Traveller-digest     Tuesday, October 12 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1199



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Gauss Tracers...
Re: Firing two guns at once
Re: Bigger ammo clips
Re: Hmmmm
Re: Ruminations on 'Behind the Claw'
Re: Starports in the 21C
Re: Starports in the 21C
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1183
Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection (GT)
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1183
Re: Gauss Tracers...
Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection (GT)
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1185...
Re: Survivor kids (Was: Annic Nova)
Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection...
Re: Bigger ammo clips...
Re: Firing two guns at once...

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Mark Cook <markc@peak.org>
Subject: Re: Gauss Tracers...

William F. Hostman <aramis@gci.net> writes:

> >> So it should pentrate as normal. With a slight chanche of igniting
> >> anything flammable it lodges in (like a kevlar vest :-)
> >
> >Hmmm ... what about gauss weapons: could they have tracer ammo?
> 
> They'd need some ignition source... IMTU, for an extra Cr 100, you can add
> a tracer ignition laser to it...

Sigh.  Why do you guys always have to pick the hardest possible
solution to a simple problem?  Present day tracer amoo ignites
simply from barrel friction.  Given gauss projectile velocities
and improved chemcial technology at TL-whatever, why not just
have *AIR* friction ignite the little buggers as they exit the
barrel? :^(

        - Mark C.
          Instructor, Willamette Small Arms Academy
          EOD, U.S.M.C. 1st MarDiv (Camp Pendleton), Class of '75
          Full-Auto Director, Albany Rifle & Pistol Club, Albany, OR
          NRA (Life), SAF (Life), CCRKBA (Life)
          Front Sight First Family member #1

- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 mark f. cook   *   shoestring graphics & printing   *  markc@ssgfx.com
 7160 n.w. somerset dr. * corvallis, or, 97330  *  http://www.ssgfx.com
 Phone: 541-745-5709                                  Fax: 541-745-5818      
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   "Remember that a government big enough to give you everything
    you want is also big enough to take away everything you have."
    --Col. David Crockett; member of the Tennessee legislature
    (1821-1822/1823-1824); member U.S. House of Representatives
    (1827-1831/1833-1835); and Texas Hero of the Alamo (1836) 

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:32:21 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Firing two guns at once

In mail you write:

> I'm also right-handed, left-eyed.  No apparent reason for  it  in
> my case, that's just the way I'm wired.  What it means is that  I
> am a completely crap shot with a rifle (kept closing my right eye
> when squinting down the barrel held right handed, then missed  by
> miles)

Odd. I've never had that much trouble. I just hold the rifle so the
sights line up with my *left* eye. I may have to tilt my head a little,
but I've never really noticed.

Of course, I was also shooting at a pill bottle cap with my .22. I'd
catch it "on the bounce just about every time, and I wasn't using the
sights. :-)

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:02:35 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Bigger ammo clips

In mail you write:

> For all of you guys with experience with military weapons...
> In a number of games I've seen players express interest in getting clips
> the hold more ammor for their guns (so they don't have change as often).
> This would seem to be relatively easy (just make them longer, they aren't
> that long right now), but if it was, it would seem likely they would
> already be made that way.  What do you guys think?

I mostly know about this from a late friend who was a gunsmith.

First problem is that the extra weight can do nasty things to the
magazine catch. Like cause it to fail, dropping a partially used
magazine at an inconvenient moment. Or to jam, making it impossible to
remove an empty. 

Next, the extra weight can make the weapon harder to handle. I never
got to *fire* it, but I did get to *handle an AK-47 with 30 round
magazine, 75 round drum, and 100 round drum. Those drums weigh a *lot*!

Finally, a longer magazine (like the add-on 30 round units for the SKS)
can snag on a lot of stuff that the smaller one won't. 

Oh yeah, an interesting idea for refs to dump on players. Have them not
be careful enough in buying ammo for their weapons. That is, buying a
crate of ammo that turns out to be oboxes of loose round, rather than
boxes of magazines or clips. 

In a combat situation, I'd *much* prefer to have my ammo drop consist
of the ruggedized "cans" of SKS ammo. Each can contains a bunch of
10-round "clips" wrapped in paper. You peel the top off the can (easy,
even if you are in a hurry and grab a handful of these and dump them in
a pouch or your pocket. If you are *really* rushed, you might scrape
your fingers a bit on the edges of the can. Big deal.  The paper keeps
the rounds from collecting dirt, and unwraps easily (makes good fire
starter too!). And if you are in a hurry, you can throw away the clip
(a flat metal "stripper clip").

Contrast this with opening the crate and finding lots of cardboard
boxes containing 20(?) loose rounds. You'd better have saved the
stripper clips from your original ammo issue, and have *time* to load
them with rounds. Or to load rounds by hand into the internal magazine
in the rifle. 

The above is based on personal experience dealing with two different
purchases of "bulk" ammo for the SKS. I'm sure similar situations apply
with other weapons and ammo. 

Anyway, sometimes "cheap" can get *real* expensive (like trying to
reload magazines by hand while under fire).

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 15:21:56 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Hmmmm

In mail you write:

> Leonard Erickson wrote:
>> 
>> In mail you write:
>> 
>> > Supplement 10 provides that the "Owner" of Earth is the Imperial Marines.
>> >
>> > William F. Hostman  |  "Smith & Wesson: THe original Point and Click
>> > interface!"
>> 
>> For some reason, *this* time when I read your sig, my mind flashed on
>> one of the "Buck Godot" books. It has a couple of "characters" named
>> "Smith" and "Wesson". They are a pair of intelligent weapons (in much
>> the same sense as a D&D "intelligent sword"). They essentially control
>> the poor guy that carries them.
>> 
>> Those would be by *just* the weapons for someone to acquire (or is that
>> "be acquired by?" :-)
>
> Sorry for drifting off-topic so quickly, but this anecdote reminds me of
> a D&D filk I heard once:  "No-Ego Wood" (to the tune of "Norwegian
> Wood").  The first lines went:
>
> I once had a sword
> Or should I say, it once had me
>
> Does anyone here have the rest of the lyrics to this filk?

Funny you should ask...

No Ego Wood
Words: ???
Tune: "Norwegian Wood" by the Beatles

     I once had a sword
     or should I say,
     it once had me.

     I just picked it up,
     oh what a sword...
     it was + 3.

     Its ego was 12,
     a fact of which
     I wasn't aware.
     'Til I tried to leave
      and I found that the
      sword didn't care.

     I walked thru the halls
     wasting my time
     Nothing to find.
     Then I turned around
     and then I said,
     "Oh, no!  Undead!"

     32 wights saw me coming and started to laugh.
     And I closed my eyes as that sword started hewing a path...

     And when I awoke, I was alone.
     That sword had flown.
      Now I use a club,
      Isn't it good...No-Ego-Wood!

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 16:44:49 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Ruminations on 'Behind the Claw'

In mail you write:

> * Ebokin : Yebab/Aramis 3002. UPP C9A489A-7
> This world has a mixed methane, CO2 and nitrogen atmosphere,
> 41% surface water and a 'cold' climate (the water must be frozen, very
> salty/gassy or an ammonia-water eutectic mixture). The 1500 mile
> diameter given must be 15000 (to permit atmospheric methane in largish
> amounts).

Also, the methane can only be present if the planet is very young or
the star is both far away, and "low energy" (ie type K or better yet M)
as otherwise UV from the star will have "cracked" water into H2 (which
leaves) and O2 which reacts with the methane to form more H2O and CO2.

*Or* the methane is being produced by lifeforms on the planet. They'd
have to be forms existing by *reducing* reactions as opposed to
*oxidizing* ones. 

> * Ursty : Yurst/Regina 2309  E7B4643-5
> Given the chlorine taint, the Ursty are more likely to be chlorine
> breathing (it is about 30-50X more soluble in water than oxygen).
>         Since oxygen is also present in the atmosphere, this world could be
> very interesting, with two biospheres developing in parallel - an
> aquatic chlorine breathing one, and a land based oxygen breathing one.
> (The 'Deep Green' phylogeny project suggests that green plants on Earth
> developed in fresh water, rather than salt as previously thought ; so
> perhaps Yurst's life evolved in an even more radical manner). 
>         Since the Ursty have attained TTL 5, their solutions to 'life in the
> presence of poisonous oxygen' would be worth studying and trading for.
>         The drying out taking place on Faldor may also be happening here.

Chlorine/oxy mixes are *really* unlikely for reasons having to do with
chemistry and the reaction energies of various molecules.

> * Tethmari : Gyomar/Chronor 0108 D8B2889-5
> The problem with Gyomar as written is that the average surface
> temperature is below the melting point of ammonia, which is supposed to
> form the world's 20% 'hydrographic coverage'.

Maybe there's enough water to form a eutetic? 

And in any case, you have to explain how large amounts of ammonia can
exist in conjuction with oxygen (or does this planet not have Oxygen?).
And again, ammonia degrades to H2 and N2 in the presence of UV from the
star.

>         Life's development is even more unlikely in the face of "tremendous
> atmospheric pressure" which would make the ammonia even harder to melt
> (would offset the freezing point depression effect of a reasonable
> amount of dissolved stuff).

But at least it might help explain why the ammonia hasn't broken down
due to UV from the star.

> * Viji : Zeta 2/Vilis 0919 X6B0000-0
> I posted some stuff on this earlier. Not being able to track down a
> description of H. Beam Piper's 'Niflheim' (which Leonard suggested as a
> reference for a high fluorine world), I'd suggest changing the word
> 'fluorine' to 'sulphur' in the descriptions of the world and the Viji.
>         This has the advantages of simplicity and greatly enhanced
> plausibility.

What you need to track down is a copy of "Uller Uprising". I think the
reprint was by Ace back in the early to mid 80s. It includes the
article on Niffleheim and Uller written by Dr. Robert S. Richardson.

My copy is in storage, otherwise I'd offer to xerox the article and
mail it to you. Maybe somebody else on the list can?

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:37:36 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Starports in the 21C

In mail you write:

>> Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 10:55:54 PST
>> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
>> 
>> Actually, the Shuttle does *not* have an ablative skin. Just one that
>> can withstand high temps *and* is a superb insulator, so that the heat
>> doesn't leak inward and fry the crew. 
>
> I don't know whether the process is technically ablation or not, but for
> whatever reason most (all?) of the shuttle's tiles get replaced after each
> flight.  That was my point.

Heck, the shuttle gets a complete *rebuild* after each flight. The damn
thing is design for performance, not reliability. 

The reason for replacing/reconditioning tiles is that they've got all
the structural strength of stryofoam. If they get chewed up a bit by
dust particles, insects, and gravel kicked up on landing, they get
replaced or refurbished (usually that means the damaged surface gets
smoothed out and the tile reshaped so it can be a spare for a smaller
tile.

>> Interesting data point. The Chinese use *oak* for such disposable heat
>> shields. 
>
> That's too cool. :)

Heck, it's the sort of thing I can see being done in the Imperium for
some uses. Things like disposable cargo pods for resupplying troops in
a hot LZ. 

I could actually see the contract for the heat shields being let out to
some TL4 (or less) planet, simply because they were the low bidder. 

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:43:39 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Starports in the 21C

In mail you write:

> Leonard Erickson wrote:
>
>> Interesting data point. The Chinese use *oak* for such disposable heat
>> shields.
>
> Not at all surprising to anyone who's done any jewelry work. Charcoal blocks
> are typically used as stable platforms to braze metals on. They're soft, you
> can stick pins in 'em to hold thnigs in place, and they hold up to the heat 
> of a torch quite well.
>
> Oak is a dense, hard wood, making excellent charcoal, expecially as you're
> absorbing all the energy to do so as you re-enter (awfully anaerobic up there
> in the upper atmosphere)
>
> You'll want to make _really_ sure there's no knots or other weak points,
> though ;-)

Yep. It does make for some interesting ideas though. Besides my idea
(in another post) of some low TL planet getting the contract for heat
shields for disposable supply pods for combat resupply of drop capsule
troops, I'm sure there are lots of other places where such a low tech
idea can be used.

Say, emergency repairs to battle damage on the PC's ship. 

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:51:36 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1183

In mail you write:

> Leonard Erickson writes:
>
>> My take is to ignore the stupid "thrusters" and go with reaction
>> drives. That makes near-c rocks *expensive*.
>
> Unfortunately, it has other consequences if you want anything resembling a 
> traveller feel for how people move about.  It replaces the 'near-C rock' 
> problem with the 'toasting cities with my rockets' problem.  As I recall, 
> HEPlaR thrusters have an exhaust velocity of 13% of c, and a power
> output of about 4 MW/newton.

Well, I prefer something more along the lines of a decent fusion
rocket. Say Isp of 600k? No idea what the power output is. But Ve is a
lot more reasonable.

>> For that matter, even *with* thrusters, it takes a damned *big* rock
>> going really, really fast to be much worse than a nuke, or a redirected
>> asteroid. 
>> 
>> Just consider how *long* you have to push that rock to get it up to
>> even 1% of c. 
>
> 3.5 days / Gs.  There is, incidentally, no point to a rock beyond shielding. 
>  An engine without an attached rock becomes more dangerous faster than an 
> engine attached to a big rock.

Thie trick being where do you get an engine that can move a *big* rock
at even .1 g?

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 14:55:25 PST
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection (GT)

In mail you write:

> At TL12+, any battlefield weapon can be detected.  It's possible to track
> bullets in near-real-time right now; this should be commonplace by the 53rd
> century.  Energy weapons are probably worse; fusing guns will have
> signatures light a trip flare, and even x-ray lasers are going to be
> detectable by the heat trace of the beam through the air.  

Actually *any* weapons grade laser is going to ionize the *hell* out of
the air it passes through. I've seen photos of a 1 MW beam in the lab
and it looks like a cheap special effect, with various sized "globes"
of ionization forming and collapsing at random along the beam path. 

X-Ray lasers will be *worse*, because is *very* opaque at X-ray
wavelengths.

So most significant lasers will be located by the long column of plasma
that ocupies the beam path.

Worse than firing tracers or a flame thrower. A *literal* "neon sign"
pointing directly at you. 

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:05:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1183

Leonard Erickson writes:

> Well, I prefer something more along the lines of a decent fusion
> rocket. Say Isp of 600k? No idea what the power output is. But Ve is a
> lot more reasonable.
Well, only 2% of C isn't as bad, but it still has an energy requirement of 6 megawatts per newton (for any reaction engine, minimum power requirement = thrust * exhaust velocity).
> Thie trick being where do you get an engine that can move a *big* rock
> at even .1 g?
Who needs a big rock?  Aside from making the projectile a bit harder to destroy, the size of the rock has zero effect on its damage.  Energy = force * distance.

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:28:06 -0600 (MDT)
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com>
Subject: Re: Gauss Tracers...

Yikes. Tracers point BOTH ways.

How about a visor (or sight) that lets the user see where they are
going, but NOT the enemy... One in every 10-20 rounds has some kind
of trasmitter, or they heat up enough in air so that you use IR...

I wouldn't want tracers, period (any of you folks play WarBirds? In
the Historical Arena I'd bounce peeps much better if my first few
rounds weren't obviously visible flying past on a boom and zoom).

- -Merrick (tater- in WB if any of you ever fly the virtual
battlefield)
`

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:28:53 -0700
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com>
Subject: Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection (GT)

> I've seen photos of a 1 MW beam in the lab
> and it looks like a cheap special effect, with various sized "globes"
> of ionization forming and collapsing at random along the beam path.

You wouldn't know where one might find such photos on the net, would you?

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:57:52 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1185...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: <dadams@parracity.nsw.gov.au>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1185



>
> Salt water would not affect
> it...
>

Also, I never saw any rules for making a starship wait an hour before going
for a swim when entering atmosphere to refuel (and a fine example is the
drawing of a Type S on some game screen and one of this list's posters art
on the subject...

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:06:58 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Survivor kids (Was: Annic Nova)

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Andrew Moffatt-Vallance <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: Survivor kids (Was: Annic Nova)


> From:           "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
> Date sent:      Mon, 11 Oct 1999 21:36:13 +1300
>
> > On 11 Oct 99, at 18:00, The Roc wrote:
>
> > > My wife works in childcare and has seen over the years, women whom
breast
> > > feed, with children only 9-10 months older than the new baby.  That's
to
> > > say that the youngest child was conceived within days of the eldest's
> > > birth and while breastfeeding that child.  I can't say how common it
is
> > > though.
> >
> > Apparently 40% of non-nursing and 15% of nursing mothers being
> > menstruation within 6 weeks, and about 10% of mothers will be fertile
> > before their first post-birth period, so I'd say "not very".
>
> >From University of Aberdeen study (1988). Exclusive breastfeeding (that
is
> the child is exclusively breastfeed) was found to be over 99% effective in
> preventing ovulation. This result was confirmed in several followup
studies.
> The effectiveness of breastfeeding as contraception in modern times has
> been dramatically reduced by the introduction of infant formula and
earlier
> weaning.
>

It's also funny on how the odds work.  Mentioning this to my wife she tells
me that her brother's wife falls into the category of conceiving while
breast feeding some couple of weeks after birth, and that in one centre she
worked, there were three such mothers, but in other centres, she does not
recall any!  It's all or nothing I suppose.

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 19:18:07 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Douglas E. Berry <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Monday, October 11, 1999 7:30 AM
Subject: Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection


> At 07:33 PM 10/11/1999 +1000, you wrote:
>
> >Just curious with terminology now, but is a mecha (as you describe this)
a
> >vehicle or a suit?  My personal take on the term "Battle Dress" was that
it
> >was "worn" by the user, not sat in like a vehicle?  Could this be where a
> >lot of confusion stems from with these things/issues?  Is this unit a
mech
> >or power assisted armour?
>
> Traveller's Battledress is a suit of powered armour, ala Heinlein's
> _Starship Troopers_ or Haldeman's _Forever War_.  Man sized, with human
> limbs going into the suit's limbs.
>
> Mecha are the traditional anime.magna giant combat robots.  Best examples
> are Battletech's Mechs and Robotech.
>

I understand the concept, but was wondering if there is a cross in
comprehension of some of the battledresses?  One writer saying the infamous
commando BD is a suit, and another saying it is obviously a mech... I was
probably more thinking aloud to the list on how easy it is for two people to
read one paragraph differently, interpreting one rule differently, one BD
differently, etc.  Also, as I don't have the book with the Commando suit in
it, I was asking that particular writer to explain as I had understood the
suit to be that, a suit?

Not being cheaky or looking to start a flame, I was really curious about his
interpretation on that "Battle Dress."

> As an aside, even though I find the concept of 10 meter tall humanoid
> combat mechs utterly ridiculous, the Battletech novels from FASA are great
> reading.  Mike Stackpole has written several excellent series focusing on
> the leaders of the Inner Sphere over a fifty year period.  Find the 10th
> Anniversary printing of the _Warrior_ Trilogy for a good read.
>

I'm not even that impressed with such mecha that I don't even read anything
with the tag "Battletech" on it, though my 11 year old loves playing
Mechwarrior2: Mercenaries whenever he has free time!

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:48:31 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Bigger ammo clips...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 10:11 AM
Subject: Re: Bigger ammo clips


> "David P. Summers" wrote:
> >
> > For all of you guys with experience with military weapons...
> > In a number of games I've seen players express interest in getting clips
> > the hold more ammor for their guns (so they don't have change as often).
> > This would seem to be relatively easy (just make them longer, they
aren't
> > that long right now), but if it was, it would seem likely they would
> > already be made that way.  What do you guys think?
>
> >From what I've read, such things do exist for specialty applications.
> However, there are several limiting factors (these apply primarily to
> handguns):
>
> 1.  The mass of the weapon equipped with the high-capacity magazine.  As
> one adds ammo, one adds weight.  Eventually (especially with sidearms),
> one reaches a point where the weapon is simply too heavy to handle
> easily.
>
> 2.  The bulk of the high-capacity magazine.  For instance, let's suppose
> that a 15-round magazine for the M9 9mm pistol is 12 cm, all of which is
> contained within the pistol grip.  Adding 15 rounds, while keeping the
> pistol grip the same, will add 11-12 cm to the length of the magazine,
> all of which will be sticking out of the pistol grip.  At some point,
> this would become unwieldly, especially when trying to draw the weapon
> from the holster.
>
> 3.  The circumference of the pistol grip.  One way to ease the problems
> of point #2 above is to increase the circumference (and thus the
> internal volume per cm of length) of the pistol grip.  However, this
> quickly hits the limit of the average human's grip (assuming that the
> weapon is intended for human use).
>
> As a rule of thumb, I'd say that you can increase the magazine capacity
> by about 25-30 percent, without presenting too much of a problem, and
> without modifying the pistol grip.
>
> With rifles, a magazine much longer than the M16's 30-round magazine
> will begin to interfere with one's ability to fire the weapon while
> prone.  I'd say, as a quick-and-dirty guess, that an M16 magazine could
> be lengthened to allow for about 50 rounds of 5.56mm ammo, without
> interfering too much with the ability to fire in the prone position.
>
> In either case, a weapon gearhead could find the absolute smallest round
> capable of inflicting a given damage factor, and design a weapon to fire
> it.  This would increase the number of rounds per cm^3 of magazine.  (Of
> course, such a custom weapon, and its ammo, would be rather expensive,
> but what price peace of mind?)
>

Oooohhhhh, now the old memory is working over time... but I believe I have
seen photos of probably half-a-dozen different weapons of automatic pistol
to automatic rifle (and a few SMG's?) with different sized magazines, mostly
WWII era (although the SLR [Self Loading Rifle -- a licensed FN design]
could comfortable take the double capacity mag of the AR [Automatic Rifle --
the upgraded, heavy-barrelled, squad support weapon version of the SLR]).  I
don't remember makes/types, but I have seen photos, so that is a basis for
anyone who wants to search them out, that they should find something at
least?

From memory (thinking hard now... why isn't this easy anymore?), I believe a
post-war version of the M1 Carbine had to types of box mags -- that is, the
extended mag was post-war, the Thompson had both a box and drum version, as
did both common Russian SMG's of WWII.  The MG34 and 42 had belt feed and
drum mags... nope, sorry, that's all I can think of from the top of my head,
but I also know there was at least one pistol that had an extended mag
(double capacity I think) that hung straight out the butt of the grip... I
personally owned a .22 semi-automatic Stirling that had three different
capacity box magazines.

Furthermore, my take on it was that weapon magazines were somewhat rugged
AND fragile, and were meant to be as inexpensive as possible.  Some designs
lent themselves to being extended with ease, but the technology for
designing a "reliable" spring mechanism for most would cost more than it was
worth in R&D because the tensile factor (the extended spring would lose it's
bounce/push when the mag was fully loaded for any length of time or it would
not extend straight and "kink" in the box) was way off (again, my learning
came from 50's/60's source material, so it is in all probability, possible
in our day and age).  For more capacity, I understand in the 80's there was
a company (I don't know if it still exists or not, was successful or not)
that was producing snail mags for different handguns.

For devious GM's, you can also use the "old design short fall" that some
weapons naturally possessed, such as the old Aussie 9mm SMG, the F1.  It had
a 30 rd box magazine that had two quirks in itself, one was that if you
reloaded and hit down on the top of the fresh mag with the breach block/bolt
open, some worn mags would deposit nearly half of the magazine's rounds
straight down at your feet -- the mag was top loaded and the ejection port
was directly below it... when the last round was ejected, the action would
carry forward with a resounding "Clunk" letting you know it was empty, the
IA was to cock the weapon, remove the empty mag and replace it with a fully
charged one, point the weapon at the target and squeeze the trigger to
release the action and continue firing, so the breach was fully open upon
reloading and with mags that had worn (I forget the term, arrrrrrgh!
Errrr... lips?  Flanges?), the rounds would just get pushed out if you hit
the top of the mag!

The other magazine quirk was that some of the older mags (that still had
good lips/flanges/whatever) would have springs that just lost strength over
time and to remain "reliable," couldn't have more than 20-25 rounds loaded
into them otherwise they wouldn't feed!  Mind you, it was a simple weapon
and fun for a yippee shoot nonetheless :^)

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:50:47 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Firing two guns at once...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 10:26 AM
Subject: Re: Firing two guns at once


> At 11:27 AM 10/10/1999 -0700, you wrote:
> >> I write, draw, paint,
> >> etc... with my left hand. I throw, swing a bat, shoot a gun, dribble a
> >> basketball and do just about everything else right handed. It was never
> >> conscious, it just sort of happened that way.
> >
> >And I thought I was an oddity. ;)
>
>         You are.  He and I are worse.  =)
>
> >Can't really call your characteristic
> >"ambidextrous", and it doesn't sound like somebody forced you to use your
> >off-hand. Could it be based on fine dexterity vs gross agility?
> >
>
>         That is my experience.  Amongst other games I play, I am a fencer.
> I also dabble in a MA that sims Middle Ages English broadsword and sheild
> fighting.  I am "supposed" to be right handed.  I play raquet ball and
fence
> right handed.  I pitch softball and swing sword left handed.  I write with
> my right, and heft with my left.  I call it adaptive ambidexterity....
>

I can use a knife and fork in either hand!  ;^)

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1199
***********************************

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
