Traveller-digest      Sunday, October 17 1999      Volume 1999 : Number 1219



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Andy Keith
Re: FFW Players out there?
[www] 16 Oct 1999 - Freelance Traveller Updated
Re: The Eternal Legionnaire
Re: FLASH: J. Andrew Keith is dead.
Re: FLASH: J. Andrew Keith is dead.
Re: Intelligent Infantry
[none]
Re: FLASH: J. Andrew Keith is dead.
New Gamer Announcement
Re: New Gamer Announcement
Re: New Gamer Announcement
Re: Andy Keith
Re: Intelligent Infantry
Re: Intelligent Infantry
Re: Great Task Debate
Re: New Gamer Announcement
Jumpdrives was Re: Norris the Man...
GTL9 Standard Components
Re: Andrew Keith, Our Loss
Re: Intelligent Infantry

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

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 23:04:21 EDT
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com
Subject: Andy Keith

What can I say?

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 02:26:20 +0100
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk>
Subject: Re: FFW Players out there?

- -----Original Message-----
From: Walter G. Smith <smithw@hartwick.edu>
To: 'TML' <traveller@mpgn.com>
Date: 17 October 1999 02:08
Subject: re: FFW Players out there?


>Besides, in Trillion Credit Squadron, all the ships in the star system
>are within combat range of each other. They should be able to talk. ;-)
>
>Walt Smith


"If you can't hail 'em, you can't nail 'em!" <g>

Matt

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

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 23:25:33 -0400
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com>
Subject: [www] 16 Oct 1999 - Freelance Traveller Updated

Freelance Traveller, the Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller
Resource has posted its most recent update to
http://come.to/FreelanceTraveller and
http://www.downport.com/freelancetraveller/Default.htm.  

This update features:

 - An article by Michl Hughes on using the 'Classic' Traveller
   or MegaTraveller extended career generation sequence with Marc
   Miller's Traveller (T4)

 - Minor updates to the published products lists in the FAQ in
   the Information Center


Your questions, comments, and ideas are always welcome at
Freelance Traveller.  Please write to freetrav@hotmail.com with
any and all of them, as we are in the process of reconfiguring
the forms, and they may be temporarily disabled.  Freelance
Traveller depends on the good will of Traveller fans both to
visit our site and justify our existence, and to write for us,
making our existence possible.

Freelance Traveller is mirrored at http://w3.execnet.com/jeffz.

Freelance Traveller wishes to extend its thanks and appreciation
to The Traveller Downport (http://www.downport.com) and to
Executive Network Information Systems (http://www.execnet.com)
for hosting services. Without organizations willing to cooperate
with Freelance Traveller's ever-growing needs, we would be unable
to bring you the articles and other resources that have made
Freelance Traveller one of the premier Traveller sites on the 
'net.
Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture 
Enterprises, 1977-1999.  Use of the trademark in 
this notice and in the referenced materials is not 
intended to infringe or devalue the trademark.
- --
Jeff Zeitlin, Editor
Freelance Traveller - The Electronic Fan-Supported Traveller Resource
http://come.to/FreelanceTraveller
http://www.downport.com/freelancetraveller/Default.htm
freetrav@hotmail.com

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

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 23:41:58 -0400
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com>
Subject: Re: The Eternal Legionnaire

On Fri, 15 Oct 1999 21:21:49 -0400 (EDT), you wrote:

>If you'd like a zipped file of this song, along with library data set in
>Andrew's FFL universe, and a jpg of what  Andrew thought  the Semti would
>look like (sketched by Bill Keith) - send me an email and I will send it to
>you as an attachment.

I'd be interested in this for myself.  I'd also be interested in
it for Freelance Traveller, if someone can grant permission...

- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jzeitlin@cyburban.com

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

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 23:30:47 -0400
From: "Micheal D. Peters" <Travelleri@home.com>
Subject: Re: FLASH: J. Andrew Keith is dead.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Jerry Paul Sanders <timmon@primenet.com>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 1999 6:11 PM
Subject: FLASH: J. Andrew Keith is dead.


> I am in shock. Today I received a letter from William H. Keith Jr.
> informing me that his brother J. Andrew Keith died  on August 7th. I am in
> deep shock, and frankly I am crying as I type this. Andrew and I had
> started to develop an ongoing friendship while working together on the
> "Lost Supplements" project. I will post what will hopefully be a final
> update regarding the project tomorrow, but for now, let me share the
letter
> from Bill regarding Andrews passing in its entirety below.
>
> In Sorrow,
> Paul Sanders

It's sad to think that one of the Great Old One has passed, however I'm sure
that he will enjoy his new found freedom as only a true TRAVELLER could!

To absent freind, but never forgotten!

Mike

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 00:06:09 -0400
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com>
Subject: Re: FLASH: J. Andrew Keith is dead.

I don't remember where I first heard it, but this sums up my
feelings exactly:

"That really sucks."

Condolences to those close to him.
- --
Jeff Zeitlin
jzeitlin@cyburban.com

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

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 21:09:20 -0700
From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org>
Subject: Re: Intelligent Infantry

This topic made me think of an article I read recently in the Wall Street
Journal (don't subscribe, but someone in the office does).  Apparently, the
various branches of the U.S. armed forces are having a REAL problem finding
people who are interested in joining up, aside from the total screwups who
have no better prospects and aren't really suitable for the military either.

These days most American kids who *can* go to college would rather do so,
or seek other means of financial aid, rather than take their chances with
the hardships of military life and the possibility of getting shot at.

In yet another example of the kind of thinking that makes "mil-intel" an
oxymoron, the response of the armed forces has been to raise quotas for the
already stressed-out and dispirited recruiters...


- --------------
Kelly St.Clair   "The Jigglypuff's trilling seems to have a 
kellys@efn.org    tranquilizing effect on the human nervous system.
                  Fortunately, I am... immune..."
                            -- Mr. Spock, THE TROUBLE WITH POKEMON

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 00:20:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
Subject: [none]

>Which trojan points? Not that many planets have nearby trojan/lagrange points,
>and gas giant trojans are way out.
>


All planets will have Trojan points. Planets with significantly massive
moons will have lagrange points. Lagrange points will be in the same orbit
(or close enough to for practical purposes) as the moon.

Trojan points will be well beyond the 100d point, tho...

William F. Hostman  |  "Smith & Wesson: THe original Point and Click
interface!"
Aramis 0602 C55A364-C S kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge-
533
Mailto:aramis@gci.net http://home.gci.net/~aramis http://www.alaska.net/~mhaa
ICQ:14640742          AIM:AKAramis	ARM 1.0: 3 R H++ P+
IMTU 1.0: tc tm++ tn- t4-- tt+ to- tg-- ru+ ge 3i+ c+ jt-() au+ st- ls
pi+() ta+ he+(-) kk+ as+ hi+ dr+ va++(--) so+ zh++ vi+ da++ sy- ge- pi+

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

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 23:57:09 -0500
From: "Pat Connaughton" <pconn@i1.net>
Subject: Re: FLASH: J. Andrew Keith is dead.

I'm sorry that I only passed one note to 
Mr. Keith.

"Damnation"
A toast - J. Andrew Keith, we shall not look upon his like again.

Requiescat in Pace
et Lux Perpetuam
We'll say a prayer for Mr. Keith
I hope that this offends none.

respectfully
Patrick Connaughton
 

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 01:39:02 EDT
From: Tascelt@aol.com
Subject: New Gamer Announcement

Hello all.  Just wanted to announce the birth of a future gamer.  My daughter 
was born October 5th.  Jocelyn Rosemary Best-Silva.  I will, of course, teach 
her the great game of Traveller (in many of it's incarnations) as well as 
other RPGs.  

TAS

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 02:20:43 -0000
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net>
Subject: Re: New Gamer Announcement

- -----Original Message-----
From: Tascelt@aol.com <Tascelt@aol.com>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: Sunday, October 17, 1999 5:43 AM
Subject: New Gamer Announcement


>Hello all.  Just wanted to announce the birth of a future gamer.  My
daughter
>was born October 5th.  Jocelyn Rosemary Best-Silva.  I will, of course,
teach
>her the great game of Traveller (in many of it's incarnations) as well as
>other RPGs.


Congratulations! Very happy to hear your glad news!

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 16:32:42 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: New Gamer Announcement

- ----- Original Message -----
From: <Tascelt@aol.com>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 1999 3:39 PM
Subject: New Gamer Announcement


> Hello all.  Just wanted to announce the birth of a future gamer.  My
daughter
> was born October 5th.  Jocelyn Rosemary Best-Silva.  I will, of course,
teach
> her the great game of Traveller (in many of it's incarnations) as well as
> other RPGs.
>
> TAS
>

Congrats TAS

- -- The Roc

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

Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 23:37:10 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Andy Keith

From: GDWGAMES@aol.com <GDWGAMES@aol.com>
Subject: Andy Keith


>What can I say?


    Nothing, other than, "Goodbye.  Godspeed.  Good luck.  We shall miss
you."

Legate Legion
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 02:13:29 -0500
From: "Lyle Youngblood" <lyley@gte.net>
Subject: Re: Intelligent Infantry

>Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 18:00:57
>From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
>Subject: Re: Intelligent Infantry
>And who calls in that artillery, has to be able to discern between over
>fifty different types of armored vehicles (and know how to kill half of
>them with two different weapons systems?), be able to generate usable
>intelligence reports, and do all of this while people are trying *real
>hard* to kill you?  The infantry.
        Agree with you on everything except the first count, Doug.  In
better than six years as a FiST Leader and Battalion FSO frequently
directly attached to an infantry battalion even in cantonment, I never
got anyone below the rank of E-6 (and damn few of them) to take
calling for fire seriously.  Except for scouts, everybody figured that
calling in artillery or mortars was the job of the platoon leader,
platoon sgt., or FO, and me and my FOs were still artillery, even if
we were the "bastard children" of artillery and infantry in the field.


>Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 11:22:06 +1000
>From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au>
>Subject: Re: SEC: UNCLASSIFIED: Out of ammo alert
>The small professional armies are only those of a minority of countries.
>Somalia and Vietnam suggest that they aren't necessarily all that superior
>either, when it comes to a clash, at least in terms of actually achieving
>the political goals of the conflict.
        The US Army of Vietnam was NOT a "small professional army".
It was a conscription-formed, professionally-led army, IMO a poor combo.
OTOH, if you were referring to French forces in Vietnam, I'll give you that.
And Somalia, IMO, was a political screw-up, not a military one.
        As far as your point of small professional armies not doing well
against popular civilian risings, two counter-examples are the Moro
rebellion in the Phillipines and the Boer War.
        ObTrav: IMTU, suppression of civilian dis-order, counter-terrorism,
etc. would be primarily an Imperial Army job.  The Marines, as an elite
force, would train only rarely, if at all, for this mission, while the Army
would probably even have units specially trained for it.

Lyle

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 20:31:53 +1300
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz>
Subject: Re: Intelligent Infantry

From:           	"Lyle Youngblood" <lyley@gte.net>
Date sent:      	Sun, 17 Oct 1999 02:13:29 -0500

>         ObTrav: IMTU, suppression of civilian dis-order, counter-terrorism,
> etc. would be primarily an Imperial Army job.  The Marines, as an elite
> force, would train only rarely, if at all, for this mission, while the Army
> would probably even have units specially trained for it.

I disagree. The Marines are the Imperium's rapid reaction force. They are
the troops you send into those spots with civil disorder hoping it doesn't
evolve into terrorism and rebellion. IMHO the biggest difference between
the Marines and Army is in staying power. The Marines can hit really
hard, but they are a one shot weapon. If you want staying power, you send
in the Emperors Dog Soldiers (the Army).


Andrew etc
Homepage http://users.netaccess.co.nz/amv/
Traveller http://www.downport.com/amv/
 "What do you expect from a species who's females are
 always in heat" Ko of the Ilui clan on Humans and honour

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 03:22:03 -0500
From: "Kurtis Rodgers" <kurtis@fastlane.net>
Subject: Re: Great Task Debate

I can't believe I'm jumping into the middle of this...  : )

Let me start off by trying to cover my flame-sensitive ass by positioning
myself as a neutral party:  I do not, nor am planning to use either GURPS or
MT as my system of choice.  They are equally fine, as far as I am concerned.
(I am such a weasel!  : P  )

In fact, I believe everyone involved has declared a truce, that no slams are
intended towards anyone's favorite system, and this is just a friendly
discussion among enthusiasts.  I think everyone agrees that there is a
certain amount of style and personal preference here - it just comes down to
what you and your players are the most comfortable with.  What then are we
arguing about, er, discussing?  Well, William's post suggests an interesting
classification system for RPG mechanics, intended to highlight a basis for
preference.  It did help me understand the 'skill vs. task system' school of
thought a little better.  I do have some questions about it though - like
most classification schemes, it requires some validity-sapping assumptions
(IMO).

I'm going to put on my TotalGeek (tm) propeller beanie, and approach this
from another angle entirely.  A professional predilection of mine is to
break complex problems into hierarchical layers.  Fundamentally, a RPG
ruleset's purpose is to model a simulation of an imaginary 'game reality'
via some kind of probablity mechanism (i.e., dice, cards, coin-flip,
pop-a-matic..  : ).  So in my scheme, we have a 'Probability Layer', which
defines the actual probability model.  This is the concrete layer where the
rubber meets the road - dice are rolled, the dice are compared to a target
number, and conclusions are drawn from the result.  Above this is the
'Simulation Layer', where the imaginary game world is modeled.  This is an
abstract layer, which maps the imaginary to the concrete.  The Probablity
Layer defines low-level mechanics or tools which are in turn used by the
Simulation Layer to deliver high-level game play.  Something more than just
craps or roulette.

With this in mind:

> Date: Sat, 16 Oct 1999 16:48:59 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "William F. Hostman" <aramis@gci.net>
> Subject: Great Task Debate

<snippage>

> The fundamental difference between skill based systems and task based
> systems is
> Item Skill Based Task Based
> Target number Skill level task difficulty
> Mods apply to Skill level task roll*

Sorry, I couldn't parse that.

> Or, should I say, most task systems adjust the roll, rather than the TN
> (BP, StarPlay, several others). A few use variable numbers of dice for
> difficulties...and really are hybrids.

Ok, now we're cooking with gas.  I read this as making a distinction between
systems that modify the target number vs. modifying the die roll.  Some of
us have a real problem with this line of thinking, because at the
Probability Layer, there is absolutely no difference between +2 target
and -2 die roll.  They are the same, as far as probability is concerned.
This is where the 'its just semantics' argument comes from.  I think there
is an argument that there *is* a difference at the Simulation Layer, because
a different system of bookkeeping can have implications for what really
'works' in the imaginary world.  This is where the 'its just a different
style of modifiers' idea springs.

Regarding "hybrids" - this is, IMHO, a hole in the 'task system'
classification scheme.  My above paragraph assumes a 'conventional' RPG
system, where all probablity is modeled as target number or die roll
modifiers.  In this regard, GURPS and MT are no different from each other -
in the Probability Layer, they both ultimately produce a simple linear
displacement on the probability curve.  Most games work this way, but as you
point out, some games have other probability 'levers' that they can pull.
In the case of Shadowrun (disclaimer: this is *my* system of choice  : ),
skill is modeled by differing numbers of dice and difficulty is modeled
conventionally by target number.  Let's clarify that for anyone not familiar
with SR: each skill die is rolled against the same target number
independently of each other.  The result is a number of successes (the count
of dice that matched or exceeded the target number), which are used to
determine the level or quality of success.  So a 'task' in Shadowrun might
be expressed as Electronics (4) - if I have a skill rating of Electronics 3,
then I roll three d6s individually against a target number of 4, resulting
in zero to three possible successes.   This mechanism provides an entirely
new dimension that fundamentally impacts both the simulation and probability
rules.

> In a skill based system, each skill has a target number of it's own, and
> you modify the target number to find the actual target number for the
> action. Examples D&D/AD&D, Palladium, Chaosium (Both BRP asnd Pendragon
> Engines), STRPG (by FASA).

I was really hung up on this "each skill has a target number of it's own"
bit, which I believe has popped up previously in this thread.  While I can
see a game that has all the success rules listed individually for each
skill, I don't think this what you meant.  In MT, the first task
specification is difficulty (target number), the second is a list of
applicable skills and/or characteristics (modifiers).  In other systems, the
task or 'success test' (to borrow the SR term for it) is expressed the other
way around - skill/characteristic (modifier) is listed first, followed by
the difficulty rating (target number).  This is your "each skill has a
target number of it's own" idea, right?  My SR skill example, above, does
exactly that.  In MT, conversely, each target number has its own skill.
<heh-heh>

Personally, I think this is kind of like like arguing front-wheel drive vs.
rear-wheel drive - the trade-offs go both ways.  : )  I once saw a print ad
for an early 20th century FWD car that featured a picture of the proverbial
cart-before-the-horse.  Perhaps that's where some of heat in these arguments
are coming from.  ; )

> Most task systems have set target numbers by difficulty, which you need to
> meet or beat to succeed, including MT, StarPlay, BabProj, Star Wars,
> WoD/StoryTeller, LUGTrek, CP2020, Mekton/MZ, Rolemaster/Spacemaster

Hmm.  I wonder at some of these picks.  In my thinking, there is more to a
'task-based' system than predefined target numbers for standardized
difficulty levels.  At the Probablility Layer, there is no difference
between difficulty as a target number or difficulty as a modifier - it all
comes out in the wash.  So there needs to be something else at the
Simulation Layer that distinguishes these games from 'skill-based' ones.
AFAIK, MegaTraveller is pretty unique in this regard.  More on this below.

> Some hybrids use a skill target number with difficulty level variables:
> TNE, T2K 1s & 2d eds, James Bond RPG,  and IIRC, Mythus.

Ok, Shadowrun uses the standard 'skill-based' expression for static,
unopposed tests that are typical for skills like Electronics or Vacc-suit.
For combat, however, things are defined more like your 'task-based' form of
expression.  For example, in SR ranged combat the base target number is
derived from the range to target, i.e. Short = 4, Medium = 5, Long = 6, and
Extreme = 9.  This is more-or-less like MT's difficulty ratings, which are
also used to model range effects, IIRC.  On the third hand, however, are
opposed tests ('confrontation' tasks in MT parlance).  In SR melee combat,
both combatants roll against a base of 4, modified by weapon reach and other
melee modifiers.  The character with the most success wins that round - the
loser takes damage.  There is no 'difficulty' level, per se.  So does all
this make Shadowrun a hybrid system?  Does the question even make sense to
ask?  <not mocking anyone here - just being pendantic>

My take on 'task vs. skill' (yes, I'm almost done.., really!):

- - Style.  Eris's names-over-numbers, and William's difficulty-before-skill.

- - Function.  Functionally, at the Probablity Layer, there is no distinction
between 'task' and 'skill' systems.  At the Simulation Layer, the
functionality comes down to skill/characteristic/attribute selection, and
the substitution or defaulting of the same.  MT says, here is a task and
here are the skills, etc, you can choose from to determine success.  If
there is more than one 'crucial' specification, then some kind of skill or
characteristic substitution is available for that task.  Games like GURPS or
Shadowrun define the task as a skill - the task and the means of success are
directly bound together.  However, there is no other means of success listed
because these games already have an entire system of defaulting defined.  MT
encapsulates its defaulting scheme on a task-by task basis, whereas other
games break this out into a separate sub-system.  Both ways get the job
done, IMO.  <shrug>

When MegaTraveller first came out, my first impression of the task system
was "hey, cool - if I had a cardfile of tasks already" and "but thats a lot
of work, and just plain anal, besides".  In other words, profoundly
ambivalent.  : P

Man!  I sure hope I got THAT all out of my system.  Sorry to bore y'all to
tears with that 'get-a-life' game analysis.  I hope it was worth somebody's
bandwidth...    I'm waay past my bedtime!  : P

Kurtis

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 08:05:32 -0300
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca>
Subject: Re: New Gamer Announcement

At 01:39 AM 17/10/1999 EDT, you wrote:
>Hello all.  Just wanted to announce the birth of a future gamer.  My daughter 
>was born October 5th.  Jocelyn Rosemary Best-Silva.  I will, of course, teach 
>her the great game of Traveller (in many of it's incarnations) as well as 
>other RPGs.  
>
>TAS

        <applause>  Welcome to Dad-dom.   I hope it makes you as happy as it
has me.

        --Michel
        (Dad since 1998)

	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	Michel R. Vaillancourt	misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca
				ICQ # 31172292
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	    NET-City Communications....
	         Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-
	***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 11:43:45 +0100
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com>
Subject: Jumpdrives was Re: Norris the Man...

"Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au> writes:

>> From: SD Mooney and various people.
<snip>
>> >Of course, in some Traveller games it's not possible to do
>> >deep space jumps like this.
>>
>> Isn't it both CT (Traveller Adventure), MT (Arrival Vengeance), TNE
>> (Regency Sourcebook) and T4 (Pocket Empires) canon that deep space jumps
>> are possible?
>
>Yes, of course it is, but I remember someone on the list having a
>brainspasm about it, and I was letting people like this deal with their own
>problems.

Hmm. That must have been in one of the jumpdrive "debates".

>Basically, this was a passing comment of no consequence.

I was just extending your reference list ;-) I can't actually remember what
the original reason was that people were objecting to deepspace jumps.
Probably something to do with technobabble...

Dom

- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------
                       MiB - Marines in Battledress
   "Protecting the Imperium from the Scum of the Galaxy"
Rob Prior's Mac software @ http://www.bits.org.uk/ 

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 13:14:12 +0100
From: John Buston <John.Buston@tesco.net>
Subject: GTL9 Standard Components

Here are some standard modules for GTL9 craft. Others already under
construction. They all occupy one standard space (500cf).

GTL9 Reactionless Thruster Module
- -5 stons vectored Thrust, 4.0 stons mass, 5000 kW Fission, 0.500 MCr

GTL9 Fusion Rocket Module 
- -55 stons vectored Thrust, 3.76 stons mass, 0.208 MCr
- -Fuel consumption 2200 gallons of water per hour.

GTL9 Fusion Rocket Fuel Module
- -14.19 stons mass (full), 0.165 stons mass (empty), 0.165 MCr

- -Stores 1.5 fuel hours for one Fusion Rocket Module. Divide number of fuel
modules by number of rocket modules and multiply by 1.5 to find number of hours
endurance.

- -As the fuel is so heavy the G rating should be calculated both with an empty
and full rocket fuel tank. Then use the average as the ships G rating for
simplicity.


GTL9 Reactionless Thrusters (as has been said before) give very low performance.
Typically 0.5G when in a fully equipped space craft.

Preliminary results for the fusion rocket suggest you could build a moderately
armoured(500DR) GTL9 400DT SDB capable of 3G for 100 minutes (5 combat turns) or
2G for 160 minutes (7 combat turns). A lightly armoured craft (100DR) could
maintain 4G for two hours. Not very long. So you probably want to put a couple
of reactionless thrusters in there for backup too.

I guess it comes down to whether you want high performance for a couple of
hours, or low performance forever. However reactionless thrusters are very
expensive. The military and merchant craft at this TL are going to be much more
distinct in their performance.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 07:42:52 -0600
From: "Eric T.  or  Maryann C. Holmes" <holmberg@thuntek.net>
Subject: Re: Andrew Keith, Our Loss

Fellow TMLers:

Our friend will be sorely missed.
....to a better life......
:-(

Eric T. Holmes

eholmes@lanl.gov			holmberg@thuntek.net
7am to 4pm Mountain Time		6pm to Midnight Mountain Time

IMTU:  he+, tc+, tm, tne, t4, tg, tt, to, ru, ge, 3i+, c+, jt, au, st, ls+,
pi+, ta+,
	as+, va+, dr+, _sa_, kk--, hi--, so++, zh, vi, da, sy, _hu_ 
		(sa = other sapients, hu = other humani)

Lacedaemon, we have done our duty.

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

Date: Sun, 17 Oct 1999 06:32:37
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Intelligent Infantry

At 02:13 AM 10/17/1999 -0500, you wrote:

>>From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>

>>And who calls in that artillery, has to be able to discern between over
>>fifty different types of armored vehicles (and know how to kill half of
>>them with two different weapons systems?), be able to generate usable
>>intelligence reports, and do all of this while people are trying *real
>>hard* to kill you?  The infantry.

>        Agree with you on everything except the first count, Doug.  In
>better than six years as a FiST Leader and Battalion FSO frequently
>directly attached to an infantry battalion even in cantonment, I never
>got anyone below the rank of E-6 (and damn few of them) to take
>calling for fire seriously.  Except for scouts, everybody figured that
>calling in artillery or mortars was the job of the platoon leader,
>platoon sgt., or FO, and me and my FOs were still artillery, even if
>we were the "bastard children" of artillery and infantry in the field.

True, but I had several leaders who enjoyed walking up to you during FXs
and saying "I'm dead, you're in charge now."  No matter what your rank, you
had to take over the leadership responsibilities.  Very good training, and
it kept you awake during FRAGOs.

>        ObTrav: IMTU, suppression of civilian dis-order, counter-terrorism,
>etc. would be primarily an Imperial Army job.  The Marines, as an elite
>force, would train only rarely, if at all, for this mission, while the Army
>would probably even have units specially trained for it.

The Sylean Rangers get that role in the ground forces book.  The do
everything from long term recon/sabotage/cadre work on enemy held worlds to
anti-terrorist teams ala SEAL 6 or the FBI's HRT.  The preliminary template
for them is getting scary.

The larger Army units do spend a great amount of their time sitting between
hostile forces, or doing large scale counter-insurgency work.  The Marines
are more like the fire brigade, sent in *quickly* to knock down an
immediate threat.

An interesting point to ponder.. The various subsector Armies are under the
loose control of the Subsector Duke, who appoints the Subsector Marshal.
The Marines are the Emperor's troops, and under orders from the Fleet.  You
could get a situation where a Duke doesn't want to intervene in a crisis,
and the local Marine commander is forced to do the Army's job while an
appeal races off to the Archduke.
- -- 

Douglas E. Berry   Templar Agent at Large.
gridlore@mindspring.com
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/sylea.html

TravGeekCode: 
tc+ tm+ !tn- t4@ ?tg+ tt@ to(CORPS)++ ru@ $ge++ 3i
ii+ au st+ ls+ pi kk+ so(++) va++ dr+ zh+ sw++ ?da
         

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1219
***********************************

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
