
Traveller-digest    Wednesday, October 27 1999    Volume 1999 : Number 1266



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives
Re: Antimatter drives
Re: TML Members as Resources
Re: Latest TNS release
Re: China in Space
Re: Norris the Man
RE: Antimatter drives
Re: Frame Strength (was BD Crush Depth)
Re: Fellow Traveller
BD Crush Depth (was Freezing in the Aleutians)
Re: Frame Strength (was BD Crush Depth)
Re: BD Crush Depth (was Freezing in the Aleutians)
Re: BD Crush Depth (was Freezing in the Aleutians)
Welcome back, Kenji!
Re: Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives
Re: Nobles
Re: TML Members as Resources
GURPS Vehicle Starship Design: LF-78 Light Freighter
RE: Taxation (off topic)
RE: Space Opera?
Re: Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives
Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:16:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: Re: Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives

Joseph R. Dietrich writes:
> In my upcoming, abberrant Traveller game I am considering dropping the lhyd
> fuel requirement for jump drives. Ships will only be required to fill their
> capacitors with energy before jumping. All jumps will require a
> sufficiently large (stellar-sized) gravity well of at least .01 g as a
> destination and will more or less take one week.

Hm...you do realize that .01gs is only .025AU from a sun-sized star, and only 10 diameters from an earth-sized planet.  No need to be concerned with 'stellar-sized' gravity wells either, assuming you can't jump into solid objects comets less than several hundred miles across will be impossible targets.
> 
> Okay, how can I expect this to change the Traveller setting? This is what I
> can think of:
> 
> 1.) Faster transit times for ships in a big hurry.
>     No need to stopover for fuel.
But overall slower merchant traffic, due to needing to transit from extremely near the sun to the target planet.  If you make it any .01G area, it becomes faster than it is now.
> 4.) Smaller ships, or more free space for cargo and
>     other things in existing ships (although this can be
>     counteracted somewhat by increasing the volume of the
>     jump drive itself.
It also seriously encourages high-jump ships; you might see the jump-6 merchant for some routes.
> 5.) No High Guard -- except in describing ortillery for
>     planetary assault.
Probably becomes the 'low guard'.

Other points:

At the specified distances, you're going to be regularly passing _dangerously_ close to stars.  Ships will need fairly substantial masses of coolant to safely travel that close to a star, and will want to be moving fairly fast.

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:25:54 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: Re: Antimatter drives

Charles Collin writes:
> Hi all. 
> 
> I've been thinking about antimatter drives.  How would they work?  Let's
It depends on how much antimatter you have access to.
> say you somehow have access to fairly large amounts of antimatter, what
> would be the best way to use it to send a ship forward?  Would simply
> allowing it to react with an equal mass of normal matter be efficient?  I
> mean, my basic view of an antimatter rocket is just that:  You feed a
> stream of antimatter into a chamber where it encounters a stream of normal
> matter.  They annihilate and you direct the energy out the back of the
> ship.  
The decay products of matter/antimatter collisions are frequently neutrally charged, making 'directing' them a bit of a challenge. 
> 
> But then I got to wondering, isn't most of the energy produced going to be
> in the form of gamma rays and other "high energy" forms?  How easy is it
> to "redirect" this?  How much thrust would you get by forcing this out the
> back of the ship? Do you need reaction mass?  Then I thought "I have no
> idea, I'll ask the friendly folks at the TML!"  And here we are... :-)

You don't need reaction mass; a pure annihilation drive would be using the decay products of matter/antimatter reactions as reaction mass.  This would tend to be extremely low thrust, however (specific impulse around 30 million seconds, power output 300 MW/newton).  Assuming you have a relatively limited supply of antimatter, the best use for it is probably using it as a seed to trigger fusion fuel.

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

Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 17:46:35 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: TML Members as Resources

And another:

Matt Clonfero 867A97

Computer-2
Admin-1
Chemistry-1
Electronics-1
Physics-1
Sensor Ops-1
Wheeled vehicle-1
Bow-0
Rifle-0

Now, what skill does operational analysis come under? It's not really
tactics...

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:30:15 +0200
From: Volker Greimann <volker@greimann.de>
Subject: Re: Latest TNS release

At 11:27 26.10.99 +1300, you wrote:
>Ha, I've been waiting for this one. Now the question is, will he wash out
>and go on to set up his own film production company? Lucan Films
>perhaps?
LucanArts, you mean?
Volker
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Volker A. Greimann --- http://www.greimann.de --- volker@greimann.de

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 17:43:34 +0100
From: Matt Clonfero <Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: China in Space

SD Mooney wrote:

>>Does the UK have an actual space program right now? Aside from
>>participation in that French/European (Adriane? sp?) rocket or Russian
>>ones?
>
>Ariane - current most successful commercial launcher IIRC.
>
>The UK space programme is part of the European Space Agencies' effort to a
>greater extent. Most funds (again IIRC) are focused on remote sensing. And
>we build a lot of solar panels (ISTR the Intl Space stn and the Hubble have
>BAe panels).

We also have the Skynet series of military communications satellites

Aetherem Vincere
Matt
- -- 
Matt Clonfero: Matt-C@aetherem.demon.co.uk    | To err is human, To forgive
My employer and I have a deal - I don't speak | is not Air Force Policy.
for them, and they don't speak for me.        |   -- Anon, ETPS.

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:06:00 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Norris the Man

Hans Rancke-Madsen wrote:
> 

> It sure was. In a Paranoia campaign I once gave one of the players a note
> with the words: "It is with my knowledge and for the good of Alpha Complex
> that the bearer of this has done what he has done. The Computer". The poor
> sap was so pleased. At first...

Aiee! Not an experienced Paranoia player, I see...Me , I'd have just
saved everyone the trouble and lasered myself right then and there. And
the Computer couldn't have even punished me for it ;-)

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 12:10:50 -0500
From: "Bont" <felix@felixcafe.com>
Subject: RE: Antimatter drives

Trevor, Peter wrote :

> Charles Collin wrote:
> > But then I got to wondering, isn't most of the energy produced
> > going to be in the form of gamma rays and other "high energy"
> > forms?  How easy is it to "redirect" this?  How much thrust
> > would you get by forcing this out the back of the ship? Do you
> > need reaction mass?  Then I thought "I have no idea, I'll ask
> > the friendly folks at the TML!"  And here we are... :-)
> 
> Dr Robert Forward came up with a solution called  the  FAM  drive (Dr
> Forward's AntiMatter drive).  A small amount of antimatter is dropped
> into a large amount  of  normal  matter  fluid.  A  small amount  of 
> matter  (equal  to  the  amount  of  antimatter)   is annihilated and
> what's left is superheated by the reaction.  This superheated matter
> expells itself from the ship  in  conventional thruster fashion.  (At
> least that's how I understood it.)

This explains the Slow AM Thermal Drives in GURPS Space 3rd 
Edition.  I was wondering why you needed 2.7 gallons of water per 
3.5E-7 stons of AntiMatter.  You're shooting a stream of steam out 
the back-end of your ship! Cool! (or hot ...) You get 16 stons of 
thrust per 500 cf of drive.

The Fast AM Thermal needs 85 gallons (!!!) per 3.4E-8 stons.  
Here, you get 200 stons of thrust per 500 cf of drive.

Thanks for explaining this!  It makes sense now (chuckle).


- - - -
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: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 18:31:14 +0100
From: John Buston <John.Buston@tesco.net>
Subject: Re: Frame Strength (was BD Crush Depth)

> > I have been trying to figure the frame strength required for ships given a
> > G rating. 
<snip>
> Given other formulae, a relatively realistic max thrust for an 
> uncompensated ship is 0.1 tons per body hit point.

Shouldn't the mass of the ship be factored in there as well?

Very small objects, like missiles lose 

It feels counter-intuitive adding empty space to a ship to increase its hit
points (and indirectly increasing its mass) so that the frame can support it.

So G compensation is the reason big military ships are buildable with Traveller
performance? They would otherwise be unbuildable using this formula. 
Shades of Star Treks structural integrity field here, though on a smaller scale.

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:37:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Re: Fellow Traveller

> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 23:18:31 +1000
> From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au>
> 
> > From: "Douglas E. Berry" 
> > To be honest, I've never seen any application of socialism or communism
> > that didn't require extensive centralized controls to function.  That
> > disqualifies Gov 0 as a true contender, once again IMHO.

It works (sometimes) for small, self-sufficient groups (some of the
communes founded in the 60s and 70s are still functioning communist
societies, though of course it's a vanishingly small proportion of the
total attempts).  See also the !Kung society, in which clan 'ownership' of
resources is the norm.  (The stresses which can threaten such a society
were rather nicely portrayed in "The Gods Must Be Crazy.")

> Seriously, though, there's not a whole lot of point in us going off onto
> an OT discussion of this. 

I see this discussion as very topical.  Government and economics drive
many Traveller campaigns.  Understanding how they work and interact makes
for better gaming.

> There's not reason why we shouldn't take the Anarchists a little
> seriously, for the sake of the game, but then again, we don't have to if
> it's not interesting. 

It's certainly interesting!  But again, I fear that anarchy will be
short-lived in all but the most unusual circumstances (among Solomani-like
humans, at least).  All it takes is one ambitious and well-led group to
turn it into something else.  Even if other groups unite to fight off the
'spoilers', by that very uniting they themselves tend to integrate on
other levels.  Anarchy is an unstable system, almost always.

> There could be a lot of fun, though, when PCs land on a Law Level 0
> world, and discover that they can't buy guns.  Of course, you would need
> to brush up on your Monty Python skills before you tried to run an
> Anarcho-syndicalist commune... 

"Come and see the violence inherent in the system!  Help, help, I'm being
repressed!" :)

- -- 
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--  http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |   "They do not preach that their God will rouse them
      a little before the nuts work loose." - Kipling

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:44:05 -0400
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com>
Subject: BD Crush Depth (was Freezing in the Aleutians)

>>Well, if you just use the Vehicles computation for crush depth, there
won't
>> be much trouble exceeding those figures.  Crush depth in Vehicles is a
>>multiple of DR, which is why the Intrepit has a crush depth of 140
miles....
>
>The scout expedition dress on page 32 of "First In" has a crush depth
>of 250 yards listed.

Using GT:V (DR+10)x2.0x10=CD (yards) for heavy frame vehicles (BD)
(60+10)x2x10=260 yards for body (40+10)x2x10=240 yards for limbs. I guess
the designer slit it down the middle and picked 250 yards. In my original
post I used medium frames for BD. Heavy frames come out to:

				DR
Combat Armor		20	(20+10)x1.0x10=120 (yards) medium frame		110 m
Battle Dress		100	(100+10)x2.0x10=300 (yards) heavy frame		273 m
Improved Battle Dress	120	(120+10)x2.0x10=320 (yards) heavy frame		290 m
Sane Battle Dress		500	(500+10)x2.0x10=700 (yards) heavy frame		637 m
Insane-Battle Dress	1400	(1400+10)x2.0x10=1600 (yards) heavy frame	1456 m


Terry C

All that is Gold does not glitter
Not all who travel are lost

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:52:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: Re: Frame Strength (was BD Crush Depth)

John Buston writes:
> > Given other formulae, a relatively realistic max thrust for an 
> > uncompensated ship is 0.1 tons per body hit point.
> 
> Shouldn't the mass of the ship be factored in there as well?

No.  A 10 ton ship under 10 T of thrust and a 1T ship under 10T thrust are under the same stresses.
> 
> Very small objects, like missiles lose.
Nah.  Small objects lose mass faster than they lose hit points.  Actually, large objects lose, it reduces the maximum Gs for large craft.  For a traveller feel, I'd increase the max to 1.0 tons/hp, blame G-compensation for that.
> 
> It feels counter-intuitive adding empty space to a ship to increase its hit
> points (and indirectly increasing its mass) so that the frame can support
> it. 
> 
> So G compensation is the reason big military ships are buildable with
> Traveller performance? They would otherwise be unbuildable using this
> formula.  Shades of Star Treks structural integrity field here, though on a
> smaller scale. 

Yup.  A 10,000 tD 1-G ship is a ridiculous engineering challenge with realistic materials (think of the Missouri flying through the air.  It would break in half).  Bonded SD is 8x stronger than steel, weight for weight, so an 8-G 10,000 tD ship should be a serious challenge for Traveller.  Given the square-cube law, that means a 2G vehicle the size of a Tigress is pretty appalling with a bonded SD structure.

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:58:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: Re: BD Crush Depth (was Freezing in the Aleutians)

Terry Carlino writes:
> Using GT:V (DR+10)x2.0x10=CD (yards) for heavy frame vehicles (BD)
> (60+10)x2x10=260 yards for body (40+10)x2x10=240 yards for limbs. I guess
> the designer slit it down the middle and picked 250 yards. In my original
> post I used medium frames for BD. Heavy frames come out to:

Hm...70*2*10 = 1400 yards.  50*2*10 = 1000 yards.

Something tells me you're grouping incorrectly.  60+(10*2*10) = 260, but that's not the order the multiplication goes in....

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 10:58:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: Re: BD Crush Depth (was Freezing in the Aleutians)

Terry Carlino writes:
> Using GT:V (DR+10)x2.0x10=CD (yards) for heavy frame vehicles (BD)
> (60+10)x2x10=260 yards for body (40+10)x2x10=240 yards for limbs. I guess
> the designer slit it down the middle and picked 250 yards. In my original
> post I used medium frames for BD. Heavy frames come out to:

Hm...70*2*10 = 1400 yards.  50*2*10 = 1000 yards.

Something tells me you're grouping incorrectly.  60+(10*2*10) = 260, but that's not the order the multiplication goes in....

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:01:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
Subject: Welcome back, Kenji!

> Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:34:08 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Kenji Schwarz <schwarz@fas.harvard.edu>
> 
> Hello, everyone.  I'd just like to say it's wonderful to be back, now
> that I'm a well-adjusted person doing what I love and enjoying life to
> the fullest, and not a snide, mouthy juvenile with ridiculous politics
> and so forth cluttering up the list.  I am so ashamed of my prior
> behavior.  From now on, I'm going to take things seriously; as seriously
> as I take my studies, as seriously as I take my life. 

Like the prodigal son, you are forgiven.  Go forth, and sin no more.

> 1)  Everyone with a BRAIN in their head knows that Strephon only gave
> Imperial Warrants to degenerate liberal-policy-children intent only on
> furthering their homosexual agenda, like Norris. 

Hrmmmm...perhaps this contains the hint we need to resolve the baronial
population bomb dilemma.

> 2)  Battledress certainly can withstand crushing pressures of many
> thousands of atmospheres, because they have to:  Imperial Marines are so
> incompetent there's no other way they can survive. 

It occurred to me while mulling over the BD crush depth problem that the
Imperial troopers' armor in the Star Wars movies clearly has a crush
pressure of about 0.8 atm.  That's why farm kids and princesses shooting
wildly with hand weapons can routinely take out three or four with each
round.  A big part of Imperial trooper training is learning to avoid at
all costs slapping one another on the back; the stress of such a blow
(even unpowered) is frequently more than sufficient to cause the armor to
implode, leaving the trooper crushed inside a bumpy white ball roughly the
size of a grapefruit. 

> 3)  Communism is not only feasible, but is inevitable.  I continue to be
> amazed that the crypto-fascist slaveholding mentality of the Third
> Imperium is so virulently defended by the otherwise stellar thinktank
> that is the TML.  Really, it's time to close the books on mercantilism
> in Traveller.  Private property is yesterday's neurosis.  The future
> lies with the progressive "races" -- the Zhodani, the Sayat, etc. 

Well spoken, comrade. :)  On a more serious note...I wonder how the
Imperium would respond to truly mercantilist (as opposed to free-market)
capitalism?  Would an industrial world practicing trade protectionism and
product dumping a la Japan circa 1988 be stopped, and if so, by whom, and
using what official or unofficial techniques?

- -- 
   |   Craig Berry - cberry@cinenet.net
 --*--  http://www.cinenet.net/users/cberry/home.html
   |   "They do not preach that their God will rouse them
      a little before the nuts work loose." - Kipling

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:26:07 -0800
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)
Subject: Re: Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives

>From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
>Subject: Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives
...
>5.) No High Guard -- except in describing ortillery for
>    planetary assault.
>
>What else. Poke holes in this idea please.

  Are you using thrusters or a reaction drive?

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:09:56
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: Nobles

At 04:58 PM 10/27/1999 +0200, you wrote:
>Douglas E. Berry writes:

>>Or your wealth and influence make you SOC F, but your "real" title is
>>Baron Pacifica.
>
>If you're SOC F, you can hobnob with people like Duchess Delphine. How
>many people per planet do you think would qualify by that test?

Very few.  But if the Baron Pacifica also owns Feldercarb Shipyards, which
is Mora's largest single cash cow, he might well wield the same level of
real power and influence as the Duchess.

{Power politics, got to love 'em.)
- -- 

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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 11:12:00
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: TML Members as Resources

At 11:34 AM 10/27/1999 -0400, you wrote:

>I'm sure there are other threads besides these underway, all of which I
>look forward to participating in with all my new-found maturity and peace
>of mind that I can muster.

He's baaaackkk...
- -- 

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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 99 18:55:35 +0000
From: igor@truserve.com
Subject: GURPS Vehicle Starship Design: LF-78 Light Freighter

Here's my first attempt at using GURPS Vehicles to make a starship, rather than the 
modular rules in GURPS Traveller. Please comment away.

For non-GURPS people, this is a 100ton, J-2 1-G light freighter capable of carrying 2 
passengers and 28 tons of cargo. It has a air/raft bay and escape pod. I can reproduce 
the design in FF&S2 with a few less tons of cargo.

The defence laser is a tiny (50MJ) rainbow (non X-ray) laser designed solely for light 
defence - the campaign I run strictly controls civilian weaponry. The defence laser 
does have a high ROF than a normal laser, though (1/8 rather than 1/60 - and using the 
backup batteries at fulll, it can handle ROF 1 for 1 turn).

LF-78 Design Data

    Subassemblies and Body Features: One turret (full rotation, under body). 
Retractable skids (3). Very good streamlining. Lifting body.
    Propulsion: One 650,000 lb. thrust standard reactionless thruster with 
vectored thrust (590 HP, 32,500kW). One 650,000 lb. thrust contragrav lifter 
(34 HP, 650 kW). One 2 parsec jump drive (304 HP, 30,000 kW).
    Weaponry: One space defence laser (TuF, HP 150, 14,062kW). One sandcaster 
(TuF, HP 378).
    Weapon Accessories: Full stabilization for laser (Tu, HP 32). Universal 
mount for laser (Tu, HP 94).
    Communications: Two radio communicators with very long range (each 
500,000mi, HP 3, 0.1 kW). Two laser communicators   with very long range 
(each 1,000,000mi, HP 14, 1kW). Two IFF transponders (each HP 1, neg. power). 
    Sensors: AESA with 10,000 mi range (HP 169, 2,500kW, scan 35). PESA 
with 2,000 mi range (HP 70, neg. power, scan 31). Radscanner with 2000 mi 
range (HP 81, neg. power, scan 31).
    Navigation: Two sets precision navigation instruments (Each HP 2). 
Two inertial navigation systems (each HP 1). 
    Targeting: One HUDWAC.
    ECM: Radar/laser detector.
    Computers: Three mainframes each complexity 7 (each HP 7, 1kW). Four 
terminals (each HP 3).
    Miscellaneous: Two full fire suppression systems (each HP 12). 
Automed (HP 107, 0.1kW). Three 2-man airlocks (each HP 90). High security 
alarm. Lifepod vehicle bay (for L-2 Freedom Lifepod, HP 556). Vehicle 
hangar (maximum 500cf size, HP 495).
    Controls: Computerized. Crew Stations: Normal. "Pilot" controls #1 
computer terminal and controls from normal crew station. "Co-pilot" controls 
#2 computer terminal and duplicate controls from normal crew station.
    Occupancy: Long. Passengers: 2. Crew: Pilot/Engineer. Accomodations:
Four cabins (each HP 238). Environmental Systems: Full lifesystem for eight 
people (HP 76, 80kW). 168 man-days provisions (HP 21). Artificial gravity 
(HP 158, 1,000kW).
    Power Plant: Fusion reactor plant with 51,000 kW output (HP 234, 
lasts 200 years). Powers all normal systems, plus either Maneuver Drive and 
Contragrav or Jump Drive.
    Energy Bank: Rechargeable power cell stores 135,000,000kW output (HP 107), 
used to power laser in combat situation or provide 10 hours backup life support.
    Fuel: One 66,660 gallon ultralight seal-sealing tank (HP 2785, fire -1). 
Enough fuel for two parsec jump. Fuel scoops (HP 129). Electrolysis plant (HP 
359, 12,961kW) capable of coverting tank full of water to fuel in 3 days. 
Atmospheric processor (HP 161, 833kW) capable of converting tank full of 
jovian gas to fuel in 1 day.
    Access, Cargo, and Empty Space: 3,336 cf access space, 14,000cf cargo 
space. Empty space 2121.043cf .
    Volumes:</i> Turret (1000cf). Body (45325cf). Retractable skids (2450cf). 
Surface Area: Turret 600, body 8034, skids 1090. Total area 8634.
    Structure: Medium frame, standard materials.
    Hit Points: Body 12,051, turret 900, skids 545 each.
    Armor: PD 4, DR 100 expensive metal on all locations.  
    Statistics: Empty Weight 289,008 lbs. Loaded Weight 640,689 lbs. 
Volume 50,000cf. Size modifier: +8. Price MCr21.458. HT 9.
    Air Performance, Unloaded: Aerostatic lift 650,000 lbs., stall speed 0, 
can hover, motive thrust 650,000lbs., aerodynamic drag 1726, top air speed 
1,680 mph, aAccel 44 mph, aMR .25, aSR 5, aDecel 1 mph.
    Air Performance, Loaded: Aerostatic lift 650,000 lbs., stall speed 0, 
can hover, motive thrust 650,000lbs., aerodynamic drag 1726, top air speed
1,680 mph, aAccel 20 mph, aMR .25, aSR 5, aDecel 1 mph.
    Space Performance, Unloaded: sAccel 2.2g, sDecel 2.2g, sMR 2.2g, 
FTL speed 2 parsecs per jump max.
    Space Performance, Loaded:</i> sAccel 1g, sDecel 1g, sMR 1g, FTL speed 
2 parsecs per jump max.


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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:36:39 -0400
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>
Subject: RE: Taxation (off topic)

Erwin Fritz writes:
>Antony Farrell wrote:
>>Just thought I'd mention this to frighten people. In Western
>>Australia, where I live, the state government is considering
>>raising Stamp Duty (A State Tax) on the forthcoming Goods and
>>Services Tax
>Here in Canada we pay a surtax on our income tax. If your
>provincial income tax (which is a percentage of federal income
>tax) is above a certain amount, the surtax of 4 or 5 percent of
>your provincial tax kicks in, and is added to your bill.
<snipped>

	If that wasn't bad enough, here in Quebec there are both
	federal and provincial sales taxes: the feddies charge 7%
	on the price of any goods or services purchased, then the
	provincials charge 7% on the price PLUS the federal tax.
	Thus, we poor sods pay something like 14.5% sales tax (of
	which 0.5% is tax on tax).  I cound be of by a few tenths
	of a percent, but you get the idea.

	ObTrav: Just when the PCs think that they've finished with
	customs officials on a Gov 9 world, another level of
	government arrives to tax the tax that they have paid.

Peez

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 13:54:14 +0100
From: "Mark Preston" <mark@mpreston.demon.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Space Opera?

Really, don't - for your own good. IMHO, the Lensman series stink - I never
liked Smith at all.

- -----Original Message-----
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Leonard
Erickson
Sent: 24 October 1999 22:23
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
Subject: Re: Space Opera?


In mail you write:

>>Alas, the two *classic* example of Space Opera don't have fighters that
>>bank either. The Lensman series and the Skylark series. The first is
>>back in print and worth reading, if only for some nasty ideas.
>>
>>Trenco is such a *lovely* planet. So is Delgon. And I want to see the
>>reaction of your players to a visit to Rigel IV. Or Lyrane.
>
> I've unfortunately never read Skylark.
>
> Lensman is grandfathered into the Space Opera category just because.  :)

You really *need* to track down copies of the Skylark Series:

"The Skylark of Space"
"Skylark Three"
"Skylark of Valeron"
"Skylark DuQuesne"

All by E.E. "Doc" Smith.

The escalating power levels are fun. And the series has *the* single
most interesting villian ever concieved. Dr. Marc C. DuQuesne. He's
amoral, but charming. He keeps his word, but to the letter. He's smart
enough to realize when revenge is a waste of time. And he's willing to
work alongside the good guys if there's a danger to humanity.

OBTrav:
Since the last we see of him, he and his girl friend are heading off to
find a nice, isolated branch of humaniti to become benevolent despots
of, you could easily justify a pocket (or larger) empire somewhere run
the way DuQuesne was planning to run his. (You'll see what I mean after
you've read the books)

It'd make things interesting for the players.

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

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 14:50:04 -0500 ()
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net>
Subject: Re: Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives

>  Are you using thrusters or a reaction drive?

Thrusters.  With all kinds of neat glowing effects and such. I think all
the good guys will have bluish thrusters, and all the bad guys reddish. ;-)

Ciao,

Joseph R. Dietrich
yikes@evansville.net

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

Date: Wed, 27 Oct 1999 15:52:46 -0400
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>
Subject: Just say "no" to lhy for Jump drives

Joseph R. Dietrich writes:
>In my upcoming, abberrant Traveller game I am considering
>dropping the lhyd fuel requirement for jump drives.

	Now THAT is a heretic!

<snipped>
>Okay, how can I expect this to change the Traveller setting?
>This is what I can think of:
>1.) Faster transit times for ships in a big hurry.
>    No need to stopover for fuel.

	Can the jump capacitors be charged up before exiting
	jump space?  How long can they be charged?  Does holding
	a charge for long times cause damage?

>2.) No jumping to the Oort cloud of a system.

	There might still be reasons to go there  For example,
	you might have run out of Oorts.

	:)

>3.) No microjumps to the outsystem.

	Why not?

>4.) Smaller ships, or more free space for cargo and
>    other things in existing ships (although this can be
>    counteracted somewhat by increasing the volume of the
>    jump drive itself.

	Huge change here.  Little fuel to buy, lots of cargo
	space, no problems with unrefined fuel: the rates for
	carrying cargo or passengers would tend to drop.

>5.) No High Guard -- except in describing ortillery for
>    planetary assault.

	Or when searching the gas giant for hidden SDBs.

>What else. Poke holes in this idea please.

	No more fuel purification plants required.
	Less reliance on starports for support.
	Damage locations should be altered to take into account
		the reduced size of fuel tanks
	Reduced advantage for SDBs relative to starships
	You can design ships for extremely long range use, so the
		Zhodanis could send an armada deep into Imperial
		space to strike almost anywhere, moving as fast as
		any warnings could.
	No more adventures that start with skimming deep in a gas
		giant.

Peez

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1266
***********************************

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
