Traveller-digest     Tuesday, October 12 1999     Volume 1999 : Number 1200



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Firing two guns at once...
Re: Parts Quest! ( was Re: Annic Nova (canon))
Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection...
Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED RE Many guns II 
Re: Does anyone play these games?
Re: Near C rocks
Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED Was Re: GURPS errata now Graffiti
Re: Near C rocks (Was: Re: Spraying 'Near-c-rocks-B-)
Re: Starports in the 21C
Re: Near C rocks
MIA's???
Lucan the Man...
Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection...
Re: Lucan the Man... 
Re: GTL8/9 Starships
GTL12 5 dTon Passenger, Cargo and Utility Shuttle
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1198

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 22:00:39 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Firing two guns at once...

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Jesse DeGraff <fenris@slip.net>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 12:35 PM
Subject: RE: Firing two guns at once



> >
> > > > As a former Army pistol team member and long-time combat
> > > > USPSA-IPSC shooter it
> > > > makes no sense to fire a pistol in each hand unless you like
> > > > wasting alot of
> > > > ammo. The chances of actually hitting your target is low, maybe
> > > > 20% and that's
> > > > if you're experienced.. Only an rank amateur or movie rambo would
> > > > ever do this.
> > > > It makes more sense to buy a high quality carry weapon and
> > load up with
> > > > additional magazines for the same amount of weight. If you want
volume
> > > > get a submachine gun like an MP5K.
> > > >
> > > > Alex Ingram
> > > >
> > > >

I also believe that squeezing both triggers at once (a la John Woo
movie-style) is not a natural action... obviously it can be done when
thought about, but not a naturally occurring action... like rubbing you
belly and patting your head, many can do it with thought (and some never
can!), but not many do it naturally.  Depending on how a player wants to do
it, this could also add another penalty?

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 09:49:51 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Parts Quest! ( was Re: Annic Nova (canon))

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Frank Pitt <frankie@mundens.gen.nz>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 1999 1:50 PM
Subject: Re: Parts Quest! ( was Re: Annic Nova (canon))


> "Parts Quest" huh  ?
>
> We played an ad hoc game a few months back called "HoonQuest" where a
group
> of "Westies" (known in this country for hotting up FJ Holdens and wearing
> black Led Zeppelin tee-shirts) went looking for an elusive and original
part
> for a 1956 Holden..
>
> It was a LARP,  and the only props we needed were black tshirts and a car
to
> hang out of, and a recording of "Stairway to Heaven".
>
> Frankie
>
>

What?  No Newcastle Song?

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:53:12 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection...

The Roc writes:

> 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...
The infamous commando BD is a suit, as I recall.  It has a battlesuit crewstation.  I think it also has the limbs in the limbs of the suit, not the entire pilot enclosed in the torso.

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:14:53 +0100
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED RE Many guns II 

- -----Original Message-----
From: Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: 12 October 1999 05:37
Subject: RE: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED RE Many guns II


On 11 Oct 99, at 20:55, Jesse DeGraff wrote:

> No clue.  I bought it used in about '85 or '86 IIRC.  I've no idea on it's
> history or the year it was made.  It's a Chinese Norinco AKMS.  Musta'
> been one of those flighty ones from a bad shift :)  I must admit that I've
> had a lot of short range plinking fun with it over the years, even if it
> DOES have problems keeping a magazine of ammo on a standard b-27
> silhouette target at 100 yards :)

Wonderful for suppressive fire though - not only can you suppress the
guy you're firing at, but his mate on the right, and his mate on the
left as well :)
- -------------------------------------------------------------
Hmmm, Group hits for autofire anyone?

I loved those Merc rules in CT, and spent ages as a 14 year old designing a
full auto shotgun for use as a defensive weapon mounted in pods on the
ceiling or walls of military vessels.  Have all the sensitive areas
approached only by long(ish... say 10m) corridors with no other exits. A few
full auto shotguns mounted at both ends of the corridor will fill the
corridor with such a vast amount of buckshot that even a platoon of IM in CT
BD will become a red haze if you use group hits by auto, and each of those
hits doing group hits by shotgun. Also, if the corridor is made of bulkhead
material, you can't damage your own ship (apart from sandblasting the
paintjob)

Ahhh, happy days <g>

Matt

Matthew Bond
mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk
www.akira.swinternet.co.uk
- --------------------------------------------------------------
"To strike a man who insults you is one thing...
...To run him through with a sword is quite another!"
- --------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:28:09 +0100
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Does anyone play these games?

- -----Original Message-----
From: Luther Martin <martin@ksarul.com>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: 12 October 1999 05:38
Subject: Re: Does anyone play these games?


>You are probably not alone in having no group to play with. What we need is
>a volunteer to either attempt running a play-by-email version of a
Traveller
>adventure or one on the GDW Traveller games (preferably Fifth Frontier
War -
>the best of them all as well as being easy to adapt to email). This could
be
>very challenging, since you would need to make major changes in *stuff* to
>make it work by e-mail. Is anyone out there up to this challenge?


Me! Me! Me!...

After splurging so much on eBay recently, it'd be nice to actually use some
of the stuff I've bought.

If we can iron out the basics, I'd be willing to ref a PBeM of FFW or TCS,
as long as RL doesn't intrude too much.

I suppose weekly turns would be best (both from a canon an RL point of
view).  Say, all orders to be received by 23.59 UK time (with a little
leeway for late orders) on a Friday.  I adjudicate on the Saturday, and post
updates on the Sunday. Any comments or victi^H^H^H volunteers, email me at
the address below (or to TML if you don't mind your comms being intercepted
by potential opponents <g>).

All the best,

Matt

Matthew Bond
mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk
www.akira.swinternet.co.uk
- --------------------------------------------------------------
"To strike a man who insults you is one thing...
...To run him through with a sword is quite another!"
- --------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:33:36 +0100
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Near C rocks

- -----Original Message-----
From: dadams@parracity.nsw.gov.au <dadams@parracity.nsw.gov.au>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: 12 October 1999 06:13
Subject: Near C rocks


>"Informal discussions with the Zhodani during the conclusion of the First
>Interstellar Wars agredd that both sides will informally acknolegde that
HVPBS


1st FRONTIER War...

Matt

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 01:38:20 +0100
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED Was Re: GURPS errata now Graffiti

- -----Original Message-----
From: Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella <xrp@sierratel.com>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: 12 October 1999 09:13
Subject: Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED Was Re: GURPS errata now Graffiti


>> 'I AM THE ANGLE OF DEATH'
>
>I wonder how many degrees that would be?
>

666?

Matt

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 00:25:25 -0400
From: Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net>
Subject: Re: Near C rocks (Was: Re: Spraying 'Near-c-rocks-B-)

	The problem isn't with t-plates specifically, the issue is the effect
of large rocks (moving at any speed) on a planet surface. You can do the
Near-C effect with a HEPLAR (or normal fusion drive), a power plant and
a Ice Comet from the Oort cloud (which would be much more common than
rocks). In fact this would be much nastier because you already have the
distance to get the velocity and the comet may come in at an unexpected
direction. 
	Or other alternative suggested is to take a small ship and just let it
accelerate on it's own using the 0.5mv^2 have it worst effects. Or take
a few thousand 4A 8dton shipping crates (from GT:Far Trader) fill them
with moon dust and drop them from high orbit. 

	The OTU solutions for many advanced technical issues seems to be "just
because you can do something does not mean you should" and the military
command structure seems unwilling or unable to "Think outside the box".
Because no one has needed to perform this kind of orbital bombardment,
it never became part of the military doctrine. And because of the
Vilani, if its not tradition you can't do it. 

	Darryl Adams post about the HVPBS makes a lot more sense, but needs to
be extended to cover not just High Velocity, but also Large rocks. 

> 
> Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 09:44:39 +1000
> From: david.d.jaques-watson@centrelink.gov.au
> Subject: Re: Spraying 'Near-c-rocks-B-gone' liberally
> 
> Dear Folks -
> 
> Desperately trying to end this topic, Craig wrote:
> >Trust me, there is *no way* to make t-plates and Imperial military history
> >as stated work consistently.  A handwaved ban on near-c rocks is the only
> >solution.
> 
> Last time this came up, one solution was to have an upper limit on the
> speed of T-plates, the handwave being something to do with the 'plates
> being affected by the star system's inertia.
> 
> That wasn't a "bad" solution, as solutions go...

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

Date: Wed, 13 Oct 1999 11:38:59 +1000
From: david.d.jaques-watson@centrelink.gov.au
Subject: Re: Starports in the 21C

Dear Folks -

Leonard wrote:
>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.

Don't tell me, the next thing we are going to see is...

...an Orrimont with OAK PANELLING??!!

;-)
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
David "Hyphen" Jaques-Watson        Beowulf Down (Tavonni/Vilis/SM 1520)
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw                       davidjw@pcug.org.au
"I file things in historical order, with a hashing algorithm of gravity"
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
REQ'D DISCLAIMER - material & opinions contained within are solely those
of the author and do not necessarily represent, in whole or in part, the
position of Centrelink or any other Commonwealth Government agency.
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:48:51 -0400
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net>
Subject: Re: Near C rocks

At 01:33 AM 10/13/99 +0100, you wrote:

>-----Original Message-----
>From: dadams@parracity.nsw.gov.au <dadams@parracity.nsw.gov.au>
>To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
>Date: 12 October 1999 06:13
>Subject: Near C rocks
>
>
> >"Informal discussions with the Zhodani during the conclusion of the First
> >Interstellar Wars agredd that both sides will informally acknolegde that
>HVPBS
>
>
>1st FRONTIER War...

<looking around>  No maaan!!!  The First _Interstellar War_.  They were 
there maaan!  Remember those black ships?  They were there!

<BAMF>  Come on Citizen, time for re-education...


Kurt Feltenberger
kurt@blazenet.net
Morrow Project Campaign http://www.sol-3.net
WT-L Support Pages http://www.sol-3.net/wt-l

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

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:51:18 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
Subject: MIA's???

Anybody seen or heard from Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk> lately?

Keven

- -- 
tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 12:06:13 -0400
From: "Chris Peers" <peersce@mindspring.com>
Subject: Lucan the Man...

Ok, now explain how come Lucan didn't use them in the Black War period
of the Rebellion. He nuked quite a lot of planets bare, and
intentionally left many other planets without the infrastructure to
support their own populations, so near-c rocks would've been right down
his alley.

Some possible reasons Lucan didn't use near-c rocks could be:

1) He didn't want to spend resources researching and developing ships
capable of projecting rocks when he has ships capable of planet nuking
already deployed.  I think this is the most likely reason.

2) He wanted the planets to be salveagable, and replace the "disloyal"
populations with loyal colonists. (this one is hard, because I don't have
any of the Hard Times or Survival Margin material.  I don't know what the
factions did in the last years before TNE).

3) He was not an original thinker, and no one suggested it.

4) Mabye he did order asteroid strikes (somehow using standard naval ships
as tugs to get the asteroid on course) and it was never reported. Maybe his
or any faction's naval commander on the scene ordered asteroid strikes.  Not
at near-c, but incredibly destructive nonetheless.

If Lucan had them, I'm sure he would have used them.  An Emperor of the 3I I
think would not have used them, because of political reasons.  Once the
Rebellion started in earnest, I think political considerations were last on
everyone's list of priorities, especially in Lucan's fascist "Imperium".

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 18:52:33
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Battledress/Battlesuit Protection...

At 07:18 PM 10/12/1999 +1000, you wrote:

>> 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!

I gloss over the combat sections.  Honestly, Mike Stackpole writes such
great intrigue that you get caught up in the court politics of the Inner
Sphere.  (Death to Katherine Steiner!  Victor Steiner-Davion for First
Lord!)
- -- 

Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 22:29:03 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
Subject: Re: Lucan the Man... 

> Some possible reasons Lucan didn't use near-c rocks could be:
> 
> 1) He didn't want to spend resources researching and developing ships
> capable of projecting rocks when he has ships capable of planet nuking
> already deployed.  I think this is the most likely reason.

Try, he didn't *HAVE* the resources to pull it off.  Remember, by 1120, most 
of the fleet engagements were over with, and any surviving fleet was at 60% 
or less of book strength.  If given the choice between trying to rebuild your 
fleets or trying something as ridiculous as trying to move an asteroid 
against a planet, 99% of the brass would rebuild their fleet.  It's just more 
practical.  You can *always* use the ship on different mission profiles.  
Moving a rock is just moving a rock.
 
> 2) He wanted the planets to be salveagable, and replace the "disloyal"
> populations with loyal colonists. (this one is hard, because I don't have
> any of the Hard Times or Survival Margin material.  I don't know what the
> factions did in the last years before TNE).

HT says that the *only* one able to field a big fleet in 1120 was Lucan, and 
he threw it away trying to whack out Strephon in Gushemege.  Not exactly 
bright, lemme tell ya...
 
> 3) He was not an original thinker, and no one suggested it.
> 
> 4) Mabye he did order asteroid strikes (somehow using standard naval ships
> as tugs to get the asteroid on course) and it was never reported. Maybe his
> or any faction's naval commander on the scene ordered asteroid strikes.  Not
> at near-c, but incredibly destructive nonetheless.

Big rocks need big energy to move them.
 
> If Lucan had them, I'm sure he would have used them.  An Emperor of the 3I I
> think would not have used them, because of political reasons.  Once the
> Rebellion started in earnest, I think political considerations were last on
> everyone's list of priorities, especially in Lucan's fascist "Imperium".
 
If he had the capability of 'rocking' somebody's world, hell, yeah, he'dve 
done it.  He just didn't have the resources.

Keven

- -- 
tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 22:34:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Robert Prior <robert_prior@sympatico.ca>
Subject: Re: GTL8/9 Starships

>How about this for a THUDD chalange. Design a practical 200tn GTL8 or GTL9
>starship?

THUDDD has three Ds.

You can find quite a few GTL9 starships at www.bits.org.uk

Go to the archives and download 101 Starships.

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 21:58:06 -0500
From: "Bont" <felix@felixcafe.com>
Subject: GTL12 5 dTon Passenger, Cargo and Utility Shuttle

I have replaced the Fusion Power Plants with Nuclear Power Plants 
(?).  They are smaller, cheaper and thus a logical choice ... 
otherwise, there would be no improvement from TL11 to TL12 
(other than the hull and armor).  Again, minor improvements.

TL12 5 dTon Cargo Shuttle

  Statistics : TL12, HP 1200, PD 4, DR 100, HT 12, Size Mod 6, 
Sealed, 50,209.3 lbs, $ 3,795,960, 2,499.49 cf, 3,851.5 kW Used, 
3,851.5 kW Produced, 2,000 kW Motive Power, 100,000 lbs Motive 
Thrust, 100,000 lbs Aerostatic Lift, Vehicle Features : 
Computerized Controls, Very Good streamlining

  Components
    - Structure Profile: TL12 Medium Frame Standard Materials 
    - Armor Profile: TL12 DR 100 Standard Metal (TURLFB) 

    Module - Body, Front (PD 4 DR 100), Rear (PD 4 DR 100), Left 
(PD 4 DR 100), Right (PD 4 DR 100), HP 1800, 50,209.3 lbs, $ 
1,842,960, 2,426.99 cf, 3,851.5 kW Used, 3,851.5 kW Produced, 
2,000 kW Motive Power, 100,000 lbs Motive Thrust, 100,000 lbs 
Aerostatic Lift

    Components
      - Airlock, TL7, HP 100, PD 4, DR 100, 1 Person at a time, 500 
lbs, $ 1,000, 50 cf 
      - Cargo, HP 1000, PD 4, DR 100, 1,608 cf, 32,160 lbs, 1,608 cf 

      Module - Engineering, HP 175, PD 4, DR 100, 3,859.3 lbs, $ 
477,360, 129.99 cf, 2,100.1 kW Used, 3,851.5 kW Produced

      Components
        - GT Contragrav, TL9, HP 7, PD 4, DR 100, 100,000 lbs Lifts, 
60 lbs, $ 1,000, 1.2 cf, 100 kW Used 
        - GT Thruster, TL11, HP 150, PD 4, DR 100, 50 sTons of 
Thrust, 3,000 lbs, $ 300,000, 120 cf, 2,000 kW Used Vectored, 
Short Term Access
        - Nuclear Power Unit, TL12, HP 24, PD 4, DR 100, 3,851.5 kW, 779.3 lbs, $ 175,860, 7.79 cf, 3,851.5 kW Produced Lasts 10 years
        - Full Life Support, TL11, HP 6, PD 4, DR 100, 1 Person, 20 lbs, $ 500, 1 cf, 0.1 kW Used 

      Module - TL11 Cockpit Bridge, HP 175, PD 4, DR 100, 5,290 lbs, $ 1,206,200, 153.6 cf, 1,751.4 kW Used

      Components
        - Full Fire Suppression, TL7, HP 16, PD 4, DR 100, 200 lbs, $ 5,000, 4 cf 
        - Roomy Crew Station, HP 75, PD 4, DR 100, 1 Crewmen, 240 lbs, $ 100, 40 cf Occupied

        Module - Instruments and Electronics, HP 150, PD 2, DR 2, 4,850 lbs, $ 1,201,100, 109.6 cf, 1,751.4 kW Used

        Components
          - Precision Navigation Instruments, TL7, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Units, 20 lbs, $ 5,000, 0.4 cf 
          - Armor Profile: TL1 DR 2 No Quality No Material (TURLFB) 
          - IFF, TL8, HP 2, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Units, 5 lbs, $ 1,000, 0.1 cf 
          - Flight Recorder, TL8, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 10 lbs, $ 200, 0.5 cf 
          - Advanced Radar/Ladar Detector, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 2 Units, 30 lbs, $ 3,000, 0.6 cf 
          - VLR Communicator, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 25 lbs, $ 625, 0.5 cf, 0.1 kW Used 500,000 mi, Scrambled
          - Computer Terminal, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Terminal, 10 lbs, $ 250, 0.5 cf 
          - VLR Laser Communicator, TL10, HP 18, PD 2, DR 2, 250 lbs, $ 6,025, 5 cf, 1 kW Used 1,000,000 mi, Scrambler
          - Radscanner, TL10, HP 40, PD 2, DR 2, 200 mi, 600 lbs, $ 1,155,000, 12 cf Passive IR, Thermograph, Passive Radar, Scan Rating 23/29
          - Microframe Computer, TL10, HP 13, PD 2, DR 2, 3 Units, 150 lbs, $ 30,000, 3 cf, 0.3 kW Used Complexity 8

          Module - Sensor Pop Turret, Pop Turret, Full Rotation, Front (PD 2 DR 2), Rear (PD 2 DR 2), Left (PD 2 DR 2), Right (PD 2 DR 2), HP 188, 3,750 lbs, $ 1,952,500, 72.5 cf, 1,750 kW Used

          Components
            - PESA, TL11, HP 50, PD 2, DR 2, 2,000 mi, 1,000 lbs, $ 1,000,000, 20 cf 
            - Radar (AESA), TL11, HP 100, PD 2, DR 2, 7,000 mi, 2,625 lbs, $ 937,500, 52.5 cf, 1,750 kW Used 

  Air Performance : Motive Thrust 100,000 lbs, Stall Speed 0 MPH, Top Speed 1,867.7 MPH, aAccel 39.8 MPH/s, aMR 3.5, aSR 5, aDecel 14 MPH/s, Take off 0, Landing 0, Lifting Body

  Space Performance : sAcc 1.992 g, sDec 1.992 g, sMR 1.992


TL12 5 dTon Passenger Shuttle

  Statistics : TL11, HP 1200, PD 4, DR 100, HT 12, Size Mod 6, Sealed, 34,640.16 lbs, $ 3,673,932, 2,500 cf, 3,055.8 kW Used, 3,055.8 kW Produced, 1,200 kW Motive Power, 60,000 lbs Motive Thrust, 100,000 lbs Aerostatic Li
ft, Vehicle Features : Computerized Controls, Very Good streamlining

  Components
    - Structure Profile: TL12 Medium Frame Standard Materials 
    - Armor Profile: TL12 DR 100 Standard Metal (TURLFB) 

    Module - Body, Front (PD 4 DR 100), Rear (PD 4 DR 100), Left (PD 4 DR 100), Right (PD 4 DR 100), HP 1800, 34,640.16 lbs, $ 1,720,932, 2,427.5 cf, 3,055.8 kW Used, 3,055.8 kW Produced, 1,200 kW Motive Power, 60,000 lbs
 Motive Thrust, 100,000 lbs Aerostatic Lift

    Components
      - Passage Tube, Armored, TL7, HP 75, PD 4, DR 20, 1 100' Increments, 2,000 lbs, $ 3,000, 40 cf 
      - Airlock, TL7, HP 150, PD 4, DR 100, 2 People at a time, 1,000 lbs, $ 2,000, 100 cf 
      - Normal Seat, HP 800, PD 4, DR 100, 43 Occupants, 9,890 lbs, $ 4,300, 1,290 cf Occupied
      - Cargo, HP 250, PD 4, DR 100, 235 cf, 4,700 lbs, 235 cf 

      Module - Engineering, HP 150, PD 4, DR 100, 3,360.16 lbs, $ 347,032, 123.4 cf, 1,304.4 kW Used, 3,055.8 kW Produced

      Components
        - GT Contragrav, TL9, HP 7, PD 4, DR 100, 100,000 lbs Lifts, 60 lbs, $ 1,000, 1.2 cf, 100 kW Used 
        - GT Thruster, TL11, HP 125, PD 4, DR 100, 30 sTons of Thrust, 1,800 lbs, $ 180,000, 72 cf, 1,200 kW Used Vectored, Short Term Access
        - Full Life Support, TL11, HP 75, PD 4, DR 100, 44 People, 880 lbs, $ 22,000, 44 cf, 4.4 kW Used 
        - Nuclear Power Unit, TL12, HP 21, PD 4, DR 100, 3,055.8 kW, 620.16 lbs, $ 144,032, 6.2 cf, 3,055.8 kW Produced Lasts 10 years

      Module - TL11 Cockpit Bridge, HP 175, PD 4, DR 100, 5,290 lbs, $ 1,206,200, 153.6 cf, 1,751.4 kW Used

      Components
        - Full Fire Suppression, TL7, HP 16, PD 4, DR 100, 200 lbs, $ 5,000, 4 cf 
        - Roomy Crew Station, HP 75, PD 4, DR 100, 1 Crewmen, 240 lbs, $ 100, 40 cf Occupied

        Module - Instruments and Electronics, HP 150, PD 2, DR 2, 4,850 lbs, $ 1,201,100, 109.6 cf, 1,751.4 kW Used

        Components
          - Precision Navigation Instruments, TL7, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Units, 20 lbs, $ 5,000, 0.4 cf 
          - Armor Profile: TL1 DR 2 No Quality No Material (TURLFB) 
          - IFF, TL8, HP 2, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Units, 5 lbs, $ 1,000, 0.1 cf 
          - Flight Recorder, TL8, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 10 lbs, $ 200, 0.5 cf 
          - Advanced Radar/Ladar Detector, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 2 Units, 30 lbs, $ 3,000, 0.6 cf 
          - VLR Communicator, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 25 lbs, $ 625, 0.5 cf, 0.1 kW Used 500,000 mi, Scrambled
          - Computer Terminal, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Terminal, 10 lbs, $ 250, 0.5 cf 
          - VLR Laser Communicator, TL10, HP 18, PD 2, DR 2, 250 lbs, $ 6,025, 5 cf, 1 kW Used 1,000,000 mi, Scrambler
          - Radscanner, TL10, HP 40, PD 2, DR 2, 200 mi, 600 lbs, $ 1,155,000, 12 cf Passive IR, Thermograph, Passive Radar, Scan Rating 23/29
          - Microframe Computer, TL10, HP 13, PD 2, DR 2, 3 Units, 150 lbs, $ 30,000, 3 cf, 0.3 kW Used Complexity 8

          Module - Sensor Pop Turret, Pop Turret, Full Rotation, Front (PD 2 DR 2), Rear (PD 2 DR 2), Left (PD 2 DR 2), Right (PD 2 DR 2), HP 188, 3,750 lbs, $ 1,952,500, 72.5 cf, 1,750 kW Used

          Components
            - PESA, TL11, HP 50, PD 2, DR 2, 2,000 mi, 1,000 lbs, $ 1,000,000, 20 cf 
            - Radar (AESA), TL11, HP 100, PD 2, DR 2, 7,000 mi, 2,625 lbs, $ 937,500, 52.5 cf, 1,750 kW Used 

  Air Performance : Motive Thrust 60,000 lbs, Stall Speed 0 MPH, Top Speed 1,446.7 MPH, aAccel 34.6 MPH/s, aMR 3, aSR 5, aDecel 12 MPH/s, Take off 0, Landing 0, Lifting Body

  Space Performance : sAcc 1.732 g, sDec 1.732 g, sMR 1.732


TL12 5 dTon Utility Shuttle

  Statistics : TL11, HP 1200, PD 4, DR 100, HT 12, Size Mod 6, Sealed, 44,119.64 lbs, $ 3,734,228, 2,479.75 cf, 3,453.2 kW Used, 3,453.2 kW Produced, 1,600 kW Motive Power, 80,000 lbs Motive Thrust, 100,000 lbs Aerostatic
 Lift, Vehicle Features : Computerized Controls, Very Good streamlining

  Components
    - Structure Profile: TL12 Medium Frame Standard Materials 
    - Armor Profile: TL12 DR 100 Standard Metal (TURLFB) 

    Module - Body, Front (PD 4 DR 100), Rear (PD 4 DR 100), Left (PD 4 DR 100), Right (PD 4 DR 100), HP 1800, 44,119.64 lbs, $ 1,781,228, 2,407.25 cf, 3,453.2 kW Used, 3,453.2 kW Produced, 1,600 kW Motive Power, 80,000 lb
s Motive Thrust, 100,000 lbs Aerostatic Lift

    Components
      - Airlock, TL7, HP 150, PD 4, DR 100, 2 People at a time, 1,000 lbs, $ 2,000, 100 cf 
      - Passage Tube, Armored, TL7, HP 75, PD 4, DR 20, 1 100' Increments, 2,000 lbs, $ 3,000, 40 cf 
      - Normal Seat, HP 400, PD 4, DR 100, 17 Occupants, 3,910 lbs, $ 1,700, 510 cf Occupied
      - Cargo, HP 600, PD 4, DR 100, 1,000 cf, 20,000 lbs, 1,000 cf 

      Module - Engineering, HP 150, PD 4, DR 100, 3,519.64 lbs, $ 409,928, 122.2 cf, 1,701.8 kW Used, 3,453.2 kW Produced

      Components
        - GT Contragrav, TL9, HP 7, PD 4, DR 100, 100,000 lbs Lifts, 60 lbs, $ 1,000, 1.2 cf, 100 kW Used 
        - GT Thruster, TL11, HP 150, PD 4, DR 100, 40 sTons of Thrust, 2,400 lbs, $ 240,000, 96 cf, 1,600 kW Used Vectored, Short Term Access
        - Full Life Support, TL11, HP 50, PD 4, DR 100, 18 People, 360 lbs, $ 9,000, 18 cf, 1.8 kW Used 
        - Nuclear Power Unit, TL12, HP 22, PD 4, DR 100, 3,453.2 kW, 699.64 lbs, $ 159,928, 7 cf, 3,453.2 kW Produced Lasts 10 years

      Module - TL11 Cockpit Bridge, HP 175, PD 4, DR 100, 5,290 lbs, $ 1,206,200, 153.6 cf, 1,751.4 kW Used

      Components
        - Full Fire Suppression, TL7, HP 16, PD 4, DR 100, 200 lbs, $ 5,000, 4 cf 
        - Roomy Crew Station, HP 75, PD 4, DR 100, 1 Crewmen, 240 lbs, $ 100, 40 cf Occupied

        Module - Instruments and Electronics, HP 150, PD 2, DR 2, 4,850 lbs, $ 1,201,100, 109.6 cf, 1,751.4 kW Used

        Components
          - Precision Navigation Instruments, TL7, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Units, 20 lbs, $ 5,000, 0.4 cf 
          - Armor Profile: TL1 DR 2 No Quality No Material (TURLFB) 
          - IFF, TL8, HP 2, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Units, 5 lbs, $ 1,000, 0.1 cf 
          - Flight Recorder, TL8, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 10 lbs, $ 200, 0.5 cf 
          - Advanced Radar/Ladar Detector, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 2 Units, 30 lbs, $ 3,000, 0.6 cf 
          - VLR Communicator, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 25 lbs, $ 625, 0.5 cf, 0.1 kW Used 500,000 mi, Scrambled
          - Computer Terminal, TL10, HP 4, PD 2, DR 2, 1 Terminal, 10 lbs, $ 250, 0.5 cf 
          - VLR Laser Communicator, TL10, HP 18, PD 2, DR 2, 250 lbs, $ 6,025, 5 cf, 1 kW Used 1,000,000 mi, Scrambler
          - Radscanner, TL10, HP 40, PD 2, DR 2, 200 mi, 600 lbs, $ 1,155,000, 12 cf Passive IR, Thermograph, Passive Radar, Scan Rating 23/29
          - Microframe Computer, TL10, HP 13, PD 2, DR 2, 3 Units, 150 lbs, $ 30,000, 3 cf, 0.3 kW Used Complexity 8

          Module - Sensor Pop Turret, Pop Turret, Full Rotation, Front 
(PD 2 DR 2), Rear (PD 2 DR 2), Left (PD 2 DR 2), Right (PD 2 DR 
2), HP 188, 3,750 lbs, $ 1,952,500, 72.5 cf, 1,750 kW Used

          Components
            - PESA, TL11, HP 50, PD 2, DR 2, 2,000 mi, 1,000 lbs, $ 
1,000,000, 20 cf 
            - Radar (AESA), TL11, HP 100, PD 2, DR 2, 7,000 mi, 
2,625 lbs, $ 937,500, 52.5 cf, 1,750 kW Used 

  Air Performance : Motive Thrust 80,000 lbs, Stall Speed 0 MPH, 
Top Speed 1,670.5 MPH, aAccel 36.3 MPH/s, aMR 3, aSR 5, 
aDecel 12 MPH/s, Take off 0, Landing 0, Lifting Body

  Space Performance : sAcc 1.813 g, sDec 1.813 g, sMR 1.813

- - - -
FELIX (Thomas L Bont)

- - Encrypt your messages!
  That way only the government knows what you wrote!

- - It is truly the wise man that knows what he doesn't!

- - With your shield or on it ... (Old Spartan Blessing)

- - Fidelitas super omnia, honore excepto

- - Help Stop Forest Fires.  Outlaw Matches.

Be sure to visit The FELIX Cafe at
     http://www.felixcafe.com/

- - - -

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

Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 05:31:39 -0400
From: Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #1198

My only comment about the Cargo Shuttle would be, could you adjust it to
haul the Standard Cargo containers from GT:Far Trader? Size 4A is 8
dtons (4000cf), 4C is 4 dtons (2000 cf) and 4D is 2 dtons (1000cf). 
	I realize the 5 dton could haul the 4D container, but only at the waste
of 1/3 of it's cargo space. 

- --
	Thomas Jones-Low
	tjoneslo@together.net
> 
> Date: Tue, 12 Oct 1999 17:45:41 -0500
> From: "Bont" <felix@felixcafe.com>
> Subject: GTL10 5 dTon Cargo Shuttle
> 
> Taking advantage of higher tech machinery, this little beauty has the
> size and maneuverability to actually fly into a cargo bay for loading
> and unloading.  It can transfer up to the 3 dTons of cargo to and
> from orbit about every 1.5 hours.  Most owner/pilots of this class of
> vessel have removed the Armored Passenger Tube to squeeze
> that extra cargo in.
> 
> TL10 5 dTon Cargo Shuttle

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1200
***********************************

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
