
	useful to consider the gene the replicator (or, rarely, the
	population).  In any event, the replicator is favoured by 
	natural selection if it can make more copies of itself than
	its competitors.  Social evolution has another method of
	spreading: sophonts can adopt a new culture because it is,
	for whatever reason, appealing.  It is worth noting that the
	"C4" maxim only applies to identical competitors for the same
	resources (as was pointed out earlier).  The various species
	competing for the galaxy in the OTU are not identical.

>My interest stems in part from a strong personal bias toward truly
>_alien_ aliens -- the kind that have to be treated as "black boxes" to
>use as NPC's, and can't be used as PC's at all. My point is that, while
>biology is not destiny, supposing biology has /no/ effect on
>relationships between alien species is just as likely to result in
>fallacy and "humans-with-bumpy-foreheads-and-funny-noses" as
>overgeneralizing them.

	While I am often lazy enough to use HWBFAFN aliens, I also
	like to have truely alien aliens.  You are absolutely right
	that our behaviour is intimately influenced by our biology,
	probably much more than most humans would like to believe.
	The way that I approach this is to think about the evolution
	of the alien, paying attention to the patterns of behaviour
	that were likely to be favoured.  This does not mean that
	Vargr will act like wolves any more than humans will act like
	chimps, but we do act a lot like chimps.  At least, my family
	does.

Peez

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

Date: Wed, 25 Aug 99 15:08:12 +0000
From: igor@truserve.com
Subject: Atlantis class redesign

Here's an updated design - I was unable to effectively provide non-fusion power to the 
maneuver drives - the mass/volume was prohibitive. The major change is a bug-fix in the 
weapons.


ATLANTIS CLASS GUNBOAT (TL 10)

  The newest vessel in the Taneian fleet, the Atlantis class 
gunboat is designed to be a jack-of-all-trades, serving as a 
patrol vessel, escort, picket, and SO (special ops) vessel.
  The Atlantis is highly advanced, and equiped with an extensive 
suite of electronic warfare equipment. These systems serve it 
well in all its roles - lying in wait for privateers and pirates, 
altering its signature to appear like a merchant vessel, and 
providing electronic warfare support to fleet elements.
  The vessel has a bunkroom capable of holding a total of 
8 individuals. This bunkroom is intended to hold prisoners if the 
craft is operating in a patrol capacity, or a squad of RATs 
(Rapid Assault Troopers) when working as a base ship for special 
operations. To further support RAT operations, the Atlantis mounts 
a single OIC (orbital isertion capsule) launcher and OIC storage 
rack, as well as Golem Assault Armor storage. When not operating 
as a SO craft, this space is largely wasted, athough a small amount 
of cargo can be placed in the Golem storage area.
  To handle a large number of prisoners, or to assist in the
evacuation of a damaged ship, the Atlantis has forty low berth 
units.
  The crew of fifteen consists of the Captain, XO/Navigator, 
Medic, Helmsman, Sensor/Commo Operator, Electronic 
Warfare Specialist, three engineers, and four gunners. The Captain 
and XO have their own staterooms (being officers), while the rest 
of the crew lives in double-occupancy rooms. A large common area 
keeps the ship from seeming too cramped. 
  Per normal Taneian operational doctrine, the Atlantis is 
equiped with enough life pods to support the full crew (six pods 
support 24 people, enough for the crew and a squad of RATs). 
The forty low berths are also ejectable in a large powered module,
allowing for the entire compliment to escape a doomed vessel.
  For offensive power, the Atlantis has two laser turrets and
two missile launchers. The missile launchers are standard
triple tube launchers, capable of launching standard missiles.
The lasers, however, are large single-barreled weapons giving
the Atlantis a long range energy punch. All of the weapons retract 
into the hull to provide a undisturbed surface for stealth 
purposes.
  The harshest criticism of the Atlantis is its armor - or more
properly, the lack of armor. Compared to ships of the line, the
Atlantis is rather fragile, being vulnerable to even turret
lasers. The vessel is intended to rely on its stealth and ECM
to avoid danger.
  Atlantis class vessels are named after mythical, fictional,
or "lost" cities from early Earth history. Other vessels
include Shangri-La, Asgard, Olympus, Rivendell, and Zinj.

  400-ton SL Hull, DR 400, 2 turrets with one 1,330-MJ laser each, 
2 Turrets with three missile racks each, Radical Stealth, Radical 
Emission Cloaking, Total Compartmentalization, Hardened Command 
Bridge, Engineering, 128 Maneuver, 12 Jump, 80 Fuel, Drop Capsule 
Launcher, Drop Capsule Rack, Battledress Morgue, Electronic Warfare, 
8 Staterooms, Bunkroom, Sickbay, Utility, 40 Vehicle Bay (10-ton 
lifeboat and 6 5-ton life pods), Fuel Processor, 5 cargo.


Statistics: EMass: 1,489.34, LMass 1,699.430, Cost MCr165.609,
HP: 37,500, Hull Size Modifier: +8.

Performance: Accel 3.01 Gs, Jump 2, Air Speed 3,690mph.

Name            Type  Acc  SS  Dam       1/2D Rng  Max Rng   ROF
1,330 MJ Laser  Imp   33   30  6dx96(2)    39,000  118,000  1/60

  Andy


+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Akins                                                       |
| Home: igor@ames.net - http://www.ames.net/igor/                    |
| Work: andya@cms-ia.com - http://www.cms-ia.com/                    |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| IMTU: tc++(**) ru+ ge 3i+ jt- au+ ls+ kk+ hi+ as+ va+ dr+ so+ zh+  |
|       vi+ da+                                                      |
| Geek: GCS d- s+:+ a- C++ W++ w+++(-)$ PS+ PE t- 5++ X+ R+++ tv+    |
|       b+++ DI+ D-- G e+ h---- r+++ y++++                           |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1012
***********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.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
