<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2800</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/23/00 9:34:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 24 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2800<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Really Classic Traveller heresy (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Really Classic Traveller heresy (was Re: Classic Traveller for  Newbies)<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Penguin ambush<BR>
Re: Last Unicorn Games (was Re: What'd I Miss?)<BR>
A/6/4518 Has Arrived!<BR>
Classic Traveller Book 2 released<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller Book 2 released<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 18:52:52 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
For CT you would also need to integrate the Radiation Damage Table (though<BR>
one appears in the Missiles Special Supplement) plus the Interior Explosion<BR>
Table, as well as the various HG weapon and defense systems, including<BR>
armor. Presumably, this would also include making the computer programs<BR>
useful again, since they are totally abstracted in HG. (And hopefully also<BR>
adding some rule to make pulse lasers different from beam lasers in CT style<BR>
combat.)<BR>
Or would CT people be simply using pure HG with ship size restrictions?<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:05:10 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
> From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
> Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
> IMO, what we should have had were generic rules, design sequences and<BR>
> adventure seeds published as Traveller.  In addition, there was (and<BR>
> still is) a place for specific settings, detailed backstories, and<BR>
> specialized design sequences in the market.  If you want a model of<BR>
> what I always thought GDW *should* have done, look at Steve Jackson<BR>
> Games with GURPS for the generic framework and its Worldbooks for<BR>
> the specific settings.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
In the end, what happened was that the 'Golden Thread' was the background.<BR>
<BR>
Without the background, CT is just a neat second-generation rules system.<BR>
<BR>
Without the rules, Traveller still exists.<BR>
<BR>
<stuff snipped><BR>
<BR>
> Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
> to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
> to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
> from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
> would build such monsters.<BR>
<BR>
The big tweak is to cut the size of the economies of interstellar worlds.<BR>
<BR>
For example, lets take Collace. 1 billion people, tech 13, Hi In. Doesnt<BR>
even make the top 100 for 'Most important worlds'.<BR>
<BR>
Per Striker, it has a per capita income of Kcr 18*1.4, or Kcr 25.2. At 2%<BR>
naval taxes, this is about Cr 500 per head.<BR>
<BR>
This is a naval budget of GCr 500 per annum.<BR>
<BR>
Assuming military ships cost 5% of their 'build cost' per year in<BR>
maintainence, and have a build cost of MCr2 per dton, Collace can afford to<BR>
build 250 000 tons of military shipping a year, or maintain 20 times that<BR>
(OK, it'd be Battle Riders, due to the class B port). Even if we slash<BR>
Planetary Navy taxes to 0.1% of GWP, we still get a staggering GCr 25 a year<BR>
to spend, enough to build 12 000 tons of military shipping in a year, or to<BR>
support a fleet of 250 000 tons.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, lets take Grote. 10 000 people, tech 11, Lo Ni Va, A<BR>
port. Per Striker, it has a per capita income of 14 000 * 0.8, or Cr 11 200.<BR>
Assuming naval taxes of 5%, thats about Cr 550 per head. Thus, a naval<BR>
budget of about MCr 5.<BR>
<BR>
It's the economics, not the design rules. It's those worlds with billions of<BR>
population that cause the radical shift in scale.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 20:01:25 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
At 07:52 PM 7/23/00, you wrote:<BR>
>For CT you would also need to integrate the Radiation Damage Table (though<BR>
>one appears in the Missiles Special Supplement) plus the Interior Explosion<BR>
>Table, as well as the various HG weapon and defense systems, including<BR>
>armor. Presumably, this would also include making the computer programs<BR>
>useful again, since they are totally abstracted in HG. (And hopefully also<BR>
>adding some rule to make pulse lasers different from beam lasers in CT style<BR>
>combat.)<BR>
>Or would CT people be simply using pure HG with ship size restrictions?<BR>
><BR>
>Sam<BR>
<BR>
         Hi, Sam!<BR>
<BR>
         For my TNEC games, I use the HG combat system whole-cloth *except* <BR>
in role-playing situations where I tear out the relative computer mods and <BR>
force the players to worry about software loads.  Missiles do 1 hit per <BR>
USP, to keep some flavor of the original rules.  Which makes them deadly, <BR>
until you think about ECM and point-defense...<BR>
<BR>
         For role-playing I say that pulse lasers are -2 to hit, but score <BR>
2 hits if successful.  For non-RP combats, I use them "flat" per the rules.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
	---------------------------------------	<BR>
	The TNEC Guy<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 19:14:53 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Really Classic Traveller heresy (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 16:04:32 -0500<BR>
>From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
>Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
><BR>
>Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
>to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
>to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
>from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
>would build such monsters.<BR>
<BR>
There are two canonical tools:<BR>
<BR>
(1) Tech level. One interpretation for the table on HG2, p. 26, is that<BR>
ship size is effectively limited as follows:<BR>
<BR>
TL	Tons<BR>
5-6	<1,000<BR>
7-8	<4,000<BR>
9	<10,000<BR>
A	<50,000<BR>
B	<100,000<BR>
C+	<1,000,000<BR>
<BR>
(2) Population. According to TCS, p. 33, shipyard tonnage is limited to<BR>
population divided by 1,000 and multiplied by a factor that can't exceed<BR>
1.5.  GT: Starports, p. 80, gives a different formula with similar<BR>
implications.<BR>
<BR>
So if your campaign is limited to TL9-A, and/or most of your worlds have<BR>
3-5 million inhabitants or less, you shouldn't be able to build starships<BR>
bigger than 5,000-10,000 tons displacement. This is consistent with an<BR>
early FTL, near stars-type setting.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Of course, the "because I said so" version works, too. A variant, submitted<BR>
for your consideration:<BR>
<BR>
Imagine a jump drive that is a tube of essentially fixed length. The jump<BR>
field is not carried on the hull, but extends from the centerpoint of the<BR>
tube in a sphere. Some minor variations in field size are possible by<BR>
varying the diameter of the tube. If the drive length is fixed at 40.6m,<BR>
and the maximum diameter of the drive field at 51.2m, the possible size of<BR>
starships ranges from approximately 100 to 5,000 displacement tons. Smaller<BR>
vessels could use more streamlined hull forms; vessels nearing the<BR>
5,000-ton limit would become progressively more spherical.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 16:28:26<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Really Classic Traveller heresy (was Re: Classic Traveller for  Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
At 07:14 PM 7/23/2000 -0400, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>There are two canonical tools:<BR>
<BR>
And a rather heritical one:<BR>
<BR>
Beyond 5,000dt, it requires heavier and heavier engines to enter jump.<BR>
<BR>
Between 5,001 - 20,000dt it requires 150% of the normal jump drive.<BR>
<BR>
From 20,001 - 100,000dt it requires 200% of the normal jump drive.<BR>
<BR>
This has the effect of keeping ships small.  It also brings back fighters,<BR>
since the most economical way to carry combat power is in masses of<BR>
fighter/riders operating from carriers.<BR>
<BR>
Note that local defenses will be massive, and most likely based on asteroid<BR>
hulls.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 16:30:39<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
At 10:22 PM 7/23/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
>pretties, fly...<BR>
<BR>
Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas Berry      gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
   http://gridlore.home.mondspring.com<BR>
<BR>
"A mrgs einu sinni hluti minn systir..."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 19:47:55 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
The proposed table of TL vs starship sizes is appropriate, although I would<BR>
disagree with the numbers.<BR>
<BR>
Personally, I like the idea of large starships, in many cases larger than<BR>
canonical Traveller allows (i.e. about 10x the 1 MdT limit).<BR>
<BR>
Actual limiting factors affecting historical ship sizes ITRW have been:<BR>
<BR>
- -Technological/Manufacturing Capability<BR>
- -Arms limitations treaties<BR>
- -Navigation Chokepoints (e.g. the PANAMAX standard)<BR>
- -Budgetary/Cost constraints<BR>
<BR>
In my research, I drew up a table containing historical ship sizes and<BR>
graphed it versus time to give me a rough idea of the increase in<BR>
shipbuilding technology.<BR>
The largest vessel currently in existence that I know of was the ex-HAPPY<BR>
GIANT, a Japanese ship which had the following stats:<BR>
<BR>
622,511.7 dwt<BR>
1504' = 458m   long<BR>
225'   = 68.5m  beam<BR>
80.9'  = 24.6m draft<BR>
<BR>
Modeled as a simple Rectangular Parallelpiped, it would have a bounding<BR>
volume of:<BR>
<BR>
771,776 cubic meters = 55,127 dT<BR>
<BR>
About the size of a PLANET-class Imperial cruiser of the GHALALK class.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 20:45:57 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
At 01:30 PM 7/23/00, you wrote:<BR>
>At 10:22 PM 7/23/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> >Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
> >pretties, fly...<BR>
><BR>
>Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
>your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
>--<BR>
<BR>
         Yeah, that Penguin adaptation of the Nerve Pinch is <BR>
*vicious*....<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 01:22:45 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2000 4:30 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
At 10:22 PM 7/23/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
>pretties, fly...<BR>
<BR>
Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
- ---------------------------------<BR>
But can they reach the monkeys to do the nerve-pinch?<BR>
<BR>
<g><BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:23:40 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
At 09:22 PM 7/23/00, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
>your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
>---------------------------------<BR>
>But can they reach the monkeys to do the nerve-pinch?<BR>
><BR>
><g><BR>
><BR>
>Matt<BR>
<BR>
         Sure.  Ninja-Penguin Assault Stilts.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 19:42:16 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
"Douglas E. Berry" wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> At 10:22 PM 7/23/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> >Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
> >pretties, fly...<BR>
> <BR>
> Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
> your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
<BR>
<<unsuccessfully trying to banish the mental image of the 101st<BR>
"Screaming Penguins" unit patch, complete with airborne tab>><BR>
<BR>
BTW, what kind of radar cross-section (RCS) would Evil Trained Monkeys<BR>
(TM) have?<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav:  Do the Definitive Sensor Rules include formulae for calculating<BR>
the RCS of living creatures?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 17:38:54 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Eris wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
> to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
> to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
> from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
> would build such monsters.<BR>
<BR>
I think that the way meson guns work does the job for you. I haven't played<BR>
HG in several years, but I recall that the big meson guns were *awesome*<BR>
weapons of death and destruction. I would guess that because that factor-T<BR>
meson gun will ruin the day of a really really big ship just as well as it<BR>
ruins the day of a really big ship, or even a big ship, the really really<BR>
big ships may not be very cost-effective, and probably will not be used<BR>
much.<BR>
<BR>
I also seem to recall that the winning TCS tournament designs from years ago<BR>
didn't have extremely big ships in them. This may reflect the above<BR>
comments.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:55:22 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
At 09:38 PM 7/23/00, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>I think that the way meson guns work does the job for you. I haven't played<BR>
>HG in several years, but I recall that the big meson guns were *awesome*<BR>
>weapons of death and destruction. I would guess that because that factor-T<BR>
>meson gun will ruin the day of a really really big ship just as well as it<BR>
>ruins the day of a really big ship, or even a big ship, the really really<BR>
>big ships may not be very cost-effective, and probably will not be used<BR>
>much.<BR>
><BR>
>I also seem to recall that the winning TCS tournament designs from years ago<BR>
>didn't have extremely big ships in them. This may reflect the above<BR>
>comments.<BR>
<BR>
         Well, meson guns are great, but the solution is fairly <BR>
effective:  meson screens.  USP 9 screens stop a heck of a range of USPs.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 18:25:32 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Michel Valincourt wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >I think that the way meson guns work does the job for you. I<BR>
> haven't played<BR>
> >HG in several years, but I recall that the big meson guns were *awesome*<BR>
> >weapons of death and destruction. I would guess that because<BR>
> that factor-T<BR>
> >meson gun will ruin the day of a really really big ship just as<BR>
> well as it<BR>
> >ruins the day of a really big ship, or even a big ship, the really really<BR>
> >big ships may not be very cost-effective, and probably will not be used<BR>
> >much.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >I also seem to recall that the winning TCS tournament designs<BR>
> from years ago<BR>
> >didn't have extremely big ships in them. This may reflect the above<BR>
> >comments.<BR>
><BR>
>          Well, meson guns are great, but the solution is fairly<BR>
> effective:  meson screens.  USP 9 screens stop a heck of a range of USPs.<BR>
<BR>
Consider how well meson screens work at higher TLs. A factor-T meson weapon<BR>
against a factor-9 meson screen only needs to get 5+ on 2d6 to penetrate.<BR>
That's pretty effective: a 5/6 probability of penetrating. With spinal<BR>
weapons, the big ones are the only way to go.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 20:52:30 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
> At 06:04 PM 7/23/00, you wrote:<BR>
> >Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
> >to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
> >to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
> >from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
> >would build such monsters.<BR>
<BR>
Just introduce a handwave based on that old ship-killer, heat buildup.<BR>
Every time you cube the volume, you only sqaure the surface area.  That<BR>
means your ability to radiate heat is also limited, but the volume will<BR>
still contain a large amount of heat generating equipment.  Given time,<BR>
one could design rules for radiators which must take up a certain surface<BR>
area based on the size of the power plant, and watch them become far<BR>
larger than the ship at >5000 dtons displacement.  Or, just use the<BR>
explanation to arbitrarily limit sizes to those in book 2.<BR>
I don't know why I'm encouraging this heresy.  You're not going to take my<BR>
megaton battleships without a fight (or a protracted naval campaign, as<BR>
the case may be)!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:03:27 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
John Groth wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> "Douglas E. Berry" wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > At 10:22 PM 7/23/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> > >Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
> > >pretties, fly...<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
> > your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
><BR>
> <<unsuccessfully trying to banish the mental image of the 101st<BR>
> "Screaming Penguins" unit patch, complete with airborne tab>><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Jesse draws it, get a patchmaker to make up afew...should sell like hotcakes<BR>
at the next con....pleeeeeeese?<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> BTW, what kind of radar cross-section (RCS) would Evil Trained Monkeys<BR>
> (TM) have?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
depends...are they wearing RAM bodysuits? if not probably the same as a large<BR>
goose or duck...<BR>
<BR>
Other Rob<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:12:22 -0400<BR>
From: "Smith, Walter" <SmithW@hartwick.edu><BR>
Subject: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
Robert Houghton wrote:<BR>
>> BTW, what kind of radar cross-section (RCS) would Evil Trained <BR>
>> Monkeys (TM) have? <BR>
> <BR>
> depends...are they wearing RAM bodysuits? if not probably the same as <BR>
> a large goose or duck... <BR>
<BR>
Villager #1: If...he...has the same radar cross-section...as a <BR>
             duck...he's made of wood?<BR>
Bedevere:    And therefore?<BR>
Villager #2: An evil trained monkey!<BR>
Crowd:       An evil trained monkey!<BR>
Bedevere:    Very good.  We shall use my largest tracking array.<BR>
<BR>
(Clip of SAM's homing in on hapless Evil Trained Monkey)<BR>
<BR>
Evil Trained Monkey:  It's a fair cop.<BR>
<BR>
(Some time later)<BR>
<BR>
Arthur:      Well, you have to know these things when you're king, <BR>
             you know.<BR>
<BR>
Walt Smith<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 19:18:56 -0700<BR>
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
Well, here's a VERY EARLY heads-up.  Found out a couple of days ago that my<BR>
Mom's seriously talking about buying a $5k computer controlled embroidery<BR>
machine around the October/November time frame.  Possibilities are running<BR>
rampant through my brain as we speak.......<BR>
<BR>
More info to come.<BR>
<BR>
Jesse<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Robert<BR>
> Houghton<BR>
> Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2000 7:03 PM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> John Groth wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > "Douglas E. Berry" wrote:<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > At 10:22 PM 7/23/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> > > >Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
> > > >pretties, fly...<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense<BR>
> Artillery await<BR>
> > > your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > <<unsuccessfully trying to banish the mental image of the 101st<BR>
> > "Screaming Penguins" unit patch, complete with airborne tab>><BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> Jesse draws it, get a patchmaker to make up afew...should sell<BR>
> like hotcakes<BR>
> at the next con....pleeeeeeese?<BR>
><BR>
> ><BR>
> > BTW, what kind of radar cross-section (RCS) would Evil Trained Monkeys<BR>
> > (TM) have?<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> depends...are they wearing RAM bodysuits? if not probably the<BR>
> same as a large<BR>
> goose or duck...<BR>
><BR>
> Other Rob<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:28:02 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch wrote,<BR>
>Assuming military ships cost 5% of their 'build cost' per year in<BR>
maintainence, and have a build cost of MCr2 per dton, Collace can afford to<BR>
build 250 000 tons of military shipping a year, or maintain 20 times that<BR>
(OK, it'd be Battle Riders, due to the class B port). <<BR>
<BR>
The numbers in Supplement 9 seem to put it closer to MCr0.6 per ton for<BR>
physical costs. (Which hardly helps of course. :)) Are you figuring on MCr<BR>
1.5 for crew training in that time?<BR>
Meanwhile, the question that comes to my mind regarding such figures,<BR>
especially in connection with TCS which also touches on it, is whether any<BR>
planet would maintain a navy at full strength (20 times yearly production<BR>
which the budget will cover in maintenance) as this would mean that either<BR>
the shipyards shut down after 20 years or that ships are declared obsolete<BR>
or surplus and scrapped or sold after only 20 years.  Either way seems<BR>
unlikely to me, so I suspect there must be something more in the dynamic<BR>
than those raw figures.  (Not that ordnance isn't done away with in less<BR>
than 20 years these days, merely that Traveller is supposed to have at least<BR>
40 year ships in the civil sector. how much further behind could the<BR>
military be?)<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 23:00:24 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Penguin ambush<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:22:32 -0700<BR>
>From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
>Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
><BR>
>Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
>pretties, fly...<BR>
><BR>
>Nick<BR>
><BR>
>> PENGUIN AMBUSH!!!!!!<BR>
>><BR>
>> Jesse<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Go Glove point. And having pointed pounce!<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 19:34:51 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Last Unicorn Games (was Re: What'd I Miss?)<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote<BR>
<BR>
> I'm pretty sure Marc Miller is currently working for (at least<BR>
> consulting with) Last Unicorn Games.  Last Unicorn Games is being<BR>
> bought by Hasbro/WotC. Unless there is a change, then soon, Marc<BR>
> will be working for WotC. <BR>
<BR>
People are not limited to one job....<BR>
<BR>
> It is the stated policy of WotC that all their roleplaying games<BR>
> will use the d20 System.  Therefore, if LUG Dune and Star Trek<BR>
> continue to be produced it is likely that they will eventually be<BR>
> converted from the ICON system to the d20 System.  <BR>
<BR>
According to the WOTC website their current plans for the<BR>
Dune RPG are to release a limited edition at GenCon that<BR>
will use the Icon system. This version _may_ be available<BR>
via mail order and/or to Premiere Stores but will not be<BR>
a general release. If you want a copy you may need to<BR>
hustle a bit to get one.<BR>
<BR>
The main release will be a d20 system version currently planned<BR>
for summer 2001.<BR>
<BR>
You may have noticed that LUG's release rate has slowed from<BR>
slim to none. I would not be surprised if future Star Trek<BR>
products start coming out using the d20 system by the end<BR>
of the year but have seen nothing official on it.<BR>
<BR>
> Given all the above, the appearance of a d20 System version of<BR>
> Traveller isn't unreasonable.  If that isn't the only version of<BR>
> Traveller available, I'd say that is more a good thing than a bad<BR>
> thing.<BR>
<BR>
[1] Premiere Store = Store that buys directly from WOTC, usually<BR>
to get more Pokemon cards. Such stores must meet certain requirements<BR>
including having a gaming area. Said store does not have to make<BR>
said gaming space available for non CCG's AFAIK.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 20:59:58 -0700<BR>
From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com><BR>
Subject: A/6/4518 Has Arrived!<BR>
<BR>
...and will be at the San Jose Traveller Board Gaming meet next<BR>
Saturday, 29 July!<BR>
<BR>
Contact travellerne@3rd-imperium.com for details and directions.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:17:15 +1000<BR>
From: Timothy Minahan <timothy.minahan@scc.edu.au><BR>
Subject: Classic Traveller Book 2 released<BR>
<BR>
I saw this in passing last week.<BR>
<BR>
What was this was this book two of the reprint from SJ Games??<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:26:04 -0400<BR>
From: "Hunter Gordon" <trav@RPGRealms.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller Book 2 released<BR>
<BR>
On 7/24/2000 at 2:17 PM Timothy Minahan wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>I saw this in passing last week.<BR>
><BR>
>What was this was this book two of the reprint from SJ Games??<BR>
<BR>
No this is a reprint of all 13 original Classic Traveller supplements. It is published by Marc Miller under his company Far Future Enterprises. It follows the recent release of the first reprent, The Classic Books which contained Books 0-9 from Classic Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
Far Future Enterprises:<BR>
http://members.aol.com/Traveller<BR>
<BR>
Hunter<BR>
The GRIP Team<BR>
http://www.RPGRealms.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2800<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (rly-zd04.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.228]) by air-zd05.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:34:13 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:33:54 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id AAA29450;<BR>
	Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:29:47 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:26:59 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id AAA29395<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:26:58 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:26:58 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007240426.AAA29395@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2800<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2801</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/24/00 9:52:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 24 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2801<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Thanks to TML<BR>
Re: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
Reverse Eng. UPP's<BR>
Starship Size Constraints<BR>
R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
TNE stuff<BR>
FW: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
CT Fighting Ships question... (maybe again)<BR>
RE: CT Fighting Ships question... (maybe again)<BR>
Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
RE: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Re: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe)<BR>
Re: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe)<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
RE: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2000 21:13:17 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I think we should take the /Kinunir/ class as really being a light<BR>
> cruiser, not some aberration.  When we do this the ships in classic<BR>
> Traveller make sense.  The 800 dton /Broardsword/ class is a<BR>
> powerful ship, not a joke.  The corsairs, merchants and gunboats all<BR>
> in the 200 to 1000 dtons work.  The "huge" megacorp liners of 1 to 5<BR>
> kdtons fit.  And if we take these numbers as normal, then heavy<BR>
> cruisers at 4 to 8 kdtons and dreadnaughts at 10 to 20 kdtons,<BR>
> aren't so outlandish.  That ought to be big enough for wargammers to<BR>
> have their fun, but still keep most ships in ranges reasonable for<BR>
> PC's to encounter and interact with.<BR>
><BR>
> Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
> to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
> to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
> from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
> would build such monsters.<BR>
<BR>
Make the "radiator" rules more realistic (note that I said "more<BR>
realistic", not "realistic").<BR>
<BR>
The bigger the ship, the harder it is to find the surface area to get<BR>
rid of waste heat. And the kludges involved make you a *real* sitting<BR>
duck for many weapons.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 06:56:23 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@btinternet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Thanks to TML<BR>
<BR>
> > Where does one go to find someone's medical records in the Traveller<BR>
> > universe?<BR>
><BR>
> I was under the impression that an up-tp-date copy was part of the<BR>
Imperial<BR>
> ID. Every time you were treated, they download your records, update them<BR>
as<BR>
> they treat you, then upload them back to your card afterwards.<BR>
><BR>
> Nick<BR>
><BR>
I had a thought on this matter. I guess having records that follows ones<BR>
character are like accepting being the part of an institution, and like any<BR>
institution, to take advantage of what it has to offer you have be part of<BR>
it. Therefore, like life here, if you wnat your current doctor to know all<BR>
about you then medical docs will need to be transfered along with that<BR>
character. If a character requires a more discretion it their movements,<BR>
thenthe matter of his genetic makeup and medical hisory is going to be some<BR>
they will have to cater for themselves.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:16:36 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
<splort> dead keyboard...<BR>
<BR>
Other Rob<BR>
<BR>
"Smith, Walter" wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Robert Houghton wrote:<BR>
> >> BTW, what kind of radar cross-section (RCS) would Evil Trained<BR>
> >> Monkeys (TM) have?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > depends...are they wearing RAM bodysuits? if not probably the same as<BR>
> > a large goose or duck...<BR>
><BR>
> Villager #1: If...he...has the same radar cross-section...as a<BR>
>              duck...he's made of wood?<BR>
> Bedevere:    And therefore?<BR>
> Villager #2: An evil trained monkey!<BR>
> Crowd:       An evil trained monkey!<BR>
> Bedevere:    Very good.  We shall use my largest tracking array.<BR>
><BR>
> (Clip of SAM's homing in on hapless Evil Trained Monkey)<BR>
><BR>
> Evil Trained Monkey:  It's a fair cop.<BR>
><BR>
> (Some time later)<BR>
><BR>
> Arthur:      Well, you have to know these things when you're king,<BR>
>              you know.<BR>
><BR>
> Walt Smith<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:26:50 +0300<BR>
From: "Ken J. Kazinski" <kjkazinski@ksaits.com><BR>
Subject: Reverse Eng. UPP's<BR>
<BR>
That kind of project has some merit.<BR>
<BR>
Kaz<BR>
<BR>
>If I get crazy enough, next I may try for a program that can "reverse<BR>
engineer" UWPs to get the rolls (ranges) that generated them. That will<BR>
then (hopefully) lead to being able to generate ranges for missing data.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:39:20 +0300<BR>
From: "Ken J. Kazinski" <kjkazinski@ksaits.com><BR>
Subject: Starship Size Constraints<BR>
<BR>
I would think that operating costs, docking fees (per dton),<BR>
maintenance, personnel costs would keep large ships from appearing too<BR>
often.  Gov'ts would be willing to have larger ships because they are<BR>
not worried about the expense of running the large ships.<BR>
<BR>
IMTU large ships are rare because of the above.<BR>
<BR>
Kaz<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
would build such monsters.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:04:11 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
The following occured to me while pondering (for the TML landgrab) what<BR>
educational facilities are like on Esalin, a TL 8 world, far from the<BR>
mainstream of the 3I.<BR>
<BR>
What are R&D efforts (I am thinking primarily of colleges and universities<BR>
now) like in the Traveller universe? Since we have established that a<BR>
significant number of planets are at TL G+, what type of R&D activities do<BR>
you see on the lower TL worlds? Does a TL 8 world have any chance of any<BR>
significant breakthroughs which have not already been made at some other<BR>
high TL place? Probably not. A difference of 8 TLs is huge. A difference of<BR>
even 2 is fairly substantial.<BR>
<BR>
What do university students on a TL 8 or even TL A planet learn? Do they<BR>
learn the TL G stuff, or only the local TL? Even one step further, what<BR>
background does the average guy on the street have? If they are on a TL 8<BR>
world, do they probably know about TL G things, but just don't have the<BR>
infrastructure needed to actually build TL G equipment?<BR>
<BR>
As a sweeping generalization, my initial thoughts are that most people learn<BR>
about TL E technology as part of their basic education, probably TL F if<BR>
they go to college, and TL G+ if they go on to graduate school (or work in<BR>
the appropriate jobs), even if they are from a TL 8 world. They will just<BR>
have theoretical knowledge of the advanced stuff, but little or no hands-on<BR>
experience with the technology. This assumes, of course, that they are out<BR>
on the frontier. Even on low TL planets in developed sectors, they probably<BR>
have access to the technology also.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:43:16 -0700<BR>
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
Jesse DeGraff wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Well, here's a VERY EARLY heads-up.  Found out a couple of days ago that my<BR>
> Mom's seriously talking about buying a $5k computer controlled embroidery<BR>
> machine around the October/November time frame.  Possibilities are running<BR>
> rampant through my brain as we speak.......<BR>
<BR>
Duuudddeeee..........<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Evyn...<BR>
<BR>
C-Space home http://home.att.net/~wmacdude/<BR>
<BR>
When Spring comes back with rustling shade,<BR>
And apple blossoms fills the air,<BR>
I have a rendezvous with Death,<BR>
When spring brings back blue days and fair.<BR>
 Legionnaire Alan Seeger, KIA the Somme.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 02:33:48 -0700<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: TNE stuff<BR>
<BR>
  Some of you guys might be interested in these:  http://www.titangames.com/<BR>
<BR>
Re: Titan Games Preview for (7/23/00)<BR>
...<BR>
>GDW:<BR>
>    (Traveller: The New Era)<BR>
>        Traveller: The New Era Rulebook (softbound) (300) [$21, M]<BR>
>        Survival Margin (301) [$9.5, NM]<BR>
>        Smash & Grab (305) [$10, M]<BR>
>        Players' Forms (306) [$8, M]<BR>
>        Referee's Screen (307) [$8, F]<BR>
>        Battle Rider Boxed Set (308) [$26, Boxed-N]<BR>
>        Path of Tears, Star Viking Sourcebook (309) [$16, M]<BR>
>        Reformation Coalition Equipment Guide (310) [$16, M]<BR>
>        World Tamer's Handbook (311) [$16, M]<BR>
>        Striker II, Miniature Warfare in the Far Future (313) [$21, M]<BR>
>        Keepers of the Flame, The Regency Sourcebook (314) [$19, M]<BR>
>        Star Vikings, Personalities of the Reformation Coalition (315) [$16, M]<BR>
>        Aliens of the Rim, Hivers and Ithklur (318) [$18, M]<BR>
>        Regency Combat Vehicle Guide (320) [$18, M]<BR>
>        The Guilded Lilly (330) [$14, M]<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:57:01 +0100<BR>
From: Matt Bond <MBOND@karpad.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: FW: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
I'm forwarding this for a friend of mine... (actually, he's my boss!)<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Tony Garbutt <BR>
> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 9:32 AM<BR>
> To: Matt Bond<BR>
> Subject: RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> When you have mentioned Evil Trained Monkeys (TM), is the TM <BR>
> an abbreviation for trained monkeys, or has a professor evil <BR>
> in some remote system trade marked the training of evil monkeys.<BR>
> <BR>
> Also are these evil monkeys that have been trained or normal <BR>
> monkeys that have been evilly trained.<BR>
> <BR>
> Yours<BR>
> <BR>
> 	A concerned member of the simian right committee.<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> > Robert Houghton wrote:<BR>
> > >> BTW, what kind of radar cross-section (RCS) would Evil Trained <BR>
> > >> Monkeys (TM) have? <BR>
> > > <BR>
> > > depends...are they wearing RAM bodysuits? if not probably <BR>
> > the same as <BR>
> > > a large goose or duck... <BR>
> > <BR>
> > Villager #1: If...he...has the same radar cross-section...as a <BR>
> >              duck...he's made of wood?<BR>
> > Bedevere:    And therefore?<BR>
> > Villager #2: An evil trained monkey!<BR>
> > Crowd:       An evil trained monkey!<BR>
> > Bedevere:    Very good.  We shall use my largest tracking array.<BR>
> > <BR>
> > (Clip of SAM's homing in on hapless Evil Trained Monkey)<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Evil Trained Monkey:  It's a fair cop.<BR>
> > <BR>
> > (Some time later)<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Arthur:      Well, you have to know these things when you're king, <BR>
> >              you know.<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Walt Smith<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:17:55 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
> The numbers in Supplement 9 seem to put it closer to MCr0.6 per ton for<BR>
> physical costs. (Which hardly helps of course. :)) Are you figuring on MCr<BR>
> 1.5 for crew training in that time?<BR>
<BR>
I'm figuring on contracting Famile Spofulam :)<BR>
<BR>
Seriously, with the enhanced EW rules in FFS2, the cost of military ships<BR>
goes up.<BR>
<BR>
> Meanwhile, the question that comes to my mind regarding such figures,<BR>
> especially in connection with TCS which also touches on it, is whether any<BR>
> planet would maintain a navy at full strength (20 times yearly production<BR>
> which the budget will cover in maintenance) as this would mean that either<BR>
> the shipyards shut down after 20 years or that ships are declared obsolete<BR>
> or surplus and scrapped or sold after only 20 years.  Either way seems<BR>
> unlikely to me, so I suspect there must be something more in the dynamic<BR>
> than those raw figures.  (Not that ordnance isn't done away with in less<BR>
> than 20 years these days, merely that Traveller is supposed to have at<BR>
least<BR>
> 40 year ships in the civil sector. how much further behind could the<BR>
> military be?)<BR>
<BR>
The reasons I picked them is that they are very conservative assumptions,<BR>
and they still crunch out big enough fleets to put a small squardron<BR>
anywhere you might like.<BR>
<BR>
It's also to show that the solution is not to artifically limit the size of<BR>
ships.<BR>
<BR>
Who really cares about a 10kton limit, if a decent sized planet can easily<BR>
afford twenty of them on every world within half a dozen parsecs ?<BR>
<BR>
The basic problem is all those billion population worlds. If you disallow<BR>
them, then the Imperium becomes something a lot more on the PC scale.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 07:15:55 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: allensh <allensh@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
In my Mileau 0 campaign (which converted to GURPS<BR>
Traveller sometime ago), the characters are<BR>
approaching the end of their first tour of duty in the<BR>
IISS. Rather than neccesarily allowing them to go<BR>
freelance, or end the campaign, I was thinking of an<BR>
idea that might get them to re-up. It's somewhere<BR>
around Year 5 in our game, and I was thinking that it<BR>
would be fun to set up a long-term exploration mission<BR>
in the direction of the Great Rift. Here's some<BR>
questions I have about that for the experts on the<BR>
TML. (This is being forwarded to my players, btw, and<BR>
I think they should ALL subscribe to the TML, don't<BR>
you? <g>)<BR>
<BR>
1. How far could you reasonably expect to explore in a<BR>
four year hitch? (say, 2 years out, 2 years back?) I'd<BR>
LIKE them to make it behind the claw as far as, say,<BR>
Mora, but my sense of astrography is worse than my<BR>
sense of geography.<BR>
<BR>
2. I've been trying to come up with a long-range ship<BR>
that would be self-sufficient for up to five years,<BR>
kind of a space-going Scout Base. Having a little<BR>
trouble with it; any of you starship architects out<BR>
there want to give it a go? (of course, it needs to be<BR>
in the GT modular system.) I can't offer any prizes<BR>
for the contest except for the knowledge that your<BR>
creation will be helping to roll back the frontiers of<BR>
the Imperium :)<BR>
<BR>
We only play this campaign about once every two<BR>
months, so I try to make the adventures as memorable<BR>
as possible. Just trying to pump some life into the<BR>
ol' campaign :)<BR>
<BR>
Allen <BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:34:24 +1000<BR>
From: "Mark Laiho" <mclaih@yesresources.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
With the capital ship design I just completed, the surface area gets used up<BR>
very fast leaving vast amounts of volume spare.  The bigger the ship the<BR>
faster you run out of surface area before you run out of volume.  This is<BR>
alleviated at higher tech levels in FF&S TNE or T4 as the area per system<BR>
performance drops.<BR>
<BR>
Besides really big ships take a long time to build (unless you have a very<BR>
industrial planet with an A class starport) and has a large financial<BR>
outlay.<BR>
<BR>
In an actual shooting war the lost of a couple million dton ship which will<BR>
probably comprise a significant proportion of your fleet would really hurt.<BR>
It could be taken out with a kinetic weapon while stationary or destroyed by<BR>
a smuggled nuclear weapon.  While the odds of this happening are small they<BR>
are also worth the risk.  If you only have one vessel of this size in your<BR>
fleet you had better be able to trust its captain as there is quite a<BR>
possibility that he has the firepower to pull off a coup de tat.  Also such<BR>
a large vessel can only be in one place at a time.  It can defend or attack<BR>
it can't do both at the same time.  So for a multisystem star nation the use<BR>
of very large ships is prohibitive because you won't be able to build enough<BR>
of them to defend every system and or conduct offensive strikes (The 3rd<BR>
Imperium should be large enough however to be able to build and deploy a<BR>
number of these).  Besides a planetary deep site meson gun can still always<BR>
blow that very large ship to pieces.<BR>
<BR>
So even if it is possible to build multi million dton warships it is<BR>
unlikely to be produced in large numbers<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 11:52 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > At 06:04 PM 7/23/00, you wrote:<BR>
> > >Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
> > >to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
> > >to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
> > >from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
> > >would build such monsters.<BR>
><BR>
> Just introduce a handwave based on that old ship-killer, heat buildup.<BR>
> Every time you cube the volume, you only sqaure the surface area.  That<BR>
> means your ability to radiate heat is also limited, but the volume will<BR>
> still contain a large amount of heat generating equipment.  Given time,<BR>
> one could design rules for radiators which must take up a certain surface<BR>
> area based on the size of the power plant, and watch them become far<BR>
> larger than the ship at >5000 dtons displacement.  Or, just use the<BR>
> explanation to arbitrarily limit sizes to those in book 2.<BR>
> I don't know why I'm encouraging this heresy.  You're not going to take my<BR>
> megaton battleships without a fight (or a protracted naval campaign, as<BR>
> the case may be)!<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 10:35:29 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
On Sat, 22 Jul 2000, Frank G. Pitt wrote:<BR>
> I'd disagree. To me the Imperium and it's institutions is what makes CT CT.<BR>
<BR>
Bah!<BR>
In my opinion, "Traveller" is neither about a specific set of<BR>
rules, nor about a specific campaign world, it's an *attitude*.  <BR>
"Traveller" strives for technological plausibility and reasonably strict<BR>
internal consistancy, and "Traveller" is about the kind of societies that<BR>
real human beings build (with both good and bad points), rather than about<BR>
utopian (Roddenberry) or dystopian (Huxley/Orwell) fantasies.<BR>
<BR>
                                                               - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:48:37 CST6CDT<BR>
From: igor@tebra.net<BR>
Subject: CT Fighting Ships question... (maybe again)<BR>
<BR>
My mail program just wigged out - I apologize if I'm seding this twice...<BR>
<BR>
I need some kind TML soul to type up the material on the Plankwell battleship <BR>
from Fighting Ships (CT supplement 9). I'm working on some SJG material, and I <BR>
don't have my copy handy right now...ack ack ack...<BR>
<BR>
I'd greatly appreciate it. I especially need the color text...<BR>
<BR>
Thanks...<BR>
<BR>
Andy Akins<BR>
igor@tebra.net<BR>
co-author, GURPS Traveller: Modular Cutter<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
________________________________________________________<BR>
True Communications, Your Local Internet Solution.<BR>
"Hometown Service with Worldwide Connectivity"<BR>
http://www.truserve.com        info@truserve.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:19:57 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: CT Fighting Ships question... (maybe again)<BR>
<BR>
Andy Akins wrote:<BR>
> I need some kind TML soul to type up the material on the <BR>
> Plankwell battleship from Fighting Ships (CT supplement 9). I'm<BR>
> working on some SJG material, and I don't have my copy handy<BR>
> right now...ack ack ack...<BR>
> <BR>
> I'd greatly appreciate it. I especially need the color text...<BR>
<BR>
Its on my website in MT stat converted form.  Go to ...<BR>
<BR>
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/trisen/sol/traveller/index.html<BR>
<BR>
... and follow the link for the starship guide.  It includes  the<BR>
Plankwell colour text you seek.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 10:27:58 -0500<BR>
From: "James Pearson" <james@pearson.net><BR>
Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
I too am running a G:T Millieu 0 Campaign.<BR>
<BR>
My players are field Agents for the AAB.<BR>
<BR>
As far as ships go, I created an "extended exploration" scout ship.  <BR>
400dt, lab, streamlined, fuel scoops, Jump 5 and about 2Gs.  It <BR>
gets them out there (it's their problem how they get back).<BR>
<BR>
Currently I've kept them in the Core Subsector, so the time / <BR>
distance issue isn't quite a problem for me as it might be fore you.<BR>
<BR>
On 24 Jul 2000, at 7:15, allensh wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> In my Mileau 0 campaign (which converted to GURPS<BR>
> Traveller sometime ago), the characters are<BR>
> approaching the end of their first tour of duty in the<BR>
> IISS. Rather than neccesarily allowing them to go<BR>
> freelance, or end the campaign, I was thinking of an<BR>
> idea that might get them to re-up. It's somewhere<BR>
> around Year 5 in our game, and I was thinking that it<BR>
> would be fun to set up a long-term exploration mission<BR>
> in the direction of the Great Rift. Here's some<BR>
> questions I have about that for the experts on the<BR>
> TML. (This is being forwarded to my players, btw, and<BR>
> I think they should ALL subscribe to the TML, don't<BR>
> you? <g>)<BR>
> <BR>
> 1. How far could you reasonably expect to explore in a<BR>
> four year hitch? (say, 2 years out, 2 years back?) I'd<BR>
> LIKE them to make it behind the claw as far as, say,<BR>
> Mora, but my sense of astrography is worse than my<BR>
> sense of geography.<BR>
> <BR>
> 2. I've been trying to come up with a long-range ship<BR>
> that would be self-sufficient for up to five years,<BR>
> kind of a space-going Scout Base. Having a little<BR>
> trouble with it; any of you starship architects out<BR>
> there want to give it a go? (of course, it needs to be<BR>
> in the GT modular system.) I can't offer any prizes<BR>
> for the contest except for the knowledge that your<BR>
> creation will be helping to roll back the frontiers of<BR>
> the Imperium :)<BR>
> <BR>
> We only play this campaign about once every two<BR>
> months, so I try to make the adventures as memorable<BR>
> as possible. Just trying to pump some life into the<BR>
> ol' campaign :)<BR>
> <BR>
> Allen <BR>
> <BR>
> __________________________________________________<BR>
> Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
> Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
> http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 17:08:48 +0100<BR>
From: Matt Bond <MBOND@karpad.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: James Pearson [mailto:james@pearson.net]<BR>
> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 4:28 PM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> I too am running a G:T Millieu 0 Campaign.<BR>
> <BR>
> My players are field Agents for the AAB.<BR>
> <BR>
> As far as ships go, I created an "extended exploration" scout ship.  <BR>
> 400dt, lab, streamlined, fuel scoops, Jump 5 and about 2Gs.  It <BR>
> gets them out there (it's their problem how they get back).<BR>
<BR>
Errr... I though J-5 was TTL-14/GTL-11? Isn't that a tad high for an M:0<BR>
campaign?<BR>
<BR>
Matt <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:15:41 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe)<BR>
<BR>
Terry Carlino writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Now as I recall the device only had a few seconds lead time so the trick<BR>
> was to cascade them to get useful times. So does that mean if you hook up<BR>
> the laser in the above experiment to come on at a specific event that it<BR>
> will travel slower so as not to transmit any information that the event<BR>
> occurred? <BR>
<BR>
What the device in question actually does is cause an entire light wave to travel at the speed of the front of the wave (and incidentally, shrinks the wave considerably).  This means that if you measure the speed of the peak of the wave, it's faster than light.  If you measure the speed of the front of the wave, it isn't faster than light.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:15:41 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe)<BR>
<BR>
Terry Carlino writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Now as I recall the device only had a few seconds lead time so the trick<BR>
> was to cascade them to get useful times. So does that mean if you hook up<BR>
> the laser in the above experiment to come on at a specific event that it<BR>
> will travel slower so as not to transmit any information that the event<BR>
> occurred? <BR>
<BR>
What the device in question actually does is cause an entire light wave to travel at the speed of the front of the wave (and incidentally, shrinks the wave considerably).  This means that if you measure the speed of the peak of the wave, it's faster than light.  If you measure the speed of the front of the wave, it isn't faster than light.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:25:54 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Who really cares about a 10kton limit, if a decent sized planet can easily<BR>
> afford twenty of them on every world within half a dozen parsecs ?<BR>
While it possibly can, it quite possibly won't.  If they aren't strong enough to maintain their own navy, they also aren't important enough for strong worlds to spend an awful lot of effort protecting them.<BR>
> <BR>
> The basic problem is all those billion population worlds. If you disallow<BR>
> them, then the Imperium becomes something a lot more on the PC scale.<BR>
> <BR>
> Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
That's similar to a heresy I was considering; if you just change pop-9 to be '1-3 billion' and pop-A to be '4-9 billion' it will reduce the population of the imperium by around 70%.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 09:33:53 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
<BR>
Neal C. Oldham writes:<BR>
> <BR>
> The webpage http://maps.grandsurvey.com doesn't give a contact e-mail, so<BR>
> I thought I should send this to the list.  It seems that on the Milieu 0<BR>
> map on the page, every world in Vland sector has TL 0.<BR>
<BR>
Blame my sources.  I was using the corrected first survey data in the Missouri Archives (http://traveller.mu.org/archive/T4/first.survey.data.txt) and it appears to have generated bad data for Vland (it also had a number of worlds in Massilia which were at the same position as other worlds).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:37:48 -0500<BR>
From: "James Pearson" <james@pearson.net><BR>
Subject: RE: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
Maybe!  But then, the AAB would never confirm that! :)<BR>
<BR>
Plus, Sylea maintained a high tech level during the long Night.<BR>
<BR>
On 24 Jul 2000, at 17:08, Matt Bond wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Errr... I though J-5 was TTL-14/GTL-11? Isn't that a tad high for an<BR>
> M:0 campaign?<BR>
> <BR>
> Matt <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:42:21 +0100<BR>
From: "Jens 'Spacejens' Rydholm" <jenry023@student.liu.se><BR>
Subject: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin wrote:<BR>
> The K'Kree would be appalled!<BR>
> <BR>
> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000719/sc/robot_dc_1.html<BR>
<BR>
This is... weird...<BR>
<BR>
Technology is marching forward... towards your home ;-)<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav: What if such a creation was implemented in a war machine? Let it loose on a planet, leave, watch the fun from a safe distance...<BR>
<BR>
The K'Kree would hate it, so it must be good  :-)<BR>
<BR>
/Jens 'Spacejens' Rydholm<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:45:19 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch wrote,<BR>
><BR>
I'm figuring on contracting Famile Spofulam :)<BR>
<BR>
Seriously, with the enhanced EW rules in FFS2, the cost of military ships<BR>
goes up.<<BR>
<BR>
OK, that would explain that. I don't have FFS2.<BR>
<BR>
>The reasons I picked them is that they are very conservative assumptions,<BR>
and they still crunch out big enough fleets to put a small squadron<BR>
anywhere you might like.<<BR>
<BR>
Oh I accept them as defaults,  I just think they cause glitches when the<BR>
economic reality of keeping your shipyards open is factored in.<BR>
<BR>
>It's also to show that the solution is not to artificially limit the size<BR>
of<BR>
ships.<BR>
<BR>
Who really cares about a 10kton limit, if a decent sized planet can easily<BR>
afford twenty of them on every world within half a dozen parsecs ?<<BR>
<BR>
This is true. But I think you also need to account for a large number of<BR>
smaller hulls. Unless you want 10kton customs cutters. And I think a truly<BR>
significant number of such hulls will burn out your basic support tonnage<BR>
quite quickly.<BR>
Using the Imperial Squadrons numbers for Collace (hopefully accepted being<BR>
based on FFW) it gets 150 SDB squadrons. Times 10 ships, time 400 tons a<BR>
ship is 600,000 tons or just over 2 years full production or 10% of the<BR>
basic maintenance budget. Moving those boats up to 1000 ton Ramrods from MT<BR>
they become a whopping 60% of the total force (using your numbers, which I<BR>
am willing to accept as a reasonable baseline). This is still within the<BR>
5000 ton range of CT (though using HG armor of course) and rather reduces<BR>
what sort of force projection can be achieved with jump ships (granting the<BR>
star port increase or importation of such ships). (It also rather blatantly<BR>
demonstrates why assaulting a Hi Pop world is such a major strategic issue.)<BR>
I think taking this into consideration, the need for those Hi Pop worlds to<BR>
produce even more hulls for such assaults means that it does indeed take an<BR>
Imperium full of such planets to be able to even consider forming a navy<BR>
capable of doing so, no matter what hull size limit we make.<BR>
Or not. Just some random concepts at this point.<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2801<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (rly-yd05.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.5]) by air-yd03.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:52:49 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:52:30 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id MAA55468;<BR>
	Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:50:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:49:38 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id MAA55418<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:49:38 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:49:38 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007241649.MAA55418@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2801<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2802</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/24/00 3:13:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 24 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2802<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Aaaah!  Carnivorous Robots on the loose!<BR>
Re: Tweaking CT; was: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
Re: What'd I Miss?<BR>
that lonesome highway<BR>
Re: that lonesome highway<BR>
RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
Re: Tweaking CT; was: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
Rob Prior email<BR>
New from 4U!<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:59:05 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
James Pearson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Maybe!  But then, the AAB would never confirm that! :)<BR>
> <BR>
> Plus, Sylea maintained a high tech level during the long Night.<BR>
> <BR>
> On 24 Jul 2000, at 17:08, Matt Bond wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Errr... I though J-5 was TTL-14/GTL-11? Isn't that a tad high for an<BR>
> > M:0 campaign?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Matt<BR>
<BR>
Been talking with Leroy recently? ;-)<BR>
<BR>
(For newcomers to the list, a former TMLer named Leroy Guatney insisted<BR>
that he had evidence that the Rule of Man [a.k.a. Second Imperium,<BR>
a.k.a. Ramshackle Empire] had reached TL-15 [GTL-12].  IIRC, he was<BR>
never able to _produce_ said evidence....) <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 13:10:04 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
Michel Vaillancourt wrote,<BR>
>For my TNEC games, I use the HG combat system whole-cloth *except*<BR>
in role-playing situations where I tear out the relative computer mods and<BR>
force the players to worry about software loads.<<BR>
<BR>
Looking over the software loads and doing some contemplation, I realized<BR>
that there is essentially no difference between Computer models 7-9 in terms<BR>
of processing ability. Each of them can run the best programs during each CT<BR>
Basic Ship Combat phase. OTOH, the smallest computers have extreme<BR>
difficulty running more than the basic Target and Launch programs,<BR>
especially the bis models that don't have storage space.<BR>
Perhaps this suggests the computer model modifiers in HG should be altered<BR>
to +2 per difference for the first 3 sizes, +1 for the middle 3 and +0 for<BR>
the largest 3.<BR>
That, or some seriously hefty software is available/required for behemoths.<BR>
(Which is quite likely.)<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:44:40 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
On 07/24/00 at 07:17 PM,  "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
>It's also to show that the solution is not to artifically limit the size<BR>
>of ships.<BR>
<BR>
I'm not a fan of *obvious* artifical limits. However as has been pointed out, there are some possible limits to size that aren't obviously artifical.<BR>
<BR>
>Who really cares about a 10kton limit, if a decent sized planet can<BR>
>easily afford twenty of them on every world within half a dozen parsecs ?<BR>
<BR>
Well, that's another problem. Economics and population sizes opens up a much larger "can of worms."<BR>
<BR>
>The basic problem is all those billion population worlds. If you disallow<BR>
>them, then the Imperium becomes something a lot more on the PC scale.<BR>
<BR>
So, how are you going to disallow the current rates of 9 and A worlds...in a way that is not obviously artifical?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 12:31:07 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Blame my sources.  I was using the corrected first survey data in the <BR>
> Missouri Archives (http://traveller.mu.org/archive/T4/first.survey.data.txt)<BR>
> and it appears to have generated bad data for Vland (it also had a number<BR>
> of worlds in Massilia which were at the same position as other worlds).<BR>
<BR>
Massilia: three worlds in subsector D (Zalucha).  That's not just a bug there,<BR>
it's in the general DGP sector files *and* as printed in _Knightfall_.  :(  <BR>
<BR>
The only saving grace is that the UWPs are the same for those particular<BR>
problems, with the exception of one that's marked Cp in one case but not<BR>
the other.  That, and oddnesses in the _Knightfall_ Massilia can almost <BR>
all be papered over by one Rebellion-era effect or another.  :)<BR>
<BR>
  -- Steve Bonneville<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 13:37:22 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000 eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
> On 07/24/00 at 07:17 PM,  "Katharine Whitchurch"<BR>
> <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said:<BR>
> >The basic problem is all those billion population worlds. If you disallow<BR>
> >them, then the Imperium becomes something a lot more on the PC scale.<BR>
> <BR>
> So, how are you going to disallow the current rates of 9 and A worlds...in<BR>
> a way that is not obviously artifical?<BR>
<BR>
Quite easily.<BR>
<BR>
When rolling up a world's population level, impose negative die modifiers<BR>
for physical inhospitability (particularly for atmospheres which are <BR>
either non-existent, unbreathable, or actively hostile).<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, it should be *possible* for a desolate rock-ball to<BR>
boast tens of billions of inhabitants (just *very* unlikely), so I use<BR>
what I call "modifier dice" instead of a straight die modifier.  Here's<BR>
how it works.  For each "modifier die" imposed, roll one die (surprise!).<BR>
For each roll of three or less, apply a -1 die modifier to the roll<BR>
determining the world's population level.  For each roll of four or more,<BR>
apply no modifier.<BR>
<BR>
For instance, a typical little desolate rock-ball:<BR>
Size=3, Atmosphere=1, Hydrogeographic Percentage=0<BR>
<BR>
I would consult the little table I whipped up (I'll post it, if anyone<BR>
wants it), and decide to apply three modifier dice (2 for the trace<BR>
atmosphere, 1 for the lack of water).  I roll a 1, a 2, and a 5.  Thus,<BR>
the world's population level would be determined by 2d6-4, instead of the<BR>
standard 2d6-2.<BR>
                                                             - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 10:45:40 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Aaaah!  Carnivorous Robots on the loose!<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Wow.<BR>
> A surefire winner of an IgNoble prize.<BR>
> It sounds like a B-movie, from the 50's, but it's true.<BR>
> The K'Kree would be appalled!<BR>
> <BR>
> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000719/sc/robot_dc_1.html<BR>
> <BR>
> Charles C.<BR>
> <BR>
> PS.  Who _funds_ these things anyway?  Weird.<BR>
<BR>
In this case, the Agriculture Ministry, IIRC. <BR>
<BR>
This thing is pretty adept at ridding fields of slugs without the use of<BR>
pesticides and with minimal damage to plants and beneficial organisms.<BR>
<BR>
And, actually, that's a B-Movie from the '80's: "Runaway".<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:11:08 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Tweaking CT; was: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
John Raynor wrote,<BR>
>When rolling up a world's population level, impose negative die modifiers<BR>
for physical inhospitability (particularly for atmospheres which are<BR>
either non-existent, unbreathable, or actively hostile).<<BR>
<BR>
Which occurs in Scouts. And which would dramatically reduce population<BR>
through the galaxy if used. It also makes Industrial worlds impossible<BR>
except on vacuum worlds.<BR>
(DM -5 in inner zone (too hot), -3 in outer zone (too cold), -2 if not Atm<BR>
0,5,6,8 (full vacuum or human breathable).)<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:09:45 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
>>Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
>>pretties, fly...<BR>
>Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
>your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
<BR>
Well, I guess that gives you a guaranteed kill on the first six, at which<BR>
point you start having reload issues...<BR>
<BR>
But what made you think they flew? The sentence my psy-ops team asked me to<BR>
add to the end of the mail? Ah well.... just think how surprised the<BR>
penguins'll be when they tunnel up underneath 'em.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:02:53 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
2. I've been trying to come up with a long-range ship<BR>
that would be self-sufficient for up to five years,<BR>
kind of a space-going Scout Base. Having a little<BR>
trouble with it; any of you starship architects out<BR>
there want to give it a go? (of course, it needs to be<BR>
in the GT modular system.) I can't offer any prizes<BR>
for the contest except for the knowledge that your<BR>
creation will be helping to roll back the frontiers of<BR>
the Imperium :)<BR>
<BR>
Err...does it have to be the GURPS *modular* system? Only I just bought<BR>
GURPS Vehicles last weekend, and it's got some quite neat stuff in it....<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:30:50 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
<BR>
Steven Bonneville writes:<BR>
> Massilia: three worlds in subsector D (Zalucha).  That's not just a bug<BR>
> there, it's in the general DGP sector files *and* as printed in<BR>
> _Knightfall_.  :(  <BR>
Actually, there's 4.<BR>
><BR>
> The only saving grace is that the UWPs are the same for those particular<BR>
> problems, with the exception of one that's marked Cp in one case but not<BR>
> the other.  That, and oddnesses in the _Knightfall_ Massilia can almost <BR>
> all be papered over by one Rebellion-era effect or another.  :)<BR>
<BR>
Hm...only the physical UWPs are identical in these files.  The affected worlds<BR>
(I chose to use the first of the pair in all cases) are:<BR>
Khiian Ark .     0720 A100348-D   LoPop Va         424 Na K9 III M5 D    <BR>
#Kuamirar .      0720 A100362-E   LoPop Va         224 Na F5 V           <BR>
Iishma Ash.      2503 C3225A7-8   Ni Po            114 Na G3 V           <BR>
#Vluund  .       2503 C322888-8   Na Po            214 Na M2 II M8 D     <BR>
Khegshesaup.     2506 C434334-A   LoPop            223 Na G0 V           <BR>
#Vlin .          2506 B434110-A   LoPop            723 Na G4 V M6 D      <BR>
Iinarla.         2508 B100786-C   Na Va            502 Na K1 V M2 D      <BR>
#Khiiir.         2508 B100200-C   LoPop Va         702 Na M7 VI M2 D     <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:30:50 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
<BR>
Steven Bonneville writes:<BR>
> Massilia: three worlds in subsector D (Zalucha).  That's not just a bug<BR>
> there, it's in the general DGP sector files *and* as printed in<BR>
> _Knightfall_.  :(  <BR>
Actually, there's 4.<BR>
><BR>
> The only saving grace is that the UWPs are the same for those particular<BR>
> problems, with the exception of one that's marked Cp in one case but not<BR>
> the other.  That, and oddnesses in the _Knightfall_ Massilia can almost <BR>
> all be papered over by one Rebellion-era effect or another.  :)<BR>
<BR>
Hm...only the physical UWPs are identical in these files.  The affected worlds<BR>
(I chose to use the first of the pair in all cases) are:<BR>
Khiian Ark .     0720 A100348-D   LoPop Va         424 Na K9 III M5 D    <BR>
#Kuamirar .      0720 A100362-E   LoPop Va         224 Na F5 V           <BR>
Iishma Ash.      2503 C3225A7-8   Ni Po            114 Na G3 V           <BR>
#Vluund  .       2503 C322888-8   Na Po            214 Na M2 II M8 D     <BR>
Khegshesaup.     2506 C434334-A   LoPop            223 Na G0 V           <BR>
#Vlin .          2506 B434110-A   LoPop            723 Na G4 V M6 D      <BR>
Iinarla.         2508 B100786-C   Na Va            502 Na K1 V M2 D      <BR>
#Khiiir.         2508 B100200-C   LoPop Va         702 Na M7 VI M2 D     <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:36:41 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
<BR>
>I expect that there will be optimists willing to live <BR>
>around a starthat might not go supernova for several<BR>
>thousand years (conventiently overlooking the fact that it<BR>
>could do it *tomorrow* :-). <BR>
<BR>
"Wow you *live* in the NGC-1701 system?  Aren't you afraid<BR>
the star will go nova on you?"<BR>
<BR>
response #1:  "Well, no, not really.  You know,<BR>
statistically more people die in air/raft accidents under<BR>
metropolitan traffic control than in novas."<BR>
<BR>
response #2:  "Well, my great ancestors lived on Terra, in<BR>
Northern California, and they didn't think anything of<BR>
earthquakes."<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:45:46 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: What'd I Miss?<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
><BR>
>Leroy and Clif are taking over the writing of T5, which<BR>
>has been sold to WotC.<BR>
<BR>
This has been the high point of the morning here at my<BR>
office.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:49:06 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: that lonesome highway<BR>
<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
>>Between Austin and Michigan you say?  hmmm.. must some<BR>
>>awful empty roads along that route... :)<BR>
>    Knowing the Midwest, you have one of two choices.  1. <BR>
>It is lost.  2. It has been hijacked by a group of<BR>
>rednecks.<BR>
>    Btw, I was raised in Decatur, IL, so I know where of I<BR>
>speak.<BR>
<BR>
3.  Black helicopters intercepted it and are now rewriting<BR>
all of the material to conform to the FEMA shadow<BR>
government's version of the truth.<BR>
<BR>
(I lived in Boise, Idaho for many years, and in Salt Lake<BR>
City, Utah for three, so I feel some confidence in offering<BR>
this possibility.)<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 13:58:03 -0500<BR>
From: Stormhound <stormhnd@fidnet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: that lonesome highway<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
><BR>
> >>Between Austin and Michigan you say?  hmmm.. must some<BR>
> >>awful empty roads along that route... :)<BR>
> >    Knowing the Midwest, you have one of two choices.  1.<BR>
> >It is lost.  2. It has been hijacked by a group of<BR>
> >rednecks.<BR>
> >    Btw, I was raised in Decatur, IL, so I know where of I<BR>
> >speak.<BR>
><BR>
> 3.  Black helicopters intercepted it and are now rewriting<BR>
> all of the material to conform to the FEMA shadow<BR>
> government's version of the truth.<BR>
><BR>
> (I lived in Boise, Idaho for many years, and in Salt Lake<BR>
> City, Utah for three, so I feel some confidence in offering<BR>
> this possibility.)<BR>
<BR>
    That would explain a lot.  I live on a direct line between Austin and<BR>
Michigan, and I wondered what all those helicopters were doing a few nights<BR>
back...<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Stormhound<BR>
DNRC Ombudsman for Induhvidual Affairs, Holder of Past Knowledge<BR>
Come visit my web page at http://www.fidnet.com/~stormhnd<BR>
Or my new Amateur Radio web page at http://www.qsl.net/kc0ekv<BR>
Or my JN6 course design page at http://www.fidnet.com/~stormhnd/golfpage.htm<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 11:59:30 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
>From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
<BR>
>Well, here's a VERY EARLY heads-up.  Found out a couple of<BR>
>days ago that my Mom's seriously talking about buying a<BR>
>$5k computer controlled embroidery machine around the<BR>
>October/November time frame.  Possibilities are running<BR>
>rampant through my brain as we speak.......More info to<BR>
>come.<BR>
<BR>
just in time for holiday shopping for all those Travellers<BR>
on Santa's list!<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:46:04 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Tweaking CT; was: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Samuel D. Weiss wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> John Raynor wrote,<BR>
> >When rolling up a world's population level, impose negative die modifiers<BR>
> for physical inhospitability (particularly for atmospheres which are<BR>
> either non-existent, unbreathable, or actively hostile).<<BR>
> <BR>
> Which occurs in Scouts. And which would dramatically reduce population<BR>
> through the galaxy if used. It also makes Industrial worlds impossible<BR>
> except on vacuum worlds.<BR>
> (DM -5 in inner zone (too hot), -3 in outer zone (too cold), -2 if not<BR>
> Atm 0,5,6,8 (full vacuum or human breathable).)<BR>
<BR>
Please note, however, that the system I am advocating (based on "modifier<BR>
dice," as described in my previous message, rather than ordinary die<BR>
modifiers) doesn't make anything *impossible*, just less *likely*.<BR>
<BR>
And, frankly, the canonical definition of "Industrial" planets is<BR>
*broken*, or at least a bit questionable.  If there's plenty of energy,<BR>
and space is easily accessible, why keep dirty, pollution-producing,<BR>
factories on the surfaces of planets where they can taint your atmosphere?<BR>
I suspect that "industry on the ground" is something that most<BR>
technological civilizations outgrow *very* quickly, probably by Tech Level<BR>
9 or so (when contragravity becomes available).<BR>
<BR>
And what's so bad about reducing the galactic population a bit?<BR>
<BR>
                                                              - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:09:12<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
At 11:59 AM 7/24/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>just in time for holiday shopping for all those Travellers<BR>
>on Santa's list!<BR>
<BR>
Picture next year's Baycon party...<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:10:46<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
<BR>
At 11:36 AM 7/24/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>response #2:  "Well, my great ancestors lived on Terra, in<BR>
>Northern California, and they didn't think anything of<BR>
>earthquakes."<BR>
<BR>
Exactly  :)  I get more tourist from places that get hit by tornados,<BR>
hurricanes and killer blizzards telling me that they could never take "all<BR>
the earthquakes."  What, one major event every thirty years?<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:17:44<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
At 07:09 PM 7/24/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>>>Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
>>>pretties, fly...<BR>
>>Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
>>your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
><BR>
>Well, I guess that gives you a guaranteed kill on the first six, at which<BR>
>point you start having reload issues...<BR>
><BR>
>But what made you think they flew? The sentence my psy-ops team asked me to<BR>
>add to the end of the mail? Ah well.... just think how surprised the<BR>
>penguins'll be when they tunnel up underneath 'em.<BR>
<BR>
<An Imperial Marine Colonel in dress uniform approaches><BR>
<BR>
"Right.  Enough of that, this thread has gotten too silly.  Started off<BR>
with nice little question about author's and artist copies of books, and<BR>
now we're up to our knickers in heavily armed penguins and tunneling monkeys!<BR>
<BR>
"This is the Traveller Mailing List, so I want a good clean Traveller<BR>
topic.  So on command, you will commence the large scale economy discussion.<BR>
<BR>
"List!  Diisss.. (Wait for it!)  ..cuss!"<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas "Penguin Boy" Berry  gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
  http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
"But that's not the point!" raged Ford. "The point is that I am now a<BR>
perfectly safe penguin, and my colleague here is rapidly running out of<BR>
limbs!"  - The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:30:23<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Rob Prior email<BR>
<BR>
I've lost Rob's email address, and need to get in contact with him<BR>
regarding GF.<BR>
<BR>
TIA.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 14:26:36 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: New from 4U!<BR>
<BR>
Tired of having your outdoor activities disrupted by flying pests?<BR>
Thanks to Umbral Universal Unique Utilities (and Pinkerdoo), that's a<BR>
thing of the past! Party in comfort with no more worries.<BR>
<BR>
We are proud to announce the BugZapper 1.0 and Universal Power Brick<BR>
<BR>
The Bug Zapper is a small box, weighing 5 and 1/2 pounds. Active air search<BR>
sensors  and a laser allow it to engage and destroy small creatures out to 1<BR>
mile. The powerful laser can penetrate 1/10 an inch of hard steel<BR>
(milizapper 1/2 inch of hard steel), and can fire once per second. A<BR>
computer with a target database and near-human level decision making<BR>
capability insure that the bug zapper 1.0 will only engage legal targets.<BR>
The laser weapon mounted can be used to rid your family of unwanted pests of<BR>
up to human size. If your pests are armored, please inquire about our<BR>
MiliZapper design, incorporating an XRay laser for increased armor<BR>
penetration capabilities and an greater stopping power. Several bugzappers<BR>
can be data linked via RF networking to pool tactical data on the pest's<BR>
movements. The RF link has a 500 mile range. A program (BugKiller) is<BR>
available for most major OS's that will allow a central computer to<BR>
coordinate operations with up to 200 Bug Zappers. Bug zappers have a low 120<BR>
Kw draw, and can be powered off of most house hold power supplies.<BR>
<BR>
For the Family on the Go - the Universal Power Brick is available also. At a<BR>
low cost and only 40 pounds, this is a Nuclear power plant on the move! When<BR>
you hook the bug zapper to the power brick via customer provided cables, the<BR>
power brick will allow operations in the rough for up to 2 and 1/2 years.<BR>
<BR>
Production costs:<BR>
Bug Zapper: $28,468.11<BR>
Power Brick: $20,315.00<BR>
<BR>
Pinkerdoo - Odd designs for Odd Jobs<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.scn.rain.com [mailto:shadow@krypton.scn.rain.com]On<BR>
Behalf Of Leonard Erickson<BR>
Sent: Saturday, June 10, 2000 12:47 AM<BR>
To: Tsykoduk<BR>
Subject: Re: design request<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> As pinkerdoo is infact a design firm, we would be more then happy to<BR>
> undertake a shot at the competition.<BR>
<BR>
I'm looking for a system rather similar to the point defense systems<BR>
that have been discussed in several threads recently. Except rather<BR>
smaller.<BR>
<BR>
The unit will use a laser, PAW or even meson gun (or multiples thereof)<BR>
to eliminate objects flying into an area the unit(s) is protecting.<BR>
Said objects are biological organisms, specificly *bugs*.<BR>
<BR>
The unit must not harm any humans in the area. And the base unit should<BR>
not harm birds, as this would adversely affect the home market. The<BR>
defense area should be at least a hectare, but be programmable as to<BR>
size and shape (mustn't zap anything in the neighbor's yard).<BR>
<BR>
Bonuses would be the ability to identify non-harmful bugs (ladybugs,<BR>
for example) and not attack them. Likewise, a selective overide for<BR>
pollinating insects (bees, etc) would be a plus.<BR>
<BR>
The unit should operate off of household power, but also be capable of<BR>
operating for 10 days off of a portable power unit for use in camping.<BR>
<BR>
(yep! A high-tech bug-zapper)<BR>
<BR>
Please submit a design, wwith costs. Final decision between submissions<BR>
will be made based on cost, size, and features.<BR>
<BR>
All designs will be posted to the list *after* selection. I wouldn't<BR>
want to waste all this creativity :-)<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01BFD39F.516445D0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	name="bug zapper power brick.txt"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<BR>
	filename="bug zapper power brick.txt"<BR>
<BR>
Copyright (c) June, 2000<BR>
by Pinkerdoo Design Group <Pinkerdoo@home.com><BR>
http://members.home.net/pinkerdoo<BR>
Subassemblies and Body Features:=20<BR>
<BR>
Occupancy: long.=20<BR>
<BR>
Power Systems:  TL12 125.00 kW nuclear power unit (Bo, HP 3, 34.00 lbs., =<BR>
0.34 cf., $20,000.00, lasts 10.00 yrs).=20<BR>
<BR>
Space:  Access space (Body 0.68 cf).<BR>
<BR>
Surface Area: Body 6.00. total 6.00.<BR>
<BR>
Structure:  Body - medium frame with standard materials.=20<BR>
<BR>
Hit Points: Body 9.<BR>
<BR>
Body armor: PD 3, DR 5 advanced metal (0.75 lbs., $15.00).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Statistics: Empty weight 40.75 lbs., Loaded weight 40.75 lbs., Volume =<BR>
1.02 cf. Size modifier -1. Cost $20,315.00. HT 12<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Created with GURPS Vehicle Designer 1.2.7<BR>
http://www.makosoft.com/gvd<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01BFD39F.516445D0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	name="bug zapper.txt"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<BR>
	filename="bug zapper.txt"<BR>
<BR>
Copyright (c) June, 2000<BR>
by Pinkerdoo Design Group <Pinkerdoo@home.com><BR>
http://members.home.net/pinkerdoo<BR>
<BR>
Subassemblies and Body Features:  open mount  (on top of Body).=20<BR>
<BR>
Weaponry:  TL12 ruggedized laser (Open MountF, HP 2, 1.25 lbs., 0.02 =<BR>
cf., $218.63, 120.00 kW).=20<BR>
<BR>
Weapon Accessories: universal mount for laser (Open Mount, HP 1, 0.62 =<BR>
lbs., 0.01 cf., $1.25).=20<BR>
<BR>
Communications:  TL12 ruggedized radio communicator with short range =<BR>
(Bo, HP 1, 0.09 lbs., 0.00 cf., $18.75, 0.00 kW, 500.00 mile range).=20<BR>
<BR>
Sensors:  TL12 AESA, 1.00 mile range, air search (BoF, HP 1, 0.38 lbs., =<BR>
0.01 cf., $312.50, 0.25 kW, Scan 11).  TL12 thermograph, 1.00 mile range =<BR>
(Open MountF, HP 1, 0.50 lbs., 0.01 cf., $1,000.00, 0.01 kW, Scan 11).=20<BR>
<BR>
Computers:  TL12 ruggedized small computer, genius, compact, robot brain =<BR>
(Bo, HP 1, 0.38 lbs., 0.01 cf., $15,000.00, 0.01 kW, Complexity 7 IQ 10 =<BR>
DX 12).=20<BR>
<BR>
Software:  TL12 datalink software ($100.00, complexity 1).  TL12 gunner =<BR>
software ($11,250.00, complexity 4, skill bonus +2).  TL12 Target =<BR>
Database ($500.00, complexity 2, skill bonus +1).=20<BR>
<BR>
Occupancy: long.=20<BR>
<BR>
Power Systems:  TL12 1,210.00 kWs rechargeable power cell (Bo, HP 1, =<BR>
0.04 lbs., 0.00 cf., $4.48).=20<BR>
<BR>
Surface Area: Body 1.00. open mount 1.00. total 2.00.<BR>
<BR>
Structure:  Body - medium frame with standard materials.=20<BR>
<BR>
Hit Points: Body 2, open mount 2.<BR>
<BR>
Body armor: PD 3, DR 5 advanced metal (0.13 lbs., $2.50).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Statistics: Empty weight 5.39 lbs., Loaded weight 5.39 lbs., Volume 0.10 =<BR>
cf. Size modifier -3. Cost $28,468.11. HT 12<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Name  Malf Type Damage SS Acc 1/2D Max  RoF Weight Cost    Power=20<BR>
laser Ver. Imp. 2d-1   11 15  500  1000 1   1.245  218.625 120  =20<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Created with GURPS Vehicle Designer 1.2.7<BR>
http://www.makosoft.com/gvd<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0012_01BFD39F.516445D0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	name="milibugzapper.txt"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<BR>
	filename="milibugzapper.txt"<BR>
<BR>
Copyright (c) June, 2000<BR>
by Pinkerdoo Design Group <Pinkerdoo@home.com><BR>
http://members.home.net/pinkerdoo<BR>
<BR>
Subassemblies and Body Features:  open mount  (on top of Body).=20<BR>
<BR>
Weaponry:  TL12 ruggedized x-ray laser, compact (Open MountF, HP 2, 0.77 =<BR>
lbs., 0.02 cf., $1,100.90, 587.00 kW).=20<BR>
<BR>
Weapon Accessories: universal mount for x-ray laser (Open Mount, HP 1, =<BR>
0.38 lbs., 0.01 cf., $0.76).=20<BR>
<BR>
Communications:  TL12 ruggedized radio communicator with short range =<BR>
(Bo, HP 1, 0.09 lbs., 0.00 cf., $18.75, 0.00 kW, 500.00 mile range).=20<BR>
<BR>
Sensors:  TL12 AESA, 1.00 mile range, air search (BoF, HP 1, 0.38 lbs., =<BR>
0.01 cf., $312.50, 0.25 kW, Scan 11).  TL12 thermograph, 1.00 mile range =<BR>
(Open MountF, HP 1, 0.50 lbs., 0.01 cf., $1,000.00, 0.01 kW, Scan 11).=20<BR>
<BR>
Computers:  TL12 ruggedized small computer, genius, compact, robot brain =<BR>
(Bo, HP 1, 0.38 lbs., 0.01 cf., $15,000.00, 0.01 kW, Complexity 7 IQ 10 =<BR>
DX 12).=20<BR>
<BR>
Software:  TL12 datalink software ($100.00, complexity 1).  TL12 gunner =<BR>
software ($11,250.00, complexity 4, skill bonus +2).  TL12 Target =<BR>
Database ($500.00, complexity 2, skill bonus +1).=20<BR>
<BR>
Occupancy: long.=20<BR>
<BR>
Power Systems:  TL12 1,210.00 kWs rechargeable power cell (Bo, HP 1, =<BR>
0.04 lbs., 0.00 cf., $4.48).=20<BR>
<BR>
Surface Area: Body 1.00. open mount 1.00. total 2.00.<BR>
<BR>
Structure:  Body - medium frame with standard materials.=20<BR>
<BR>
Hit Points: Body 2, open mount 2.<BR>
<BR>
Body armor: PD 3, DR 5 advanced metal (0.13 lbs., $2.50).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Statistics: Empty weight 4.66 lbs., Loaded weight 4.66 lbs., Volume 0.09 =<BR>
cf. Size modifier -4. Cost $29,349.88. HT 12<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Name        Malf Type Damage SS Acc 1/2D Max RoF Weight Cost     Power=20<BR>
x-ray laser Ver. Imp. 5d(2)  11 14  330  660 1   0.765  1100.895 587  =20<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Created with GURPS Vehicle Designer 1.2.7<BR>
http://www.makosoft.com/gvd<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2802<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (rly-yc04.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.36]) by air-yc05.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:13:27 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:12:58 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA68191;<BR>
	Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:11:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:11:30 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA68151<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:11:30 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:11:30 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007242211.SAA68151@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2802<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2803</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/24/00 5:36:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 24 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2803<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Rob Prior email<BR>
Re: Big Ships<BR>
re: New from 4U!<BR>
Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Re: Aaaah!  Carnivorous Robots on the loose!<BR>
Sector Maps<BR>
Re: Sector Maps<BR>
unsubscribe<BR>
TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: New from 4U!<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:50:37 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Rob Prior email<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 2:30 PM<BR>
Subject: Rob Prior email<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> I've lost Rob's email address, and need to get in contact with him<BR>
> regarding GF.<BR>
> <BR>
> TIA.<BR>
<BR>
Doug,<BR>
<BR>
Try the following, which is the From address on his last post to the list:<BR>
<BR>
robert_prior@sympatico.ca <BR>
<BR>
All the best,<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 07:50:19 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ships<BR>
<BR>
> From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
> Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
><BR>
> On 07/24/00 at 07:17 PM,  "Katharine Whitchurch"<BR>
<katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said:<BR>
><BR>
> >It's also to show that the solution is not to artifically limit the size<BR>
> >of ships.<BR>
><BR>
> I'm not a fan of *obvious* artifical limits. However as has been pointed<BR>
out, there are some possible limits to size that aren't obviously artifical.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
The problem I see is that for the CT ships to be relevant, we need to push<BR>
the limit down ... way down.<BR>
<BR>
> >Who really cares about a 10kton limit, if a decent sized planet can<BR>
> >easily afford twenty of them on every world within half a dozen parsecs ?<BR>
><BR>
> Well, that's another problem. Economics and population sizes opens up a<BR>
much larger "can of worms."<BR>
<BR>
If you solve that one, the other one goes away, because no-one can afford<BR>
the really big ships.<BR>
<BR>
> >The basic problem is all those billion population worlds. If you disallow<BR>
> >them, then the Imperium becomes something a lot more on the PC scale.<BR>
><BR>
> So, how are you going to disallow the current rates of 9 and A worlds...in<BR>
a way that is not obviously artifical?<BR>
<BR>
I think that the late 3I is just a case of 'Big Everything'. I'd say that<BR>
world sizes and economies should be a lot smaller in an Interstellar Wars,<BR>
M:200 or Long Night/Pocket Empires campaign.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 15:44:19 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re: New from 4U!<BR>
<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>Tired of having your outdoor activities disrupted by<BR>
>flying pests?<BR>
>Thanks to Umbral Universal Unique Utilities (and<BR>
>Pinkerdoo), that's a thing of the past! Party in comfort<BR>
>with no more worries.<BR>
<BR>
I want one! I want one!<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
"Another one! That makes fifteen! Dang, what a night!"<BR>
<BR>
P.S.  I'm going to forward your design to my brother, an<BR>
engineer who will enjoy it.<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 08:05:05 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:02:53 -0700<BR>
> From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
> Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
><BR>
> 2. I've been trying to come up with a long-range ship<BR>
> that would be self-sufficient for up to five years,<BR>
> kind of a space-going Scout Base. Having a little<BR>
> trouble with it; any of you starship architects out<BR>
> there want to give it a go? (of course, it needs to be<BR>
> in the GT modular system.) I can't offer any prizes<BR>
> for the contest except for the knowledge that your<BR>
> creation will be helping to roll back the frontiers of<BR>
> the Imperium :)<BR>
<BR>
Just put in two or maybe three jump-2 drives, plus a spare maneuver drive,<BR>
plus a spare fuel purifier.<BR>
<BR>
When you are past your Captain's courage limit, switch to one of the<BR>
backups.<BR>
<BR>
Assuming 1 kilo of food per person per day, a dton of 'fridge space' per<BR>
crew should keep them going till they find a world with a biosphere, at<BR>
which point that an figure out whats edible, and refill the fridge (and I<BR>
know about food tanks and that stuff ... one of the small but significant<BR>
differences between FFS2 anf G:T is that 'food machines' are small and cheap<BR>
in G:T, while type V and up life support is a big investment in FFS2).<BR>
<BR>
Personally, if I won the contract I'd modify a standard Empress Marava. 12<BR>
jump modules (48t, MCr 37.2), 15 maneuver modules (51t, MCr 24), a fuel<BR>
purifier (1.1t, MCr 0.85), 4 labs (40t, MCr 4) and a sickbay (0.75t, MCr<BR>
0.16) will reduce cargo capacity by 31 dtons down to 11 dtons (even given<BR>
the stupid, brain-damaged, economics-breaking, really really dumbshit<BR>
decision to charge ships 20% of their volume for being streamlined. PC<BR>
starships have enough of a problem being economically viable, without making<BR>
anything that goes into an atmosphere uneconomic). That will allow the crew<BR>
of 10 a dton of food apiece, and the ship would cost about MCr 103.7.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:03:28 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
<BR>
> 0.16) will reduce cargo capacity by 31 dtons down to 11 dtons (even given<BR>
> the stupid, brain-damaged, economics-breaking, really really dumbshit<BR>
> decision to charge ships 20% of their volume for being streamlined. PC<BR>
> starships have enough of a problem being economically viable, without<BR>
> making anything that goes into an atmosphere uneconomic).<BR>
<BR>
Gee, feeling bitter or something?  Personally, I agree that streamlining should have been done differently, but on the other hand GT doesn't have things like minimum bridge volume 20 tons, or multi-ton computers.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:06:40 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Aaaah!  Carnivorous Robots on the loose!<BR>
<BR>
Any thoughts on the conversion efficiency.  How many calories of intake to<BR>
power a carnivorous warbot? Will fatty targets be preferred?<BR>
<BR>
Of course, this brings up the thought of a whole series of meat powered<BR>
devices, robotic or not.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Charles Collin" <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
To: "Traveller Mailing List" <traveller@mpgn.com><BR>
Sent: Sunday, July 23, 2000 3:00 PM<BR>
Subject: Aaaah! Carnivorous Robots on the loose!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Wow.<BR>
> A surefire winner of an IgNoble prize.<BR>
> It sounds like a B-movie, from the 50's, but it's true.<BR>
> The K'Kree would be appalled!<BR>
><BR>
> http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20000719/sc/robot_dc_1.html<BR>
><BR>
> Charles C.<BR>
><BR>
> PS.  Who _funds_ these things anyway?  Weird.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:13:59 -0400<BR>
From: Joseph J Alberti Jr <albertijjr@juno.com><BR>
Subject: Sector Maps<BR>
<BR>
I am looking to create a sector map of Corridor Sector using Corridor<BR>
Sector data.  Does a program exist that takes sector data and creates a<BR>
sector map which cab be printed out?  I have seen sub-sector map<BR>
creators, but have not found one that makes sector maps.<BR>
<BR>
I would prefer it to be about the same scale as the Spinward Marches map<BR>
on the inside cover of the MegaTraveller Players Manual and the sector<BR>
map of Massilia in Knightfall, but any other scale would be ok.<BR>
<BR>
Joe Alberti<BR>
"Long Live Emperor Dulinor!"<BR>
________________________________________________________________<BR>
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!<BR>
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!<BR>
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:<BR>
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:29:39 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Sector Maps<BR>
<BR>
Joseph J Alberti Jr writes:<BR>
> I am looking to create a sector map of Corridor Sector using Corridor<BR>
> Sector data.  Does a program exist that takes sector data and creates a<BR>
> sector map which cab be printed out?  I have seen sub-sector map<BR>
> creators, but have not found one that makes sector maps.<BR>
<BR>
Well, there's my map program, though it produces Postscript output (which you may or may not be able to use) and my pregen maps (which are converted to .pdf) have been (in a highly unofficial manner) unshattered.  Corridor would be http://maps.grandsurvey.com/sec//ee.corridor.pdf .  If you have Adobe Acrobat you could probably fix them by hand, however (or, I suppose I could produce shattered imperium maps).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:27:51 -0400<BR>
From: "Daniel Phelps" <phelpsd@gate.net><BR>
Subject: unsubscribe<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:46:45 -0700<BR>
From: "J. Paul Sanders" <timmon@primenet.com><BR>
Subject: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
Posted this about three years ago...thought the newer members of the list<BR>
might find it useful.<BR>
******<BR>
<BR>
              The following supplies are available at the local port:<BR>
<BR>
         Item for Sale       Tech Level Weight    Mass/Volume  Credits<BR>
<BR>
         Airlock, Portable       TL9    6.0 kg    2000.0 ltr      4000<BR>
         Air Tanks               TL9    2.5 kg     5.0 ltr        2000<BR>
         Air Tanks, Underwater   TL9    2.5 kg     5.0 ltr        3200<BR>
         Atmosphere Tester       TL9    1.0 kg     1.5 ltr         600<BR>
         Attache Case / Lock     TL9    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         400<BR>
         Axe, Ice                TL3    1.5 kg     3.0 ltr         100<BR>
         Backpack                TL3    3.0 kg     40.0 ltr        180<BR>
         Rescue Ball             TL7    5.0 kg     1.0 ltr         600<BR>
         Base, Advance           TL8-9  6000.0 kg  72.0 klt     200000<BR>
         Battle Computer         TL9    15.0 kg    28.0 ltr      40000<BR>
         Beacon, Emergency       TL9    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr        3000<BR>
         Binoculars              TL3    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         300<BR>
         Binoculars, Electric    TL9    1.5 kg     2.0 ltr        3000<BR>
         Boots, Climbing         TL3    1.5 kg     3.0 ltr         200<BR>
         Bullhorn                TL6    0.5 kg     2.5 ltr         500<BR>
         Cabin, Prefabricated    TL6    4000.0 kg  72.0 kltr     40000<BR>
         Cable, 50 meter coil    TL9    3.0 kg     1.0 ltr         400<BR>
         Cable, Electric 50 m    TL9    4.0 kg     1.0 ltr         100<BR>
         Calculator, Hand        TL7    0.1 kg     0.25 ltr         40<BR>
         Calculator, Hand Solar  TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr          50<BR>
         Canopener               TL6    -          -                10<BR>
         Carpentry Tool Set      TL3    25.0 kg    30.0 ltr       1200<BR>
         Carpentry Tool, Power   TL9    25.0 kg    30.0 ltr       1200<BR>
         Charges, Breaching      TL9    2.0 kg     20.0 ltr        400<BR>
         Clothing, Cold Weather  TL9    2.0 kg     9.0 ltr        2500<BR>
         Clothing, Desert        TL3    -          -               400<BR>
         Communication Reg.500km TL9    1.2 kg     2.4 ltr        2000<BR>
         Communicator 500km      TL9    1.5 lg     3.0 ltr       20000<BR>
         Compass, Magnetic       TL3    -          -                40<BR>
         Counter, Radiation      TL6    1.0 kg     1.5 ltr        1000<BR>
         Crampons                TL4    -          -                80<BR>
         Desert Survival Kit     TL6    1.0 kg     4.0 ltr        1800<BR>
         Detector, Metal         TL6    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr        1200<BR>
         Disguise Kit            TL7    5.0 kg     8.0 ltr        4000<BR>
         Dye, Water              TL9    0.1 kg     0.1 ltr         200<BR>
         Echo Sounder (Sonar)    TL9    0.4 kg     0.6 ltr         800<BR>
         Electronic Tool Kit     TL9    4.0 kg     12.0 ltr       8200<BR>
         Electronic Tool Kit     TL7    5.0 kg     10.0 ltr       8000<BR>
         Filter/Respirator Comb  TL5    0.5 kg     1.0 ltr         600<BR>
         Flare, Smoke            TL6    0.25 kg    0.5 ltr          50<BR>
         Flare, Gun              TL5    1.0 kg     1.5 ltr         300<BR>
<BR>
         Flare, Signal           TL5    0.25 kg    0.1 ltr          40<BR>
         Flare, Illum.           TL5    0.25 kg    0.1 ltr         100<BR>
         Guage, Depth            TL9    -          -              1000<BR>
         Guage, Tank Pressure    TL6    -          -               100<BR>
         Gill, Artificial        TL9    4.0 kg     5.0 ltr       16000<BR>
         Goggles                 TL5    -          -                60<BR>
         Goggles (IR/LI)         TL9    0.2 kg     0.3 ltr        5000<BR>
         Goggles (IR)            TL6    0.25 kg    0.5 ltr        2000<BR>
         Goggles (LI)            TL7    -          0.5 ltr        1600<BR>
         Grapnel (no rope)       TL2    2.0 kg     4.0 ltr          60<BR>
         Grapnel Gun             TL7    10.0 kg    6.0 ltr         400<BR>
         Hammer, Rock            TL2    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr          40<BR>
         Heatsuit                TL8    -          -              1200<BR>
         Heatsuit Battery, Disp. TL8    0.5kg      -               160<BR>
         Helmut, Transparent     TL8    0.75 kg    6.0 ltr         120<BR>
         Hoist, Climbing         TL8    1.5 kg     0.5 ltr         500<BR>
         Hoist, (Type ??)        TL6    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         200<BR>
         Hoist, Mechanical       TL1    12.0 kg    24.0 ltr        250<BR>
         Hoist, Powered          TL9    20.0 kg    40.0 ltr        450<BR>
         Lamp, Gas or Oil        TL2    0.5 kg     1.0 ltr          40<BR>
         Lamp Fuel Refill        TL2-6  0.2 kg     0.6 ltr          10<BR>
         Lantern, Cold Light     TL6    0.25 kg    0.5 lt           80<BR>
         Locater, Inertial       TL9    1.5 kg     0.5 ltr        5000<BR>
         Lockpick Set            TL5-9  0.25 kg    0.5 ltr      40-400<BR>
         Lock, Keypad            TL7    0.05 kg    0.05 ltr        160<BR>
         Lock, Combination       TL5    0.25 kg    0.05 ltr        120<BR>
         Lock, Magnetic or<BR>
              Fingerprint        TL8    0.25 kg    0.05 ltr        200<BR>
         Lock, Voiceprint        TL8    0.25 kg    0.05 ltr        300<BR>
         Lock, Retinal Scan      TL9    0.25 kg    0.05 ltr        300<BR>
         Lock, Metabolic Scan    TL9    0.25 kg    0.05 ltr        800<BR>
         Lock, Tumbler           TL4-9  0.25 kg    0.1 ltr         100<BR>
         Machete                 TL4    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         500<BR>
         Map, Electronic         TL9    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr       10000<BR>
         Mask, Face, Underwater  TL9    0.5 kg     0.7 ltr         300<BR>
         Mask, Filter            TL3    6.5 kg     1.0 ltr          40<BR>
         Mask, Protective        TL6    0.5 kg     1.0 ltr         100<BR>
         Mechanical Tool Kit     TL5    20.0 kg    30.0 ltr       4000<BR>
         Medical Kit             TL9    10.0 kg    20.0 ltr       4000<BR>
         Metalwork Kit           TL4    50.0 kg    50.0 ltr       6000<BR>
         Metalwork Kit, Power    TL9    50.0 kg    50.0 ltr       6000<BR>
         Mirror, Return          TL9    20.0 kg    15.0 ltr       2000<BR>
         Mirror, Signal          TL2    0.25 kg    0.2 ltr          40<BR>
         Mountaineers Kit        TL4    2.0 kg     4.o ltr         400<BR>
         Navigator, Inertal      TL8    0.15 kg    0.2 ltr        6000<BR>
         Oxygen Rebreather       TL8    4.0 kg     8.0 ltr        8000<BR>
         Oxygen Breather<BR>
              Recharge           TL8    3.0 kg     6.0 ltr         400<BR>
         Parachute               TL4    15.0 kg    20.0 ltr       1000<BR>
         Parawing                TL7    5.0 kg     5.0 ltr        1600<BR>
         Pitons, Steel           TL7    0.2 kg     0.1 ltr          25<BR>
         Pitons, Superglue       TL8    0.2 kg     0.1 ltr          25<BR>
         Piton Glue Solvent      TL8    0.5 kg     0.5 ltr          80<BR>
         Respirator              TL5    0.5 kg     1.0 ltr         400<BR>
         Rope, 10 meter          TL5    3.0 kg     6.0 ltr          80<BR>
         Navigational Satelite   TL9    100.0 kg   300.0 ltr    140000<BR>
         Shoes, Rock             TL4    0.5 kg     -                40<BR>
         Snorkel                 TL5    0.1 kg     0.5 ltr          20<BR>
         Snowshoes               TL1    1.0 kg     4.0 ltr         240<BR>
         Suit Air Conditioner    TL8    3.0 kg     6.0 ltr         800<BR>
         Suit, Desert Survival   TL9    5.0 kg     20.0 ltr      28000<BR>
         Suit, Dry               TL7    3.0 kg     3.0 ltr        1200<BR>
         Suit, Heated Dry        TL8    -          3.0 ltr        2600<BR>
         Suit Heater             TL8    3.0 kg     6.0 ltr        1000<BR>
         Suit, Protective        TL6    7.0 kg     8.0 ltr        4000<BR>
         Suit, Heavy Protective  TL7    7.0 kg     10.0 ltr       5600<BR>
         Suit, Wet, Advanced     TL9    -          -               400<BR>
         Survival Bubble         TL9    3.0 kg     3.0 kltr       2400<BR>
         Swim Fins               TL3    0.5 kg     1.0 ltr          60<BR>
         Swim Equipment          TL3    1.0 kg     3.0 ltr         800<BR>
         Tarpaulin               TL1    2.0 kg     4.0 ltr          40<BR>
         Tarpaulin, Reflector    TL7    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr        1600<BR>
         Tent                    TL2    3.0 kg     6.0 ltr         800<BR>
         Text, Pressure          TL7    25.0 kg    30.0 ltr       3000<BR>
         Torches                 TL1    0.25 kg    1.0 ltr           4<BR>
<BR>
         Torches, Electric       TL5    0.5 kg     1.0 ltr          40<BR>
         Well Patch,Experimental TL9    5.0 kg     1.5 ltr         800<BR>
         Water Filter/Distill    TL7    1.0 kg     4.0 ltr         300<BR>
         Water Purification Kit  TL5    -          -                20<BR>
         Weight Belt             TL5    -          -               100<BR>
         Vaccines, Single        TL9    -          -                60<BR>
         Vaccines, Multi, Exp.   TL9    -          -               100<BR>
         Antitoxin,<BR>
           Single Poison/Disease TL9    -          -               100<BR>
         Antibiotics             TL9    -          -               200<BR>
         Metabolics              TL9    -          -              4000<BR>
         Vacc Suit               TL9    8.0 kg     3.6 kltr 28000 -3Dx<BR>
         Hostile Environment<BR>
           Vacc Suit             TL9    40.0 kg    3.8 kltr 64000 -3Dx<BR>
         PLSS 9A                 TL9    7.0 kg     11.0 ltr      12000<BR>
         PLAA 9B                 TL9    14.5 kg    20.0 ltr      20000<BR>
         PLSS 9C                 TL9    29.0 kg    55.0 ltr      32000<BR>
         Hard Bubble Helmet      TL9    2.0 kg     14.0 ltr       3200<BR>
         Magnetic Grip Vacc Suit TL9    -          0.5 ltr          80<BR>
         Suit Patches (5)        TL9    -          0.2 ltr          10<BR>
         Thermal/Meteroid G???   TL9    -          1.0 ltr        1600<BR>
         Small Live Animals      -      0.2 kg     2.0 ltr          10<BR>
         Small Birds             -      0.1 kg     2.0 ltr          20<BR>
         Animal & Bird Feed      TL2    0.5        0.5 ltr          20<BR>
         Pets (Invent your own)  -      ?          ?          50-500 +<BR>
         Garden Hose/10 meter    TL9    25.0 kg    20.0 ltr        100<BR>
         Portable Pump Gas Power TL9    50.0 kg    40.0 ltr        400<BR>
         Winemaking Kit          TL3    15.0 kg    25.0 ltr        150<BR>
         Alcohol Still           TL6    30.0 kg    50.0 ltr        500<BR>
         Chainsaw, Gas Powered   TL7    15.0 kg    20.0 ltr        800<BR>
         Gasoline                TL7    6.0 kg     5.0 ltr          20<BR>
         Extension Drop Cord     TL8    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr          30<BR>
         Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
         Gyrocompass             TL9    3.0 kg     8.0 ltr        4400<BR>
         Language Translater     TL9    2.0 kg     3.0 ltr        8000<BR>
         Translater Blank Memchp TL9    -          -                40<BR>
         Remote Earpiece         TL8    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr         300<BR>
         Utility Vest            TL8    -          6.0 ltr        1000<BR>
         Antigrav Units          TL9    27.0 kton  13.5 kl     2000000<BR>
         Jump Drive Units        TL9    27.0 kton  13.5 kl    12000000<BR>
         Fusion 2 MW Power Plant TL9    4.0 kton   1.0 ltr     2000000<BR>
         Nuclear Fission<BR>
           1.0 MW Plant          TL6    8.0 kton   1.0 kl      2000000<BR>
         Gas Turbine<BR>
           0.6 MW Plant          TL7    1.0 kton   1.0 kltr    2000000<BR>
         TL9 Solar Cells Meter   TL9    0.014 kg   0.01 kltr   2000000<BR>
         Battery @ 6 Kilowatt    TL9    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr        1500<BR>
         10 Kilowatt Fuel Cell   TL9    20.0 kg    20.0 ltr       2400<BR>
         Copper Tubing 150 Meter TL9    3.0 kg     5.0 ltr         500<BR>
         Leartherworking Kit     TL9    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         100<BR>
         Jack Armor              TL1    1.0 kg     4.0 ltr         200<BR>
         Mesh Armor              TL7    2.0 kg     4.0 ltr         600<BR>
         Cloth Armor             TL6    2.0 kg     4.5 kl         1000<BR>
         Flak Jacket             TL7    1.0 kg     2.0 kltr        400<BR>
         Ablat Armor             TL9    2.0 kg     4.5 kltr        300<BR>
         Dagger                  TL1    0.2 kg     0.2 ltr          40<BR>
         Sword                   TL2    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr         600<BR>
         Cutlass                 TL3    1.2 kg     1.0 ltr         400<BR>
         Broadsword              TL2    2.5 kg     1.5 ltr        1200<BR>
         Foil                    TL3    0.5 kg     0.6 ltr         400<BR>
         Hand Axe                TL1    0.5 kg     2.0 ltr         200<BR>
         Battle Axe              TL2    3.0 kg     2.0 ltr         800<BR>
         Bayonette               TL6    0.2 kg     0.2 ltr          40<BR>
         Spear                   TL0    2.0 kg     2.0 ltr          40<BR>
         Halbard                 TL2    2.5 kg     2.5 ltr         300<BR>
         Pike                    TL1    3.0 kg     2.5 ltr         160<BR>
         9mm Magnum Revolver     TL5    1.2 kg     1.2 ltr        1200<BR>
         Mag 9mm Ammunition      TL5    0.12 kg    -                32<BR>
         9mm Revolver            TL4    0.9 kg     0.9 ltr         600<BR>
         9mm Ammunition          TL4    0.1 kg     0.1 ltr          20<BR>
         10 mm Snub Pistol       TL8    0.2 kg     0.2 ltr         600<BR>
         10mm SP Ammunition      TL8    0.03 kg    0.03 ltr         40<BR>
         10mm Auto Snub Pistol   TL8    4.0 kg     4.0 ltr        2400<BR>
         Auto SP Ammunition      TL8    0.5 kg     0.5 ltr          80<BR>
         7mm Auto Pistol         TL6    0.5 kg     0.5 ltr         600<BR>
         7mm Ammunition          TL6    0.2 kg     0.2 ltr          32<BR>
         9mm Auto Pistol         TL5    0.7 kg     0.7 ltr         800<BR>
         9mm Auto Pistol Ammo.   TL5    0.25 kg    0.25 ltr         40<BR>
         7mm Carbine             TL5    3.0 kg     3.0 ltr         800<BR>
         7mm Carbine Ammunition  TL5    0.12 kg    0.12 ltr         40<BR>
         9mm Rifle               TL7    5.0 kg     4.0 ltr        4000<BR>
         9mm Rifle Ammunition    TL7    0.8 kg     0.8 ltr         160<BR>
         13mm Hunting Rifle      TL5    6.0 kg     4.5 ltr        8000<BR>
         13mm Ammunition         TL5    1.5 kg     1.0 ltr         240<BR>
         7mm Auto Rifle          TL6    5.0 kg     5.0 ltr        4000<BR>
         18mm Auto Shotgun       TL7    4.0 kg     4.0 ltr        2000<BR>
         18mm Shotgun Shells     TL7    0.75 kg    0.75 ltr         40<BR>
         9mm SMG                 TL5    2.5 kg     2.5 ltr        2000<BR>
         SMG Ammunition          TL5    0.5 kg     0.5 ltr          80<BR>
         5mm Assault Rifle       TL7    3.0 kg     3.0 ltr        1200<BR>
         5mm Ammunition          TL7    0.33 kg    0.3 ltr          80<BR>
         7mm Assault Rifle       TL7    4.0 kg     4.0 ltr        1600<BR>
         7mm Ammunition          TL7    0.6 kg     0.6 ltr         120<BR>
         6mm Accelerator Rifle   TL9    2.5 kg     2.5 ltr        3600<BR>
         6mm Ammunition          TL9    0.5 kg     0.5 ltr         100<BR>
         LAG                     TL8    4.0 kg     4.0 ltr        2400<BR>
         LAG Ammunition          TL8    0.5 kg     0.5 ltr          80<BR>
         Laser Pistol            TL9    0.7 kg     0.7 ltr        8000<BR>
         Laser Pistol Powerpack  TL9    2.0 kg     2.0 ltr        6000<BR>
         Laser Rifle             TL9    6.0 kg     5.0 ltr       14000<BR>
         Laser Rifle Powerpack   TL9    4.0 kg     4.0 ltr        6000<BR>
         Tangle Net              TL1    0.5 kg     0.5 ltr          80<BR>
         Tranq. Spray            TL5    0.1 kg     0.1 ltr         400<BR>
         Plastic Knife           TL9    0.35 kg    0.3 ltr        1200<BR>
         Ammunition Belt         TL6    0.5 kg     2.0 ltr         500<BR>
         Bola                    TL0    -          -                40<BR>
         Insta-glue              TL7    0.2 kg     0.2 ltr          80<BR>
         Typewriter              TL8    20.0 kg    20 ltr         1000<BR>
         Paper/?                 TL8    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr          50<BR>
         Hand Grenade            TL6    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr         100<BR>
         Gunpowder, Barrel       TL6    50.0 kg    40.0 ltr       1000<BR>
         6 Unknown Artifacts     ?      ?          ?           2000000<BR>
         Bottle of Wine, Good    TL3    1.2 kg     1.0 ltr         100<BR>
         Bottle of Beer, Good    TL3    0.6 kg     0.5 ltr          20<BR>
         Bottle of Beer, Poor    TL3    0.5 kg     0.4 ltr          10<BR>
         Hallucinogenic Drugs    TL0-9  Varies     Varies          100<BR>
         Narcotic Drugs          TL0-9  -          -               100<BR>
         Deck of Cards           TL5    0.1 kg     0.1 ltr          12<BR>
         Roulette Wheel          TL6    2.0 kg     4.0 ltr         500<BR>
         Bolt of Cloth           TL3    12.0 kg    12.0 ltr       4000<BR>
         Costume Jewelry         TL9    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr        1000<BR>
         1 Liter Bottle of ??    TL7    0.5 kg     1.0 ltr          10<BR>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2804</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/24/00 7:49:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 24 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2804<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
RE: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:58:29 -0700<BR>
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
<BR>
I hadn't thought of THAT Glenn.  Hmm, just in time to raise the prices then<BR>
lower them for a holiday sale >:D<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
JUST KIDDING!!!!!  I would NEVER do that to you guys & gals!!!!!<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
Jesse<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Glenn Goffin<BR>
> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 12:00 PM<BR>
> To: traveller mailing aa list<BR>
> Subject: RE: Screaming Penguins" unit patch<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> >From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
><BR>
> >Well, here's a VERY EARLY heads-up.  Found out a couple of<BR>
> >days ago that my Mom's seriously talking about buying a<BR>
> >$5k computer controlled embroidery machine around the<BR>
> >October/November time frame.  Possibilities are running<BR>
> >rampant through my brain as we speak.......More info to<BR>
> >come.<BR>
><BR>
> just in time for holiday shopping for all those Travellers<BR>
> on Santa's list!<BR>
><BR>
> --Glenn<BR>
><BR>
> __________________________________________________<BR>
> Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
> Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
> http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 17:37:29 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Michel Vaillancourt writes:<BR>
<BR>
>          Hmmm.  I like that.  I always thought the 10x factor scale for <BR>
> population got out of control in a hurry towards the top end.  Is, perhaps,<BR>
>  the entire scale in need of readjustment?     Something so the<BR>
> progression  is more gentle?<BR>
<BR>
Well, if you rescale so minimum population is like this its a bit saner:<BR>
Code	1      2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9      A<BR>
Pop	100k   300k   1M     3M     10M    30M    100M   300M   1B     3B<BR>
<BR>
Of course, people might object to the lack of any planets below 100k population<BR>
(other than pop-0 rocks) but by and large I don't see a problem here.  If you want, you could also add modifiers for environment.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 16:44:51 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
<BR>
"Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> <An Imperial Marine Colonel in dress uniform approaches><BR>
<BR>
Which member of the Python team is playing the Colonel?<BR>
John Cleese might be good.<BR>
<BR>
> "Right.  Enough of that, this thread has gotten too silly.  Started off<BR>
> with nice little question about author's and artist copies of books, and<BR>
> now we're up to our knickers in heavily armed penguins and tunneling monkeys!<BR>
> <BR>
> "This is the Traveller Mailing List, so I want a good clean Traveller<BR>
> topic.  So on command, you will commence the large scale economy discussion.<BR>
> <BR>
> "List!  Diisss.. (Wait for it!)  ..cuss!"<BR>
<BR>
Group [loudly and in unison] "Sir, Yes, Sir!"<BR>
<BR>
Colonel: "All right people listen up."<BR>
<BR>
"As many people know most monkeys are uncomfortable in cool<BR>
or temperate climates and thrive in warm climates. Therefore<BR>
Planetary Evil Monkeys [PEM's] typically live in tunnels they<BR>
construct using meson weaponry. Since the monkeys are, after<BR>
all, evil they do not care if their tunnels cut through power,<BR>
air, communications, water, waste or other lines. The resulting<BR>
service outages caused by the damaged lines are impacting<BR>
the productive capacity of many worlds and thus damaging the<BR>
large scale economy of the Imperium. The overall Gross Imperial<BR>
Product [GIP] is already down by over 4.8%. Three primary solutions<BR>
to alleviate this problem before it causes an Imperium wide depression <BR>
have been proposed. As you are already aware the problem poses<BR>
the greatest threat to planets in the Imperial Core as few of<BR>
them have extensive Subterranean Planetary Artillery comma Meson<BR>
[SPAM] with which to eliminate the PEM threat.<BR>
<BR>
You will form into three groups each of which will select<BR>
and discuss one solution. <BR>
<BR>
Solution number one: Imperial military forces, including<BR>
this unit, will serve as cadre personnel to train and lead<BR>
Killer Underground Penguins [KUP's] to seek out and eliminate<BR>
PEM's. Include discussions of all operational criteria including<BR>
training, supply, logistics, strategy and tactics of the campaign,<BR>
effects of overall force readiness, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Solution number two: Imperial Diplomatic personnel will <BR>
attempt to reach a rapprochement with the PEM's arch rivals,<BR>
the Spacefaring Evil Monkeys [SEM's], and will persuade the<BR>
SEM's to assist us in our efforts to eliminate this problem.<BR>
Such assistance will not, I say WILL NOT, extend to providing<BR>
the SEM's with any Familium Spofulum products which would,<BR>
of course, be contrary to Arbetralla's Commentary On The<BR>
Laws of War [ACOTLOW] which clearly state that providing FS<BR>
products to _any_ non Imperial sources is, and I quote from the<BR>
words of her most Illustrious And Dread Majesty "I say that's <BR>
not really cricket now is it old chap?"<BR>
<BR>
Solution Number three: The Emperor, blessed be his name, shall <BR>
direct the Imperial General Directorate on Revenue and Income<BR>
Procurement [IGDRIP] to recruit all PEM's into Imperial Service<BR>
by persuading them that they can accomplish more evil as Auditors<BR>
than they can in their tunnels. In your analysis you must include<BR>
a proposal for alternative employment of current IGDRIP auditors<BR>
89% of whom are currently Bwap's [Newts].<BR>
<BR>
Commence the Discussion!"<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 17:50:43 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Hm...toe to toe.  Obviously we have boneheaded marines here.<BR>
<BR>
Personally, I find the 'skirt' rather funny looking.  <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 20:36:58 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
<BR>
Peter Newman wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
<<snip>><BR>
> <BR>
> Solution Number three: The Emperor, blessed be his name, shall<BR>
> direct the Imperial General Directorate on Revenue and Income<BR>
> Procurement [IGDRIP] to recruit all PEM's into Imperial Service<BR>
> by persuading them that they can accomplish more evil as Auditors<BR>
> than they can in their tunnels. In your analysis you must include<BR>
> a proposal for alternative employment of current IGDRIP auditors<BR>
> 89% of whom are currently Bwap's [Newts].<BR>
<BR>
Please note the following URL:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.monkeybagel.com/monkeybagel.html<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:30:20<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
<BR>
At 04:44 PM 7/24/2000 -0800, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> <An Imperial Marine Colonel in dress uniform approaches><BR>
><BR>
>Which member of the Python team is playing the Colonel?<BR>
>John Cleese might be good.<BR>
<BR>
It was always Graham Chapman in the series, IIRC.  Cleese made an excellent<BR>
Sergeant-Major, especially when instructing Home Guard members in the fine<BR>
art of hand to fruit combat.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:36:51<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 05:50 PM 7/24/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>Hm...toe to toe.  Obviously we have boneheaded marines here.<BR>
<BR>
Actually..  getting "inside the punch," close enough to attach limpet mines<BR>
and do detailed naughtiness is probably the best way to do it.  Current<BR>
doctrine emphasizes negating the armor advantage by closing to point-blank<BR>
range.<BR>
<BR>
>Personally, I find the 'skirt' rather funny looking.  <BR>
<BR>
Sadly, there's no real good way to armor that area (which most people feel<BR>
is somewhat vital) and maintain mobility *and* deal with all the...<BR>
plumbing required.  Using the usual BD plate would require a codpiece that<BR>
would make Dirk Diggler green with envy.  And that would be for the female<BR>
Marines.<BR>
<BR>
Keeping enough mobility for the hips to allow BD-equipped troopers to move<BR>
in a tactical sense just precludes heavy armor around the hips and groin.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
Embrace Fascism.    The uniforms look cool<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:55:46 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
<BR>
> From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
><BR>
> Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
><BR>
> > 0.16) will reduce cargo capacity by 31 dtons down to 11 dtons (even<BR>
given<BR>
> > the stupid, brain-damaged, economics-breaking, really really dumbshit<BR>
> > decision to charge ships 20% of their volume for being streamlined. PC<BR>
> > starships have enough of a problem being economically viable, without<BR>
> > making anything that goes into an atmosphere uneconomic).<BR>
><BR>
> Gee, feeling bitter or something?  Personally, I agree that streamlining<BR>
should have been done differently, but on the other hand GT doesn't have<BR>
things like minimum bridge volume 20 tons, or multi-ton computers.<BR>
<BR>
Neither of those decisions have anywhere near the impact. Commercial<BR>
starships in Trav are built to very tight tolerances. Whacking a 20%<BR>
atmosphere surcharge (and having a hidden 10% overage on jump drives) screws<BR>
the economics, and means that under G:T design rules  commercial starships<BR>
dont ever go into atmospheres.<BR>
<BR>
Something like Mir would exist around every world, and some tacky little<BR>
orbital shuttle would move stuff up and down.<BR>
<BR>
This means that the PCs starship stays in orbit with the engineer, while the<BR>
party goes onto the planet.<BR>
<BR>
I dont want that.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:42:02 -0400<BR>
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com><BR>
Subject: RE: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
>The following occured to me while pondering (for the TML landgrab) what<BR>
>educational facilities are like on Esalin, a TL 8 world, far from the<BR>
>mainstream of the 3I.<BR>
><BR>
>What are R&D efforts (I am thinking primarily of colleges and universities<BR>
>now) like in the Traveller universe? Since we have established that a<BR>
>significant number of planets are at TL G+, what type of R&D activities do<BR>
>you see on the lower TL worlds? Does a TL 8 world have any chance of any<BR>
>significant breakthroughs which have not already been made at some other<BR>
>high TL place? Probably not. A difference of 8 TLs is huge. A difference of<BR>
>even 2 is fairly substantial.<BR>
<BR>
I would expect that "Research Universities" don't exist under these<BR>
circumstances on these worlds. Don't think modern American universities.<BR>
Think old world or eighteenth century centers of higher learning. These<BR>
schools were set up to teach students. Modern American Universities are set<BR>
up to get money from the U.S. Government via research grants. This is<BR>
evident by the way the pecking order is established. Full tenured professors<BR>
get status based not on their teaching skills but on their ability to<BR>
publish and accumulate grant money. Most undergraduate students are taught<BR>
by teaching assistants or associate professors, or by full professors who<BR>
pick up a class of 300 first year chemistry students because the university<BR>
has a policy requiring they teach an undergraduate class every couple of<BR>
years or so. This situation has been created by the slush fund of U.S<BR>
government dollars allocated to "national defense" research, which has<BR>
pushed universities into this method of doing business: Research first,<BR>
teaching second.<BR>
<BR>
>What do university students on a TL 8 or even TL A planet learn? Do they<BR>
>learn the TL G stuff, or only the local TL? Even one step further, what<BR>
>background does the average guy on the street have? If they are on a TL 8<BR>
>world, do they probably know about TL G things, but just don't have the<BR>
>infrastructure needed to actually build TL G equipment?<BR>
><BR>
I would wonder if they even have universities in that sense. Colleges to<BR>
teach non-technical subjects, like history or business management maybe, but<BR>
schools to teach engineering and such will probably be technical schools.<BR>
These will have very little in common with the way that American<BR>
Universities are set up, but will be student centered, like U.S. technical<BR>
schools with their primary purpose to turn out engineers and technicians,<BR>
not to do research.<BR>
<BR>
>As a sweeping generalization, my initial thoughts are that most people<BR>
learn<BR>
>about TL E technology as part of their basic education, probably TL F if<BR>
>they go to college, and TL G+ if they go on to graduate school (or work in<BR>
>the appropriate jobs), even if they are from a TL 8 world. They will just<BR>
>have theoretical knowledge of the advanced stuff, but little or no hands-on<BR>
>experience with the technology. This assumes, of course, that they are out<BR>
>on the frontier. Even on low TL planets in developed sectors, they probably<BR>
>have access to the technology also.<BR>
><BR>
>------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
I would expect that theoretical knowledge would be taught at the highest<BR>
level possible. In other words if you take a physics course at a graduate<BR>
level you'll get the same grounding of TL G (GTL12) stuff that the student<BR>
on Capital or Terra gets. You might even get into some theoretical<BR>
mathematics or physics (After all the soviets proved that in physics<BR>
sometimes you get father ahead if you don't have the money to actually build<BR>
anything, but just to sit around thinking about it.)<BR>
<BR>
Generally I would expect that most of the best students (and all of the<BR>
nobility, leadership class, and rich kids) would go to University offworld.<BR>
Think about someone in Denver or Little Rock in the eighteen hundreds, they<BR>
would go 'back east" to attend college and then return to take up the family<BR>
business. So someone on a TL A world in the Marches, who could afford it,<BR>
will go to the University of Regina, or to the University of Mora.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Terry C<BR>
All that is Gold does not glitter<BR>
Not all who travel are lost<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:58:58 -0400<BR>
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Besides really big ships take a long time to build (unless you have a very<BR>
>industrial planet with an A class starport) and has a large financial<BR>
>outlay.<BR>
<BR>
I don't see this as a problem. If civilian ships are expected to last 40<BR>
years I would expect a military capital ship to last 100 years or more,<BR>
especially with the slow rate of technological advance in the 3I. It's the<BR>
rapid advance of technology that causes modern wet navy craft to have such<BR>
short lifetimes. In the age of sail ships had much longer (relative)<BR>
lifetimes.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>In an actual shooting war the lost of a couple million dton ship which will<BR>
>probably comprise a significant proportion of your fleet would really hurt.<BR>
>It could be taken out with a kinetic weapon while stationary or destroyed<BR>
by<BR>
>a smuggled nuclear weapon.  While the odds of this happening are small they<BR>
>are also worth the risk.  If you only have one vessel of this size in your<BR>
>fleet you had better be able to trust its captain as there is quite a<BR>
>possibility that he has the firepower to pull off a coup de tat.  Also such<BR>
>a large vessel can only be in one place at a time.  It can defend or attack<BR>
>it can't do both at the same time.  So for a multisystem star nation the<BR>
use<BR>
>of very large ships is prohibitive because you won't be able to build<BR>
enough<BR>
>of them to defend every system and or conduct offensive strikes (The 3rd<BR>
>Imperium should be large enough however to be able to build and deploy a<BR>
>number of these).  Besides a planetary deep site meson gun can still always<BR>
>blow that very large ship to pieces.<BR>
<BR>
While I'm not overly fond of "Yanks in space" comparisons I must point out<BR>
that the United States, arguably the last remaining superpower, has only 12<BR>
supercarriers in its fleet. How many capital ships does it take to dominate<BR>
11000 worlds?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Terry C<BR>
All that is Gold does not glitter<BR>
Not all who travel are lost<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:04:03 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
on 7/24/00 4:54 PM, Jesse DeGraff at jdegraff@pacbell.net wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> The main point of the survey is to see if people object to the cloth armor<BR>
> "skirt" on the assault battldress.  Modification suggestions that have<BR>
> already been raised by others have been lengthening it slightly and adding<BR>
> plate armor to it (my favorite) or same principle only making it vertically<BR>
> slitted and armored akin to a Roman Legionaire.  BTW Doug, the author,<BR>
> mentioned that a kilt is part of the dress uniform, so it's actually nicely<BR>
> justified by that as well.<BR>
<BR>
I'd be disinclined to favor the skirt design, for both practical and<BR>
esthetic.  Personally, I think the skirt looks wrong.<BR>
<BR>
From a practical standpoint, the skirt would act as a nice funnel for<BR>
anti-personnel mines or other similar weapons.  If you note the design of<BR>
contemporary heavy body armor, you'll notice that a groin flap or shield is<BR>
generally used.  This lend itself to better protecting of the 'personals'<BR>
from all-aspect attacks.  Bear in mind that the trooper may be prone. The<BR>
skirt becomes possibly worse than no armor at all if a shell or bomb goes<BR>
off behind the trooper!<BR>
<BR>
Tod "former grunt" Glenn<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:29:42 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
> I would expect that "Research Universities" don't exist under these<BR>
> circumstances on these worlds. Don't think modern American universities.<BR>
> Think old world or eighteenth century centers of higher learning. These<BR>
> schools were set up to teach students. Modern American Universities are set<BR>
> up to get money from the U.S. Government via research grants. This is<BR>
[snip]<BR>
<BR>
I'd preface that with "large public".  Having attended a smaller private<BR>
university, all of my classes were taught by tenured professors.  I'm sure<BR>
that this is far from rare.  We tend to hear most about the Stanfords and<BR>
Purdues and MITs.<BR>
<BR>
> I would wonder if they even have universities in that sense. Colleges to<BR>
> teach non-technical subjects, like history or business management maybe, but<BR>
> schools to teach engineering and such will probably be technical schools.<BR>
> These will have very little in common with the way that American<BR>
> Universities are set up, but will be student centered, like U.S. technical<BR>
> schools with their primary purpose to turn out engineers and technicians,<BR>
> not to do research.<BR>
<BR>
My old Jesuit profs would be shocked.  No philosophy? no literature? Just<BR>
crank out tons of technicians with no foundation in the humanities, no<BR>
ethics? I hate to think that the Imperium has gone down that road. IMTU, I<BR>
favor the idea of the gentlebeing scholar.<BR>
<BR>
> Generally I would expect that most of the best students (and all of the<BR>
> nobility, leadership class, and rich kids) would go to University offworld.<BR>
> Think about someone in Denver or Little Rock in the eighteen hundreds, they<BR>
> would go 'back east" to attend college and then return to take up the family<BR>
> business. So someone on a TL A world in the Marches, who could afford it,<BR>
> will go to the University of Regina, or to the University of Mora.<BR>
<BR>
I suspect universities will acquire reputation, and that will be the<BR>
important factor.  As you say, knowledge is portable.  Some of the well<BR>
regarded schools of the US are in some decidedly non-glamorous,<BR>
non-high-tech places: Rose Hullman (Terra Haute), CalTech (Pasadena).<BR>
Student will be attracted by staff, reputation and other intangibles.<BR>
Location on a high tech world will only be part of the equation.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 19:36:57 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (NOT) Building The Perfect Behemoth (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
on 7/24/00 6:58 PM, Terry Carlino at carlino@home.com wrote:<BR>
>> In an actual shooting war the lost of a couple million dton ship which will<BR>
>> probably comprise a significant proportion of your fleet would really hurt.<BR>
>> It could be taken out with a kinetic weapon while stationary or destroyed<BR>
>> by<BR>
>> a smuggled nuclear weapon.  While the odds of this happening are small they<BR>
>> are also worth the risk.  If you only have one vessel of this size in your<BR>
>> fleet you had better be able to trust its captain as there is quite a<BR>
>> possibility that he has the firepower to pull off a coup de tat.  Also such<BR>
>> a large vessel can only be in one place at a time.  It can defend or attack<BR>
>> it can't do both at the same time.  So for a multisystem star nation the<BR>
> >use<BR>
>> of very large ships is prohibitive because you won't be able to build<BR>
>> enough<BR>
>> of them to defend every system and or conduct offensive strikes (The 3rd<BR>
>> Imperium should be large enough however to be able to build and deploy a<BR>
>> number of these).  Besides a planetary deep site meson gun can still always<BR>
>> blow that very large ship to pieces.<BR>
> <BR>
> While I'm not overly fond of "Yanks in space" comparisons I must point out<BR>
> that the United States, arguably the last remaining superpower, has only 12<BR>
> supercarriers in its fleet. How many capital ships does it take to dominate<BR>
> 11000 worlds?<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
And supercarriers are too expensive to risk.  And they are not the weapons<BR>
system being committed to combat.  They are transport and hangerage for the<BR>
real weapons, the air wing.  The big 'capital' ships (Battleships) are<BR>
already gone, except for submarines.  Carriers are important for one reason:<BR>
force projection.  haul a bunsh of very deadly, but short range craft to<BR>
within striking distance of their target.<BR>
<BR>
In the 3I we have the same issue:  Dreadnaughts or Battleriders and<BR>
carriers.  Dreadnaughts will probably get built out of 'national' pride, but<BR>
light ships and carrier craft will due the day to day work.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 03:45:29 +0100<BR>
From: "Ben Aaronovitch" <bem@imaginaryfilms.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------<BR>
2. I've been trying to come up with a long-range ship<BR>
that would be self-sufficient for up to five years,<BR>
kind of a space-going Scout Base. Having a little<BR>
trouble with it; any of you starship architects out<BR>
there want to give it a go? (of course, it needs to be<BR>
in the GT modular system.) I can't offer any prizes<BR>
for the contest except for the knowledge that your<BR>
creation will be helping to roll back the frontiers of<BR>
the Imperium :)<BR>
- ---------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Your slightest wish is my sternest command.<BR>
<BR>
I haven't put the chrome on these yet and<BR>
I'm still working on the deck plans.<BR>
<BR>
The basic design conception was to build<BR>
something durable and long ranged that<BR>
was small enough for player characters to<BR>
handle.<BR>
<BR>
My personal preference would be to allow<BR>
players to have a duplicate backup character<BR>
(or two) as part of the crew. This serves<BR>
two functions, in a long extended campaign<BR>
it means death isn't the end. And also<BR>
it stops the players sending the NPC crew<BR>
to face certain death instead of them.<BR>
<BR>
All ships built using GTS (highly recomended)<BR>
<BR>
600-ton Walkabout-class , Long Duration Scout (TL10)<BR>
<BR>
Crew:<BR>
28 Total. 6 Command and Control, 2 Pilots,<BR>
3 Jump Drive, 6 Scientific, 6 Engineering, 1 Medic,<BR>
4 additional. Some crew to be cross trained and<BR>
designated as gunners.<BR>
<BR>
Hull:<BR>
600-ton VGSL, Medium Frame, Standard Materials,<BR>
Crystaliron (Expensive) Armored Hull (DR 200), Heavy<BR>
Compartmentalization, Basic Stealth(-6, AMod 4),<BR>
Basic Emission Cloaking(-6, PMod 4 [-3, PMod 7 in space]).<BR>
<BR>
Control Areas:<BR>
Basic Bridge(37/41/31, 5k/10k/0,<BR>
Hardened, Complexity 7), Basic Bridge(37/41/31,<BR>
5k/10k/0 (Auxilery Bridge), Hardened, Complexity 7),<BR>
Scientific Sensors, Basic Security,<BR>
Computer Bank(8xMacroframe, HiCap, Hardened, Complexity 8).<BR>
<BR>
Engineering:<BR>
2 Engineering(13.3 dtons[553.49 MW], 36 Total Life Support),<BR>
25 Jump Drive,<BR>
64 Maneuver Drive(1.84 / 2.67 Gs, 2,560 stons thrust),<BR>
185.5 Cryonic Internal Tank(Fire 13, Loaded with 185.5 stons),<BR>
4 Fuel Processor(5.8 hours to refine Cryonic Internal Tank),<BR>
Utility, 77.7 Man-Hours/day Maintenance.<BR>
<BR>
Accommodations:<BR>
18 Stateroom, 2 Sickbay(4 Patients),<BR>
8 Low Berth(32 Cryoberths), Normal Office(4 Users),<BR>
2 Gymnasium(8 Users), 2 Complete Workshop(6 Users).<BR>
<BR>
Misc:<BR>
5 Laboratory/10.<BR>
<BR>
Armaments:<BR>
6 Turret Batteries of 1 each (DR100).<BR>
<BR>
Stores:<BR>
30 Vehicle Bay(30 Ton SUV Eagle (Lander)),<BR>
30 Vehicle Bay(30-Ton SUV Eagle (Explorer)),<BR>
20.5 Hold(Additional 11 dTons available in<BR>
Eagle Lander, 10 dtons on Eagle Explorer).<BR>
<BR>
Statistics:<BR>
EMass 960.36 stons, LMass 1,394.33 stons,<BR>
Cost MCr262.29, HP 45,000, Size Mod 10,<BR>
HT 12, CP 59.<BR>
<BR>
Performance:<BR>
Jump-3 (3), Acc L/E 1.84 / 2.67 Gs, Airspeed 2,530 mph,<BR>
Skimming Airspeed 7,156 mph, Aerostatic Lift 2,560 stons.<BR>
<BR>
Sample Times (Earth Std, Full Load):<BR>
Orbit 0.12 Hrs, Escape Velocity 0.17 Hrs, 100D 4.71 Hrs,<BR>
Earth-Mars 80.91 Hrs.<BR>
<BR>
Options<BR>
Turrets add to Jump Tonnage for Jump Drive/Fuel calculations<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Printed 25/07/00 03:29:05<BR>
<BR>
Copyright  2000 by Ben Aaronovitch<BR>
<BR>
Spread Sheet Output<BR>
<BR>
Quantity       Cost       Mass   System<BR>
<BR>
       1      14.28     348.00   Hull<BR>
       6       0.88      28.95   Turret<BR>
       2       0.64       8.00   Engineering<BR>
      25      77.50     100.00   Jump Drive<BR>
      64      10.24     217.60   Maneuver Drive<BR>
       1       4.60       8.97   Basic Bridge<BR>
       1      31.90       1.90   Scientific Sensors<BR>
     371      31.54     246.72   Cryonic Internal Tank<BR>
       4       3.40       4.40   Fuel Processor<BR>
       1      30.00      12.00   Computer Bank<BR>
       1       0.30      11.50   Utility<BR>
       5       5.00      50.00   Laboratory/TL<BR>
      30       5.21      74.31   Vehicle Bay<BR>
      30      38.70      72.67   Vehicle Bay<BR>
       1       4.60       8.97   Basic Bridge<BR>
       1       0.90       2.60   Basic Security<BR>
       2       0.32       1.50   Sickbay<BR>
      18       0.22      43.20   Stateroom<BR>
       8       1.76      16.00   Low Berth<BR>
       1       0.18       3.54   Normal Office<BR>
       2       0.00       1.00   Gymnasium<BR>
       2       0.12      30.00   Complete Workshop<BR>
      41       0.00     102.50   Hold<BR>
<BR>
   Empty     262.29     960.36<BR>
    Full               1394.33<BR>
<BR>
Ships Boats<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
30-ton SUV-class Eagle, Utility Boat (landing) (TL10)<BR>
<BR>
Note<BR>
Long Term Seating Module (TL10) 60 Man-Days limited<BR>
life support, RX slice, 6 computer terminals (for<BR>
work/entertainment), 8 Roomy Seats (fold up into 4 bunks),<BR>
galley, 67 cf storage.<BR>
<BR>
Crew:<BR>
2 Total. 1 Pilot, 1 Flight Engineer.<BR>
<BR>
Hull: 30-ton VGSL, Medium Frame, Standard Materials,<BR>
Crystaliron (Expensive) Armored Hull (DR 100),<BR>
Standard Compartmentalization.<BR>
<BR>
Control Areas:<BR>
Cockpit/Systems(35/39/29, 500/1K/-,<BR>
Hardened, Complexity 6).<BR>
<BR>
Engineering:<BR>
Engineering(0.9 dtons[39.24 MW]),<BR>
7 Maneuver Drive(2.17 / 3.79 Gs, 280 stons thrust),<BR>
Utility, 11.0 Man-Hours/day Maintenance.<BR>
<BR>
Accommodations:<BR>
3 Long Term Seating(24 Passengers).<BR>
<BR>
Stores:<BR>
11 Hold.<BR>
<BR>
Statistics:<BR>
EMass 73.81 stons, LMass 128.81 stons,<BR>
Cost MCr5.21, HP 6,000, Size Mod 7, HT 12, CP 10.<BR>
<BR>
Performance:<BR>
Acc L/E 2.17 / 3.79 Gs, Airspeed 2,292 mph,<BR>
Skimming Airspeed 6,481 mph, Aerostatic Lift 280 stons.<BR>
<BR>
Sample Times (Earth Std, Full Load):<BR>
Orbit 0.1 Hrs, Escape Velocity 0.15 Hrs, 100D 4.33 Hrs,<BR>
Earth-Mars 74.36 Hrs.<BR>
<BR>
Options<BR>
Turrets add to Jump Tonnage for Jump Drive/Fuel calculations<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Printed 25/07/00 03:04:32<BR>
<BR>
Copyright  2000 by Ben Aaronovich<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
30-ton SUV-class Eagle, Utility Boat (Explorer) (TL10)<BR>
<BR>
This version of the SUV Eagle allows for extended insystem missions.<BR>
For example: putting an advance party on a world while the mothership<BR>
refuels at a gas giant. It's high cost is due to the full planetary<BR>
survey sensor suite.<BR>
<BR>
Crew:<BR>
2 Total. 1 Pilot, 1 Flight Engineer.<BR>
<BR>
Hull:<BR>
30-ton VGSL, Medium Frame, Standard Materials, Crystaliron (Expensive)<BR>
Armored Hull (DR 100), Standard Compartmentalization.<BR>
<BR>
Control Areas:<BR>
Basic Bridge(37/41/31, 5k/10k/0, Hardened, Complexity 7),<BR>
Scientific Sensors.<BR>
<BR>
Engineering:<BR>
Engineering(0.8 dtons[32.67 MW], 16 Total Life Support),<BR>
5 Maneuver Drive(1.64 / 2.77 Gs, 200 stons thrust),<BR>
Utility, 29.9 Man-Hours/day Maintenance.<BR>
<BR>
Accommodations:<BR>
Bunk Room.<BR>
<BR>
Stores: 10 Hold.<BR>
<BR>
Statistics:<BR>
EMass 72.17 stons, LMass 122.17 stons,<BR>
Cost MCr38.7, HP 6,000, Size Mod 7, HT 12, CP 8.<BR>
<BR>
Performance:<BR>
Acc L/E 1.64 / 2.77 Gs, Airspeed 1,937 mph,<BR>
Skimming Airspeed 5,478 mph, Aerostatic Lift 200 stons.<BR>
<BR>
Sample Times (Earth Std, Full Load):<BR>
Orbit 0.14 Hrs, Escape Velocity 0.2 Hrs, 100D 4.99 Hrs,<BR>
Earth-Mars 85.68 Hrs.<BR>
<BR>
Options<BR>
Turrets add to Jump Tonnage for Jump Drive/Fuel calculations<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Printed 25/07/00 03:28:04<BR>
<BR>
Copyright  2000 by Ben Aaronovich<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2804<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (rly-yc03.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.35]) by air-yc02.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:49:34 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc03.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:48:41 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA78726;<BR>
	Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:47:44 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:47:27 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA78683<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:47:27 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:47:27 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007250247.WAA78683@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2804<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2805</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/25/00 6:51:06 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Tuesday, July 25 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2805<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
Re: Races and Recoil Tolerance<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
GT: Starports illo<BR>
Re: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
CT Ship Trade Viability (was Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Races and Recoil Tolerance<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
Re: Tech Levels<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 18:50:35 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> wrote<BR>
<BR>
someone wrote<BR>
> >That's similar to a heresy I was considering; if you just change pop-9 to<BR>
> >be '1-3 billion' and pop-A to be '4-9 billion' it will reduce the<BR>
> >population of the imperium by around 70%.<BR>
<BR>
> I like that.  I always thought the 10x factor scale for<BR>
> population got out of control in a hurry towards the top end. Is, perhaps,<BR>
> the entire scale in need of readjustment? Something so the progression<BR>
> is more gentle?<BR>
<BR>
If we readjust the scale we can also reduce the number of planets<BR>
that have very low populations. This will reduce the number of <BR>
implausible planets with a population of 27 and a class A<BR>
starport.<BR>
<BR>
How about if every _2_ population numbers is a 10 fold change<BR>
in population<BR>
<BR>
Pop# 		Population<BR>
- -1         0<BR>
0          less than 100,000<BR>
1          100,000  to        316,223<BR>
2          316,224  to      1,000,000<BR>
3        1,000,000  to      3,166,227<BR>
4        3,166,228  to     10,000,000 <BR>
5       10,000,000  to     31,622,776<BR>
6       31,622,777  to    100,000,000<BR>
7      100,000,000  to    316,227,766<BR>
8      316,227,767  to  1,000,000,000<BR>
9    1,000,000,001  to  3,162,277,660<BR>
A    3,162,277,661  to 10,000,000,000<BR>
B   10,000,000,000  to 31,622,776,600 <BR>
<BR>
Now the formula for population is:<BR>
Population = 10^((Pop + 9)/2)<BR>
If Pop is less than 0 than population = 0<BR>
<BR>
For greater precision you may use<BR>
Population = 10^((Pop + 9 + Pop Multiplier/10)/2).<BR>
<BR>
Using these figures population will average around 10 billion <BR>
(10^9) people for every 36 worlds and the Imperium will have<BR>
a population of about 3 trillion (10612) people not 15 trillion.<BR>
Populations of -1 and B can be generated only with modifiers<BR>
of course, they are included for completeness.<BR>
<BR>
I would suggest that Lo Pop should be Pop 0 and 1. This<BR>
will make one in twelve planets LoPop which is the same odds<BR>
as for HiPop planets.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:04:16 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
At 11:50 PM 7/24/00, you wrote:<BR>
> > I like that.  I always thought the 10x factor scale for<BR>
> > population got out of control in a hurry towards the top end. Is, perhaps,<BR>
> > the entire scale in need of readjustment? Something so the progression<BR>
> > is more gentle?<BR>
><BR>
>If we readjust the scale we can also reduce the number of planets<BR>
>that have very low populations. This will reduce the number of<BR>
>implausible planets with a population of 27 and a class A<BR>
>starport.<BR>
<BR>
         <chuckle><BR>
<BR>
>How about if every _2_ population numbers is a 10 fold change<BR>
>in population<BR>
<BR>
         [table snip]<BR>
<BR>
>Using these figures population will average around 10 billion<BR>
>(10^9) people for every 36 worlds and the Imperium will have<BR>
>a population of about 3 trillion (10612) people not 15 trillion.<BR>
>Populations of -1 and B can be generated only with modifiers<BR>
>of course, they are included for completeness.<BR>
<BR>
         I think that is a very good revision at first blush.  Would a <BR>
TCS-junkie in the audience care to re-evaluate what this does to military <BR>
budgets?<BR>
<BR>
>I would suggest that Lo Pop should be Pop 0 and 1. This<BR>
>will make one in twelve planets LoPop which is the same odds<BR>
>as for HiPop planets.<BR>
<BR>
         ..Which makes some sense.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 20:12:33 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, J. Paul Sanders at timmon@primenet.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
Given that Traveller credits are close to US 1977 dollars, this list is<BR>
scary.  A few notes based on year 2000 prices:<BR>
<BR>
> Posted this about three years ago...thought the newer members of the list<BR>
> might find it useful.<BR>
> ******<BR>
> <BR>
> The following supplies are available at the local port:<BR>
> <BR>
> Item for Sale       Tech Level Weight    Mass/Volume  Credits<BR>
> <BR>
> Binoculars              TL3    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         300<BR>
Nice binoculars!  Seviceable pair: more like Cr100<BR>
<BR>
> Boots, Climbing         TL3    1.5 kg     3.0 ltr         200<BR>
Hmmm.  About right<BR>
<BR>
> Bullhorn                TL6    0.5 kg     2.5 ltr         500<BR>
More like Cr50<BR>
<BR>
> Calculator, Hand Solar  TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr          50<BR>
Just looked at one of these.  TI scientific solar $9.95<BR>
<BR>
> Clothing, Cold Weather  TL9    2.0 kg     9.0 ltr        2500<BR>
Mink coat? a full set of ECWS gear will set you back about $1000<BR>
<BR>
> Clothing, Desert        TL3    -          -               400<BR>
Mon Dieu.  Is that burnoose made with gold leaf?<BR>
<BR>
> Communicator 500km      TL9    1.5 lg     3.0 ltr       20000<BR>
Yaesu, Kenwood Icom shortwave rig. ~$2500<BR>
<BR>
> Detector, Metal         TL6    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr        1200<BR>
$99 at radio shack<BR>
<BR>
> Goggles (IR/LI)         TL9    0.2 kg     0.3 ltr        5000<BR>
AN/PVS-7B State of the art LI/IR goggles $2795<BR>
<BR>
> Machete                 TL4    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         500<BR>
OK, this is way off.  How about $20 at the local surplus store<BR>
<BR>
> Map, Electronic         TL9    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr       10000<BR>
Garmin streetpilot color ~$650<BR>
<BR>
> Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
add a couple thousand and make it a Rolex.  Or buy an electronic for $49<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm Magnum Revolver     TL5    1.2 kg     1.2 ltr        1200<BR>
Must be a Korth.  S&W 686 about $600<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm Revolver            TL4    0.9 kg     0.9 ltr         600<BR>
High end.  But a Rossi for $350<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm Auto Pistol         TL5    0.7 kg     0.7 ltr         800<BR>
Glock-17.  $525<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm Rifle               TL7    5.0 kg     4.0 ltr        4000<BR>
Well, if this is some big bore, like a Dakota arms, yes.<BR>
<BR>
> 13mm Hunting Rifle      TL5    6.0 kg     4.5 ltr        8000<BR>
.500+ caliber double rifle?  Cheap at that price.  Plain Jane Butch Searcy<BR>
double: $9000, Holland and Holland:  $30,000+<BR>
<BR>
> 18mm Auto Shotgun       TL7    4.0 kg     4.0 ltr        2000<BR>
Remington 11-87: $736 MSRP (from their website)<BR>
<BR>
> 18mm Shotgun Shells     TL7    0.75 kg    0.75 ltr         40<BR>
about $1 a round for buckshot<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm SMG                 TL5    2.5 kg     2.5 ltr        2000<BR>
Right on for a PAWS pre 1986 transferable gun. a realistic price is probably<BR>
something like $500<BR>
<BR>
> 5mm Assault Rifle       TL7    3.0 kg     3.0 ltr        1200<BR>
$7000 for a Colt M16 pre 1986 transferable.  Semi-auto for ~$700.<BR>
<BR>
> Bottle of Wine, Good    TL3    1.2 kg     1.0 ltr         100<BR>
> Bottle of Beer, Good    TL3    0.6 kg     0.5 ltr          20<BR>
> Bottle of Beer, Poor    TL3    0.5 kg     0.4 ltr          10<BR>
Holy Cow!  the 3I must have one hell of a sin tax! Anybody on this list pay<BR>
$10 per beer?<BR>
<BR>
> Hallucinogenic Drugs    TL0-9  Varies     Varies          100<BR>
> Narcotic Drugs          TL0-9  -          -               100<BR>
Must be a big stash.  More like $10 per dose<BR>
<BR>
> Deck of Cards           TL5    0.1 kg     0.1 ltr          12<BR>
Bought these for $1 a pack<BR>
<BR>
> Bolt of Cloth           TL3    12.0 kg    12.0 ltr       4000<BR>
Cloth of gold, maybe?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Just my Cr.02.  Time to update the list?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 00:26:20 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch wrote,<BR>
>Commercial starships in Trav are built to very tight tolerances. <<BR>
<BR>
That is definitely true. Twitching the least little thing in CT can easily<BR>
make a ship impossible to run with financing. And then trying to upgrade the<BR>
thing? Definitely impossible. The Type R has to have a subsidy or payments<BR>
can't be made. How the A2 is supposed to operate is also a "mystery" (read:<BR>
invitation to smuggling or worse). (And what about the "other" A2, the one<BR>
in the summary on page 24 with Maneuver and Power Plant 2 and only 46 tons<BR>
of cargo?)<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:50:01 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Races and Recoil Tolerance<BR>
<BR>
In a campaign I was in, one of the characters had a 400dt ship with a<BR>
long central corridor.  They made it into a shooting range and would<BR>
practice in jumpspace..<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
> >Which brings up another question.  How many players<BR>
> >actually practice with their weapons?  And how many<BR>
> >actually go to the trouble of sighting in newly<BR>
> >acquired weapons?<BR>
><BR>
> Oh, you mean how many player-characters, don't you.  I'm<BR>
> sure all of the players who acquire guns sight them in and<BR>
> practice regularly.  Player-characters of such players<BR>
> probably do as well.  In fact, most of the<BR>
> player-characters that I have seen as a referee or a player<BR>
> check out their new weapons at the range at the first<BR>
> opportunity.  (My own player-characters do, of course, and<BR>
> I don't even own any guns.)<BR>
><BR>
> --Glenn<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 22:10:14 -0700<BR>
From: "J. Paul Sanders" <timmon@primenet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
At 08:12 PM 7/24/00 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, J. Paul Sanders at timmon@primenet.com wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>Given that Traveller credits are close to US 1977 dollars, this list is<BR>
>scary.  A few notes based on year 2000 prices:<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
>Just my Cr.02.  Time to update the list?<BR>
><BR>
>Tod<BR>
<BR>
Likely. The list was from a campaign in the early 90's (prices where NOT in<BR>
late '70's dollars/credits). Then to - these items are what was available<BR>
at a TL9 starport/starttown - which somewhat explains the inflated prices<BR>
(or so the reasoning was in the campaign that this list was derived from).<BR>
I think it's a valid assumption myself - last time I went on a bluewater<BR>
cruise, I felt I was being mugged at the marina's chandlers' store.<BR>
<BR>
L8r,<BR>
Paul<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 07:50:44 +0200 (METDST)<BR>
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Eris writes:<BR>
<BR>
>On 07/22/00 at 05:59 PM,  "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz> said:<BR>
><BR>
>>>Well, to start with, The Imperium is more of an *option* for CT than an<BR>
>>>actual *part* of it.<BR>
> <BR>
>>I'd disagree. To me the Imperium and it's institutions is what makes CT<BR>
>>CT.<BR>
> <BR>
>I knew someone would. <g><BR>
> <BR>
>I remember CT from before there were all those institutions.  You gamed in<BR>
>your own universe with little, or no, "Imperium and its institutions." IMO,<BR>
>*that* was CT!  What came later was the GDW's Imperium setting, played with<BR>
>CT.<BR>
<BR>
I remember the same thing, Eris, but that was over twenty years ago. Today,<BR>
when I play Traveller I use my own home-grown rules (with d20s and all), but<BR>
it takes place in the Imperium setting. Things change. The meaning of words<BR>
change. 'CT' changed. Once it was just 3 little black books and you gamed in<BR>
your own universe with little, or no, "Imperium and its institutions." But<BR>
then more books appeared, CT books all, and the Imperium setting became part<BR>
of it. A big part of it. Nowadays, if I were to ask some of my old players<BR>
if they wanted to play in a Traveller campaign, they'd ask "What rules?" not<BR>
"What setting?"[*].<BR>
<BR>
All highly subjective and totally IMO and YMMV, etc.<BR>
<BR>
[*] Well, they might ask "What period?" ;-)<BR>
<BR>
>The Imperium setting is fine, but it isn't the "be all and end all"<BR>
>of Traveller.  As Leonard said, "the Imperium is more of an option"<BR>
>not "what makes CT CT."<BR>
<BR>
Technically, of course, you're right. But to me Traveller is the Imperium<BR>
setting.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
      Hans Rancke<BR>
University of Copenhagen<BR>
     rancke@diku.dk<BR>
- ------------<BR>
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent<BR>
         events based on the individual situation."<BR>
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 23:42:08 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Grant <neo@total.net><BR>
Subject: GT: Starports illo<BR>
<BR>
Essentially Useless Information Dept:<BR>
<BR>
A recent mention of _GT: Starports_ had me flipping through the book <BR>
again, and I came across my illustration on pg.31, "Kiigashshiim & <BR>
Lanashraa, Cargo Brokers" -- I'd completely forgotten about the silly <BR>
stuff I'd put into the list of cargos on the broker's screen. <BR>
Amongst various ordinary cargos, like "Petrochemicals", there are:<BR>
<BR>
Vanadium Ingots<BR>
Desktop Printers<BR>
Monkeys, Brass<BR>
Carbonweave Flywheels<BR>
Dairy Products<BR>
Live Shellfish<BR>
Edible Oil Product<BR>
Spatulas<BR>
Gazebos<BR>
Mukluks<BR>
Hovercraft<BR>
Eels, Frozen<BR>
Pornography<BR>
Bedframes, Vibrating<BR>
Toasters<BR>
Betamax Videotapes<BR>
Cosmetic Implants<BR>
Waterwings, Gravitic<BR>
[and the rest are obscured:]<BR>
Drills, Tungsten Carbide<BR>
Inflatable Dolls<BR>
<BR>
Besides some Monty Python references, at least four of these refer to <BR>
sketches by a Canadian comedy troop, the Vestibules (formerly "Radio <BR>
Free Vestibule"), of which my brother-in-law is a member.<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
<BR>
Glenn<BR>
- -- <BR>
                Glenn Grant  <neo@total.net><BR>
        "How come if we can send a man to the Moon,<BR>
         we can't send a man to the Moon anymore?"<BR>
            --Cmdr Rick, _Prisoners of Gravity_<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 03:20:17 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Grant <neo@total.net><BR>
Subject: Re: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe)<BR>
<BR>
Terry Carlino writes:<BR>
<BR>
>  Now as I recall the device only had a few seconds lead time so the trick<BR>
>  was to cascade them to get useful times. So does that mean if you hook up<BR>
>  the laser in the above experiment to come on at a specific event that it<BR>
>  will travel slower so as not to transmit any information that the event<BR>
>  occurred?<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> replies:<BR>
<BR>
>What the device in question actually does is cause an entire light <BR>
>wave to travel at the speed of the front of the wave (and <BR>
>incidentally, shrinks the wave considerably).  This means that if <BR>
>you measure the speed of the peak of the wave, it's faster than <BR>
>light.  If you measure the speed of the front of the wave, it isn't <BR>
>faster than light.<BR>
<BR>
Correct.  As it was explained to me yesterday afternoon by (Analog <BR>
science columnist and high-energy physicist) John Cramer, the cesium <BR>
gas barrier acts as a filter which allows the wave-front to pass <BR>
through, but cuts off the more intense part of the wave, before the <BR>
peak actually enters the barrier.  Suddenly the wave is cut short -- <BR>
all that's left is the faint part that has already passed through the <BR>
barrier -- and snap, the peak suddenly *seems* to leap across the <BR>
room, at FTL speed.  But in fact nothing is travelling faster than <BR>
light.<BR>
<BR>
I asked Dr. Cramer about the "FTL photon" experiment after a panel at <BR>
Readercon, in Burlington, MA.  We had just finished a panel about the <BR>
depiction of scientific and technological breakthroughs in SF -- the <BR>
other panelists being Jeff Hecht and Paul Levinson.  An informative <BR>
panel, but I seemed to be the only one talking about SF; everybody <BR>
else kept wandering off into anecdotes (though interesting ones) <BR>
about accidental scientific discoveries.<BR>
<BR>
I don't suppose anyone on this list was at Readercon?  If not you <BR>
missed a really great convention.  Michael Moorcock was GOH.  Lots of <BR>
cool people there, like Chip Delany, Gene Wolfe, John Kessel, James <BR>
Morrow, and lots lots more.  And you haven't lived until you've <BR>
attended the Kirk Poland Memorial Bad Science Fiction and Fantasy <BR>
Prose Competition -- asphyxiatingly hilarious.<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
<BR>
Glenn<BR>
- -- <BR>
                Glenn Grant  <neo@total.net><BR>
_Northern Suns: The New Anthology of Canadian Science Fiction_<BR>
           Edited by David Hartwell & Glenn Grant<BR>
          ++Now in trade paperback from Tor Books++<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 01:14:04 -0700<BR>
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> on 7/24/00 4:54 PM, Jesse DeGraff at jdegraff@pacbell.net wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > The main point of the survey is to see if people object to the cloth armor<BR>
> > "skirt" on the assault battldress.  Modification suggestions that have<BR>
> > already been raised by others have been lengthening it slightly and adding<BR>
> > plate armor to it (my favorite) or same principle only making it vertically<BR>
> > slitted and armored akin to a Roman Legionaire.  BTW Doug, the author,<BR>
> > mentioned that a kilt is part of the dress uniform, so it's actually nicely<BR>
> > justified by that as well.<BR>
><BR>
> I'd be disinclined to favor the skirt design, for both practical and<BR>
> esthetic.  Personally, I think the skirt looks wrong.<BR>
<BR>
No... It works the heels aren't high enough.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Evyn...<BR>
<BR>
C-Space home http://home.att.net/~wmacdude/<BR>
<BR>
When Spring comes back with rustling shade,<BR>
And apple blossoms fills the air,<BR>
I have a rendezvous with Death,<BR>
When spring brings back blue days and fair.<BR>
 Legionnaire Alan Seeger, KIA the Somme.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:44:19 +0200 (METDST)<BR>
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash writes:<BR>
<BR>
>**High Guard represented a major departure in another area as well: the<BR>
>introduction of ships larger than 5,000 tons. When you recall this, the<BR>
>designation of the 1,200-ton /Kinunir/ as a cruiser doesn't seem nearly so<BR>
>silly, and the 1,000- to 5,000-ton megacorporate merchants in The Traveller<BR>
>Adventure make sense. Traveller lost something when warships and<BR>
>merchantmen went from being 2-50x the size of a PC vessel to 100-2,500x as<BR>
>large. <BR>
<BR>
True enough, Chris, but it also gained a smidgin of plausibility. I assume<BR>
that someone at GDW actually made an estimate of how much a high-population<BR>
system could reasonably be expected to produce and decide that just perhaps<BR>
the Imperium had ships a bit bigger.<BR>
<BR>
The alternative would be to have 100-2,500x as MANY ships. Or to make<BR>
ships a lot more expensive. Which would make civilian ships correspondingly<BR>
more expensive and make free traders a lot more implausible. Or to remove<BR>
all high-population worlds from the Imperium setting ...<BR>
<BR>
And Eris adds:<BR>
<BR>
>Absolutely!!!  And it's about time this was brought up (again).  I<BR>
>understand that some people want to wargame, not roleplay, and lots<BR>
>and lots of us like big guns, but the inflation of ship sizes was<BR>
>something I hated.  <BR>
<BR>
I can't say that I was entirely gruntled with them myself, but they do<BR>
follow logically from the background. No, I tell a lie. The Imperial<BR>
Navy is still composed of either too few or too small ships to fit the<BR>
number of Imperial high-population worlds.<BR>
<BR>
>I think we should take the /Kinunir/ class as really being a light<BR>
>cruiser, not some aberration.  When we do this the ships in classic<BR>
>Traveller make sense.<BR>
<BR>
For a universe composed entirely of systems with population levels below<BR>
9, yes. Otherwise, no.<BR>
<BR>
>The 800 dton /Broardsword/ class is a powerful ship, not a joke.<BR>
>The corsairs, merchants and gunboats all in the 200 to 1000 dtons work.<BR>
>The "huge" megacorp liners of 1 to 5 kdtons fit.  And if we take these<BR>
>numbers as normal, then heavy cruisers at 4 to 8 kdtons and dreadnaughts<BR>
>at 10 to 20 kdtons, aren't so outlandish.<BR>
<BR>
And if we do this, then either starships are too expensive for private<BR>
individuals to own, especially a set of scruffy vagabonds, or anybody<BR>
with a few billions can buy themselves a dreadnought.<BR>
<BR>
>That ought to be big enough for wargammers to have their fun, but still<BR>
>keep most ships in ranges reasonable for PC's to encounter and interact<BR>
>with.<BR>
> <BR>
>Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
>to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
>to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
>from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
>would build such monsters.<BR>
 <BR>
And if you do come up with a solution that does not affect the cost of <BR>
starships, those who can afford it would have lots and lots and lots<BR>
of ships instead. <BR>
<BR>
My own ideas run in the direction of making military ships very much<BR>
more expensive than civilian ships. One possibility I've considered<BR>
is making the cost of a jump drive N-squared MCr/dT, where N is the jump<BR>
number. Thus jump-1 drives would actually be cheaper than they are<BR>
under the current rules, jump-2 drives would cost the same, which is<BR>
good for civilian ships, but jump-4 drives would cost 4 times as much<BR>
and jump-6 drives 9 times. This mostly affects military ships.<BR>
<BR>
I've also considered making armor very expensive. 'Military-grade' armor,<BR>
whatever that may be.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
      Hans Rancke<BR>
University of Copenhagen<BR>
     rancke@diku.dk<BR>
- ------------<BR>
"And the rain it raineth every day<BR>
Upon the just and unjust fellas.<BR>
But more upon the just because<BR>
The unjust steal the just's umbrellas."<BR>
 -- Walter James<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 07:47:04 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: CT Ship Trade Viability (was Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T)<BR>
<BR>
At 01:26 AM 7/25/00, you wrote:<BR>
>That is definitely true. Twitching the least little thing in CT can easily<BR>
>make a ship impossible to run with financing. And then trying to upgrade the<BR>
>thing? Definitely impossible. The Type R has to have a subsidy or payments<BR>
>can't be made. How the A2 is supposed to operate is also a "mystery" (read:<BR>
>invitation to smuggling or worse). (And what about the "other" A2, the one<BR>
>in the summary on page 24 with Maneuver and Power Plant 2 and only 46 tons<BR>
>of cargo?)<BR>
><BR>
>Sam<BR>
<BR>
         Hi, Sam!<BR>
<BR>
         Myself and a few others have beaten this one stupid over the past <BR>
couple of years.  They only make money on speculative cargo work.  Hauling <BR>
boxes only pays out for the Big Boys.  Which means that a good chunk of <BR>
start capital is required for that A2.  Enough to buy the first couple <BR>
loads of cargo.<BR>
<BR>
         Alternately, you can go with a non-canon rules set.  I believe I <BR>
posted my alternate cargo rules to my website.  Take a look.  If you can't <BR>
find them, I'll repost them to the list.<BR>
<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	Michel R. Vaillancourt	misha@atlantic-online.ns.ca<BR>
				ICQ # 31172292<BR>
	"Reality Error in Progress....<BR>
			       ....Do Not Adjust Your Penguin"	<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	Cyberpunk:  	http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/cp2020<BR>
	Traveller:		http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/traveller<BR>
	AD&D:		http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/adnd_eurania<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	    ***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 02:55:25 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Jesse,<BR>
<BR>
    I like #1, but only #2 is doable.  So use #2.<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 03:15:35 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Races and Recoil Tolerance<BR>
<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>In a campaign I was in, one of the characters had a 400dt ship with a<BR>
>long central corridor.  They made it into a shooting range and would<BR>
>practice in jumpspace..<BR>
><BR>
>Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    Sounds like something out of Darkstar.  Did they also have a beach-ball<BR>
alien?<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:37:14 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Jesse DeGraff wrote:<BR>
> The main point of the survey is to see if people object to the<BR>
> cloth armor "skirt" on the assault battldress.  Modification<BR>
> suggestions that have already been raised by others have been<BR>
> lengthening it slightly and adding plate armor to it (my<BR>
> favorite) or same principle only making it vertically slitted<BR>
> and armored akin to a Roman Legionaire.  BTW Doug, the author,<BR>
> mentioned that a kilt is part of the dress uniform, so it's<BR>
> actually nicely justified by that as well.<BR>
<BR>
Two thoughts:<BR>
<BR>
First:  BD provides a sealed environment which can be used  in  a<BR>
vacuum or in exremely dense atmospheres (I don't have  the  exact<BR>
stats to hand  while  I  type  this  but  the  range  was  pretty<BR>
impressive).  It also provides protection against a wide range of<BR>
temperature extremes.  Any area protected  to  that  degree  wont<BR>
need an additional armour skirt.  I have no problem with the idea<BR>
of a armoured skirt  on  non-BD/non-CES  armour.  (CES  =  Combat<BR>
Environment Suit ... basically non-powered  BD  as  I  understand<BR>
it.)<BR>
<BR>
Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
BSG)?<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 08:00:40 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
<BR>
Yet another reason to subscribe to JTAS:<BR>
<BR>
This week's edition includes an "Amber Zone" adventure, written by Rob<BR>
Prior, that features none other than Hengabar Spofulam and his niece. <BR>
Glenn Grant provides a fine illustration of Miss Ditzjammer Spofulam.<BR>
<BR>
At US $15/year, there's no reason not to subscribe.  (No, I don't get a<BR>
cut.)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:48:16 GMT<BR>
From: "Jeff Rowse" <jeffrowse@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Tech Levels<BR>
<BR>
IIRC, at least one Traveller incarnation mentions that not all aspects of a <BR>
culture need be at the same tech level - some aspect (ie Warfare) may be one <BR>
or two tech levels above another aspect (ie Personal Transport); we have <BR>
smart weapons that can home in on their target from several hundred miles <BR>
away, but we *still* can't invent a cycle tire that won't get a puncture.<BR>
<BR>
And can someone repost the location of the young lass and the Hivers playing <BR>
with 'little guns' - I seem to remember something about "page x9", but <BR>
cannot remember what went before the 9 or which book it was in... #8(.  Any <BR>
assistance greatly appreciated.<BR>
<BR>
Jeff (aka Captain Chicken, a Leg-End in his own lunchtime).<BR>
"If you hear the signal, run like hell.  The signal is 'AARRGGH!'"<BR>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (rly-zb03.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.3]) by air-zb04.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:51:06 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:50:30 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id JAA01854;<BR>
	Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:49:10 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:48:49 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id JAA01808<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:48:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:48:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007251348.JAA01808@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2806</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/25/00 1:02:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Tuesday, July 25 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2806<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Chat<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
System Detailing:  Imperial Squadrons<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Grenadier Minis<BR>
Re: Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Striker Armor Values Formula<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: System Detailing:  Imperial Squadrons<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:36:40 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@btinternet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
> Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> wrote<BR>
><BR>
> someone wrote<BR>
> > >That's similar to a heresy I was considering; if you just change pop-9<BR>
to<BR>
> > >be '1-3 billion' and pop-A to be '4-9 billion' it will reduce the<BR>
> > >population of the imperium by around 70%.<BR>
><BR>
> > I like that.  I always thought the 10x factor scale for<BR>
> > population got out of control in a hurry towards the top end. Is,<BR>
perhaps,<BR>
> > the entire scale in need of readjustment? Something so the progression<BR>
> > is more gentle?<BR>
><BR>
> If we readjust the scale we can also reduce the number of planets<BR>
> that have very low populations. This will reduce the number of<BR>
> implausible planets with a population of 27 and a class A<BR>
> starport.<BR>
I know I am firing little guns here, though to this last statement I just<BR>
have to say , NO. I disagree and say that this last is plausible. I am<BR>
realing it to some recent past of mine where in a town there were many night<BR>
clubs, though the one night club costing the most to build, which had far<BR>
better facilities than all the rest, you would indeed find empty on most<BR>
nights, with all the lights going, bar open, music blaring. One could not<BR>
understand why, but for some reason it just was. If you tried to stick out<BR>
the evening there, you would soon tire of the surroundings. It just had no<BR>
character, no appeal, no life!!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@BTinternet.com<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 08:55:42 -0500<BR>
From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com><BR>
Subject: Chat<BR>
<BR>
I need a vict . . . er . . . volunteer to conduct a chat on JTAS --<BR>
possibly using the "chat in character" notion Steve floated in his poll<BR>
recently.<BR>
<BR>
Any takers?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Loren Wiseman<BR>
     Traveller Line Manager/Traveller Guru-in-Residence<BR>
     Editor, Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society  http://jtas.sjgames.com/<BR>
     SJ Games<BR>
     lkw@io.com http://www.io.com/~lkw/<BR>
     (512) 447-7866 VOX<BR>
     (512) 447-1144 FAX<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:51:37 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
While really Hi Pop worlds might be a problem, I see more of a difficulty<BR>
with the random nature of the distributions.<BR>
Why are some prime worlds sitting around with only 2-5000 people while dirt<BR>
balls or hell holes are teeming with billions? Past a certain point the<BR>
"Imperial Reservation" bit wears thin. Never mind anything else, reserving<BR>
every garden world and its brother for a bunch of nobles will result in a<BR>
rebellion well before 1000 years have passed. Likewise the "preparing for<BR>
colonization" and certain other explanations.<BR>
Related to this is TL variation. While nice in theory to have a few "lost<BR>
colonies" here and there, it has also been several hundred years since most<BR>
of them would have been rediscovered.  Even the most conservative,<BR>
isolationist Vilani colony should have managed to claw its way back to CT TL<BR>
7 in that time if not 9. Even more is the number of non-viable colonies<BR>
existing on artifacts from the previous Imperium or even Ancient technology.<BR>
Using the "non-viable" TL minimums in some of the Alien Modules quite a few<BR>
worlds in the Spinward Marches just shouldn't have any humans on them<BR>
anymore. Converting to Aliens hardly helps either unless you want tons of<BR>
them running around as well. Also, quite a few of them have populations so<BR>
low as to suggest their imminent collapse due to inbreeding in a very short<BR>
period of time. Grant/Jewell has a Pop of 20 and a TL of 0. While you could<BR>
stretch and call that the interdicting force, then why would they have a TL<BR>
of 0? Or 457-973/Rhylanor. 500 people and a TL4 with a government 1. How<BR>
could an Interstellar company get there with a TL of 4? And if established<BR>
by an Interstellar community, why would it only have a TL of 4? Would it<BR>
really be possible for Boeing to set up a factory to make biplanes these<BR>
days? It would only be worse with higher TLs.<BR>
So I'd start with reassigning Pops and TLs first before worrying about<BR>
reducing those A pop worlds. Spreading the people out a bit more evenly<BR>
first and I think the other problems will shrink a bit.<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 07:55:11 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >Using these figures population will average around 10 billion<BR>
> >(10^9) people for every 36 worlds and the Imperium will have<BR>
> >a population of about 3 trillion (10^12) people not 15 trillion.<BR>
> >Populations of -1 and B can be generated only with modifiers<BR>
> >of course, they are included for completeness.<BR>
<BR>
Actually population will average closer to 7 billion per<BR>
36 worlds and closer to 2.1 trillion for the 11,000 main<BR>
worlds. Determining the populations of secondary planets<BR>
is more difficult since planets not in the life zone have<BR>
negative modifiers to Pop, given that most will not be<BR>
in the life zone or have a standard atmosphere these<BR>
4,000+ planets will add very little to the total Imperial<BR>
population which should be less than 2.2 trillion.<BR>
<BR>
> I think that is a very good revision at first blush.  Would a<BR>
> TCS-junkie in the audience care to re-evaluate what this does to military<BR>
> budgets?<BR>
<BR>
It makes them a lot more playable. Since Population only<BR>
goes up as the square root of ten rather than tenfold per<BR>
Pop it becomes more plausible that planets with different<BR>
Pop might actually fight a war. In TCS's Island Campaign<BR>
setting one of the four main planets was Pop +1, TL -1<BR>
and another was Pop -1, TL +1. It always seemed to me that<BR>
the player with the highest Pop would win.<BR>
(I'm not a TCS junkie but I play one on TV)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:05:21 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry writes:<BR>
> At 05:50 PM 7/24/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> >Hm...toe to toe.  Obviously we have boneheaded marines here.<BR>
> <BR>
> Actually..  getting "inside the punch," close enough to attach limpet mines<BR>
> and do detailed naughtiness is probably the best way to do it.  Current<BR>
> doctrine emphasizes negating the armor advantage by closing to point-blank<BR>
> range.<BR>
<BR>
I doubt it emphasizes doing it from the front, which is what 'toe to toe' implies.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:19:01 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
<BR>
> > Gee, feeling bitter or something?  Personally, I agree that streamlining<BR>
> should have been done differently, but on the other hand GT doesn't have<BR>
> things like minimum bridge volume 20 tons, or multi-ton computers.<BR>
> <BR>
> Neither of those decisions have anywhere near the impact.<BR>
<BR>
True, but the lack of power plant slices has a pretty big impact.  GT USL merchant ships have way more free space than CT merchants.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:22:47 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Michael Scanlon writes:<BR>
> > If we readjust the scale we can also reduce the number of planets<BR>
> > that have very low populations. This will reduce the number of<BR>
> > implausible planets with a population of 27 and a class A<BR>
> > starport.<BR>
> I know I am firing little guns here, though to this last statement I just<BR>
> have to say , NO. I disagree and say that this last is plausible. I am<BR>
> realing it to some recent past of mine where in a town there were many<BR>
> night clubs, though the one night club costing the most to build, which<BR>
> had far better facilities than all the rest, you would indeed find empty on<BR>
> most nights, with all the lights going, bar open, music blaring. One could<BR>
> not understand why, but for some reason it just was. If you tried to stick<BR>
> out the evening there, you would soon tire of the surroundings. It just had<BR>
> no character, no appeal, no life!!<BR>
<BR>
First of all, the point is not that there aren't tiny towns out there.  The point is that there aren't tiny towns with massive shipbuilding industries.<BR>
<BR>
In addition, note that the majority of a planet's population is _not_ at the starport.  100,000 people on a planet is functionally uninhabited; I don't think there's any significant area on earth with a population density that low...<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:23:43 -0600<BR>
From: "Eric T. Holmes" <eholmes@lanl.gov><BR>
Subject: System Detailing:  Imperial Squadrons<BR>
<BR>
Fellow TMLers:<BR>
<BR>
I am trying to resolve a situation and I don't have my copy of Imp Sqdrns<BR>
at hand.<BR>
<BR>
When building World or System Details using the T4 Imperial Squardrons,<BR>
are System Defense Boat Squadrons the number of SDB Squadrons or the<BR>
number of system defense boats available to place in squadrons?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
<BR>
Eric<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 09:37:15 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Given that Traveller credits are close to US 1977 dollars, this list is<BR>
> scary.  A few notes based on year 2000 prices:<BR>
<BR>
Are they?  Based on economics in various supplements, you can argue they're worth well over a 1977 dollar (and in any case should be at least<BR>
<BR>
> > Item for Sale       Tech Level Weight    Mass/Volume  Credits<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Binoculars              TL3    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         300<BR>
> Nice binoculars!  Seviceable pair: more like Cr100<BR>
Or less.<BR>
> <BR>
> > Boots, Climbing         TL3    1.5 kg     3.0 ltr         200<BR>
> Hmmm.  About right<BR>
Actually, either high or low.  For the equivalent of TL 3 climbing boots I'd call it more like $50, and it will still be better than any TL 3 boots.<BR>
> <BR>
> > Bullhorn                TL6    0.5 kg     2.5 ltr         500<BR>
> More like Cr50<BR>
> <BR>
> > Calculator, Hand Solar  TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr          50<BR>
> Just looked at one of these.  TI scientific solar $9.95<BR>
And cheapo four-function calculators are probably $2.95 or less.<BR>
<BR>
> > Goggles (IR/LI)         TL9    0.2 kg     0.3 ltr        5000<BR>
> AN/PVS-7B State of the art LI/IR goggles $2795<BR>
And note that it would be TL 8.<BR>
<BR>
> > Map, Electronic         TL9    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr       10000<BR>
> Garmin streetpilot color ~$650<BR>
And odds are it includes a GPS receiver, a clock, ...<BR>
> <BR>
> > Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
> add a couple thousand and make it a Rolex.  Or buy an electronic for $49<BR>
Hm...what is a 'multichronometer' anyway?  Cost varies heavily with quality, for a basic electronic watch figure $2.95.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:39:06 -0500<BR>
From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com><BR>
Subject: Grenadier Minis<BR>
<BR>
A request for anybody who has some of the old Grenadier 25mm minis:<BR>
<BR>
Can you measure the height of the figs -- preferably one standing straight<BR>
up, measuring from the soles of the boots to the level of the eyes --<BR>
metric preferred, I'd like to confirm the dimensions of these.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Loren Wiseman<BR>
     Traveller Line Manager/Traveller Guru-in-Residence<BR>
     Editor, Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society  http://jtas.sjgames.com/<BR>
     SJ Games<BR>
     lkw@io.com http://www.io.com/~lkw/<BR>
     (512) 447-7866 VOX<BR>
     (512) 447-1144 FAX<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:00:39 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Grant <neo@total.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
<BR>
John Groth <wombat@premier.net> writes:<BR>
<BR>
>Yet another reason to subscribe to JTAS:<BR>
>This week's edition includes an "Amber Zone" adventure, written by Rob<BR>
>Prior, that features none other than Hengabar Spofulam and his niece.<BR>
>Glenn Grant provides a fine illustration of Miss Ditzjammer Spofulam.<BR>
<BR>
Based heavily on Jesse's cartoons of Ditzie, I hasten to point out.<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
<BR>
Glenn<BR>
- -- <BR>
    ------------------------Glenn Grant------------------------<BR>
                          <neo@total.net><BR>
       "I don't want to achieve immortality through my work.<BR>
         I want to achieve it by not dying." -- Woody Allen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:16:07<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 12:37 PM 7/25/2000 +0100, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>First:  BD provides a sealed environment which can be used  in  a<BR>
>vacuum or in exremely dense atmospheres (I don't have  the  exact<BR>
>stats to hand  while  I  type  this  but  the  range  was  pretty<BR>
>impressive).  It also provides protection against a wide range of<BR>
>temperature extremes.  Any area protected  to  that  degree  wont<BR>
>need an additional armour skirt.  I have no problem with the idea<BR>
>of a armoured skirt  on  non-BD/non-CES  armour.  (CES  =  Combat<BR>
>Environment Suit ... basically non-powered  BD  as  I  understand<BR>
>it.)<BR>
<BR>
The idea is to make sure that you can't disable a BD equiped trooper by<BR>
shooting into the groin.  Since heavy armor on that are is imprractable, an<BR>
armored skirt (or kilt, as I prefer) is a good compromise.<BR>
<BR>
>Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
>white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
>BSG)?<BR>
<BR>
Marine BD incorporates chameleon surfaces, so they should be a variaty of<BR>
colors, depending on the background.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 10:16:47<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 09:05 AM 7/25/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>I doubt it emphasizes doing it from the front, which is what 'toe to toe'<BR>
implies.<BR>
<BR>
If you can get to the driver, that tank is dead.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:09:37 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> >I doubt it emphasizes doing it from the front, which is what 'toe to toe'<BR>
> implies.<BR>
><BR>
> If you can get to the driver, that tank is dead.<BR>
> --<BR>
<BR>
We prevent this with AP plates. Essentially claymore mine like firing high<BR>
density flechettes set it rows along the skirt of the vehicle.  Up close is<BR>
very, very bad.  K Laumer has these in his 'Bolo' series.  And it also<BR>
doubles as reactive armor.<BR>
<BR>
A RealLife (tm) version of this is the South African Holland hail organ.<BR>
Vehicle mounted, it consists of a large number of  40mm 'shotguns' firing<BR>
square shot mounted under the chassis.  Very unpleasant.  An older article<BR>
in Soldier of Fortune details the effect on a bunch of terrorist attempting<BR>
to hijack a bus.  Only the leader survived (he had a head wound and a leg<BR>
blown off).  His fellow terrorists were reduced to chunks hanging in the<BR>
trees.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:16:25 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
> And if we do this, then either starships are too expensive for private<BR>
> individuals to own, especially a set of scruffy vagabonds, or anybody<BR>
> with a few billions can buy themselves a dreadnought.<BR>
<BR>
And this is a bad thing how? Nasty rich people with private navies?<BR>
Adventures waiting to happen. :-)<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:30:30 +0300<BR>
From: "Ken J. Kazinski" <kjkazinski@ksaits.com><BR>
Subject: Striker Armor Values Formula<BR>
<BR>
Does anyone have the formula that was used to create the Striker Armor<BR>
Table?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
<BR>
Kaz<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:32:20 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
> A RealLife (tm) version of this is the South African Holland hail organ.<BR>
> Vehicle mounted, it consists of a large number of  40mm 'shotguns' firing<BR>
> square shot mounted under the chassis.<BR>
<BR>
Ah, South Africa. The nation whose response to car crime is to start<BR>
mounting flamethrouwers under the door sills....<BR>
<BR>
NB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 11:37:21 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
I wrote a program to adjust pop scale, as follows:<BR>
Add +2 for port-A, +1 for port-B<BR>
Add +1 for atmosphere 4-9<BR>
Add +1 for water 2-9<BR>
Add +5<BR>
New pop code is half this number.<BR>
New pop digit is (old/3) if even, (old*2/3)+3 if odd.  Round normally, min 1.<BR>
<BR>
Applied to the Spinward Marches, population drops from 438 billion to 51 billion.  Highest populations become Porozlo and Fornice, both at 4 billion.  Lowest population is 600.  Pixie is the smallest world with a class-A port, with a population of 30,000.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:46:11 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: System Detailing:  Imperial Squadrons<BR>
<BR>
"Eric T. Holmes" wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Fellow TMLers:<BR>
> <BR>
> I am trying to resolve a situation and I don't have my copy of Imp Sqdrns<BR>
> at hand.<BR>
> <BR>
> When building World or System Details using the T4 Imperial Squardrons,<BR>
> are System Defense Boat Squadrons the number of SDB Squadrons or the<BR>
> number of system defense boats available to place in squadrons?<BR>
<BR>
According to _Imperial Squadrons_, page 26, the table does indeed<BR>
provide the number of SDB squadrons in-system.<BR>
<BR>
The table itself (on page 28) is also labeled "SDB Squadrons."<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:59:00 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
<<snip>><BR>
> ><BR>
> > > Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
> > add a couple thousand and make it a Rolex.  Or buy an electronic for $49<BR>
> Hm...what is a 'multichronometer' anyway?  Cost varies heavily with quality, for a basic electronic watch figure $2.95.<BR>
<BR>
Based on the name, I would expect a multichronometer to be a timepiece<BR>
that can track and display more than one world's time simultaneously. <BR>
Thus, with one watch, one can keep track of times and dates on the<BR>
following example worlds:<BR>
<BR>
New Washington, with a forty-hour day;<BR>
Thurstone, with "hours" that are 1.08 standard hours long;<BR>
Terra, with a day of twenty-four standard hours.<BR>
<BR>
Presumably, the more expensive multichrons can track more worlds<BR>
simultaneously.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:04:47 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
> ><BR>
> > >I doubt it emphasizes doing it from the front, which is what 'toe to<BR>
toe'<BR>
> > implies.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > If you can get to the driver, that tank is dead.<BR>
> > --<BR>
><BR>
> We prevent this with AP plates. Essentially claymore mine like firing high<BR>
> density flechettes set it rows along the skirt of the vehicle.  Up close<BR>
is<BR>
> very, very bad.  K Laumer has these in his 'Bolo' series.  And it also<BR>
> doubles as reactive armor.<BR>
><BR>
> A RealLife (tm) version of this is the South African Holland hail organ.<BR>
> Vehicle mounted, it consists of a large number of  40mm 'shotguns' firing<BR>
> square shot mounted under the chassis.  Very unpleasant.  An older article<BR>
> in Soldier of Fortune details the effect on a bunch of terrorist<BR>
attempting<BR>
> to hijack a bus.  Only the leader survived (he had a head wound and a leg<BR>
> blown off).  His fellow terrorists were reduced to chunks hanging in the<BR>
> trees.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Part of my training as Anti-Armor gunner (not just guns, we learned lots of<BR>
ways to kill armor) was to get inside of a MBT and find out for ourselves<BR>
just how poor the vision from inside a tank really is. If you can convince<BR>
him to 'button up' (mortars are great, a .50 cal is ok, if you are willing<BR>
to risk an MG, a few rifles will do in a pinch) a tankers vision becomes<BR>
restricted to a very narrow wedge. Get within 10 feet of a buttoned up tank<BR>
and infantry is invisible. Scary to do and you lose a lot of grunts trying,<BR>
but the alternative is letting them roll over you.<BR>
AP plates are one shot. If it takes half a section to use up the tanks<BR>
defenses, then the other half had _better_   do the tank right.<BR>
That is, after all, why they're called the PBI. Do and die.<BR>
Trading a section of infantry for a MBT or a squad of Impereal Marines for a<BR>
GravTank is a good investment.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/7-10/appj.htm<BR>
Down the bottom of the page - Figures J-17 & J-18<BR>
<BR>
Pronto<BR>
AKA Brian Taylor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:27:15 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Error in M0 map on maps.grandsurvey.com?<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > Massilia: three worlds in subsector D (Zalucha).  That's not just a bug<BR>
> > there, it's in the general DGP sector files *and* as printed in<BR>
> > _Knightfall_.  :(  <BR>
> Actually, there's 4.<BR>
[...]<BR>
> Hm...only the physical UWPs are identical in these files.  The affected worlds<BR>
> (I chose to use the first of the pair in all cases) are:<BR>
> Khiian Ark .     0720 A100348-D   LoPop Va         424 Na K9 III M5 D    <BR>
> #Kuamirar .      0720 A100362-E   LoPop Va         224 Na F5 V           <BR>
> Iishma Ash.      2503 C3225A7-8   Ni Po            114 Na G3 V           <BR>
> #Vluund  .       2503 C322888-8   Na Po            214 Na M2 II M8 D     <BR>
> Khegshesaup.     2506 C434334-A   LoPop            223 Na G0 V           <BR>
> #Vlin .          2506 B434110-A   LoPop            723 Na G4 V M6 D      <BR>
> Iinarla.         2508 B100786-C   Na Va            502 Na K1 V M2 D      <BR>
> #Khiiir.         2508 B100200-C   LoPop Va         702 Na M7 VI M2 D     <BR>
<BR>
Oh, that's classic -- they *added* a duplicate!  The UWPs in the M:0 file<BR>
must have been rolled back randomly, with slightly different results.<BR>
Here's the same hexes from the "updated" DGP version:<BR>
<BR>
Amaya         0720 A100321-G    Ni Va Lo           924 Li K9 III M5 D<BR>
Moran         2503 B3227B8-B    Po Na              414 Ma M2 II M8 D<BR>
Euteneier     2503 B3227B8-B    Po Na              414 Ma G3 V<BR>
Hayashi       2506 B434678-C  N Ni                 323 Ma G4 V M6 D<BR>
Cragun 3      2506 B434678-C  N Ni                 323 Ma G0 V<BR>
Janeen        2508 A100610-G  N Ni Va Na           302 Ma K1 V M2 D<BR>
Zalucha       2508 A100610-G  N Ni Va Na Cp        302 Ma M7 VI M2 D<BR>
<BR>
  -- Steve Bonneville<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:29:33 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
And...there's a _problem_ with Car Wars LARPS??? ;-P<BR>
<BR>
Nick Bradbeer wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > A RealLife (tm) version of this is the South African Holland hail organ.<BR>
> > Vehicle mounted, it consists of a large number of  40mm 'shotguns' firing<BR>
> > square shot mounted under the chassis.<BR>
> <BR>
> Ah, South Africa. The nation whose response to car crime is to start<BR>
> mounting flamethrouwers under the door sills....<BR>
> <BR>
> NB<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:35:19 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
> Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> <<snip>><BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > > Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
> > > add a couple thousand and make it a Rolex.  Or buy an electronic for<BR>
$49<BR>
> > Hm...what is a 'multichronometer' anyway?  Cost varies heavily with<BR>
quality, for a basic electronic watch figure $2.95.<BR>
><BR>
> Based on the name, I would expect a multichronometer to be a timepiece<BR>
> that can track and display more than one world's time simultaneously.<BR>
> Thus, with one watch, one can keep track of times and dates on the<BR>
> following example worlds:<BR>
><BR>
<<snip>><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
According to the World Builders Handbook, Survey Equipment,<BR>
"This timepiece sets itself, in one planetary rotation, to local zero<BR>
meridian time, local solar time, and local sidereal time. A setting allows<BR>
for automatic time zone corrections according to world size. It also keeps<BR>
Imperial standard time.<BR>
The sidereal and zero meridian times are of interest mainly to the<BR>
astronomer and navigator, giving them the spin plane of the world, its year<BR>
length, and other information."<BR>
TL9  Cr500,  0.1kg    0.2ltr<BR>
TL10  Cr200   -     .1ltr<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:35:53 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/24/00 7:15 AM, allensh@yahoo.com issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> (This is being forwarded to my players, btw, and<BR>
> I think they should ALL subscribe to the TML, don't<BR>
> you? <g>)<BR>
<BR>
Up to you, but I am quite hesitant to get /my/ players on the TML, as any<BR>
adventure seeds that pop up here would have to be modified and maybe stashed<BR>
for much later use.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:37:55 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
At 9:48 -0400 25/7/00, Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> wrote:<BR>
> >Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
> >to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
> >to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
> >from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
> >would build such monsters.<BR>
>And if you do come up with a solution that does not affect the cost of<BR>
>starships, those who can afford it would have lots and lots and lots<BR>
>of ships instead.<BR>
<BR>
What about:<BR>
<BR>
"Using current technology the maximum size ship which can safely <BR>
transition into jumpspace is 5000 dT. It is hoped that more advanced <BR>
technologies will eventually allow this limit to be broken."<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:46:05 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/24/00 2:10 PM, gridlore@pop.mindspring.com issued<BR>
forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Exactly  :)  I get more tourist from places that get hit by tornados,<BR>
> hurricanes and killer blizzards telling me that they could never take "all<BR>
> the earthquakes."  What, one major event every thirty years?<BR>
> -- <BR>
<BR>
I'll take the ground shaking over the sky sucking me up anytime.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:49:34 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
> Part of my training as Anti-Armor gunner (not just guns, we learned lots<BR>
of<BR>
> ways to kill armor) was to get inside of a MBT and find out for ourselves<BR>
> just how poor the vision from inside a tank really is. If you can convince<BR>
> him to 'button up' (mortars are great, a .50 cal is ok, if you are willing<BR>
> to risk an MG, a few rifles will do in a pinch) a tankers vision becomes<BR>
> restricted to a very narrow wedge. Get within 10 feet of a buttoned up<BR>
tank<BR>
> and infantry is invisible. Scary to do and you lose a lot of grunts<BR>
trying,<BR>
> but the alternative is letting them roll over you.<BR>
> AP plates are one shot. If it takes half a section to use up the tanks<BR>
> defenses, then the other half had _better_   do the tank right.<BR>
> That is, after all, why they're called the PBI. Do and die.<BR>
> Trading a section of infantry for a MBT or a squad of Impereal Marines for<BR>
a<BR>
> GravTank is a good investment.<BR>
<BR>
But AP plates aren't just one shot.  You have multiple pates to cover each<BR>
route of approach, appropriately mounted to prevent sympathetic detonation.<BR>
And one hopes that there are better sensors on Grav tanks than the old<BR>
periscopes.  Further, one hopes that your other tanks are providing mutual<BR>
supporting fire.  Something like a nice little VRF gauss gun, laser or<BR>
infinite repeater-kills infantry while not endangering tanks.<BR>
<BR>
Having been on the inside of a track when all buttoned up, it IS a damn<BR>
scary.  All the things you can't see will drive you crazy.  That's why you<BR>
have your own infantry.  Tanks without support are just really expensive<BR>
targets.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2806<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc02.mx.aol.com (rly-yc02.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.34]) by air-yc03.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:02:38 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc02.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:01:50 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id PAA15357;<BR>
	Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:50:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:49:43 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id PAA15313<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:49:43 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:49:43 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007251949.PAA15313@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2806<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2807</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/25/00 3:04:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Tuesday, July 25 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2807<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: New from 4U!<BR>
Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
RE: Multichron<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Multichron<BR>
GRIP:Traveller<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:55:38 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, timmon@primenet.com issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Text, Pressure          TL7    25.0 kg    30.0 ltr       3000<BR>
<BR>
Should this be "tent"?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:56:41 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Having been on the inside of a track when all buttoned up, it IS a damn<BR>
> scary.  All the things you can't see will drive you crazy.  That's why you<BR>
> have your own infantry.  Tanks without support are just really expensive<BR>
> targets.<BR>
<BR>
Are the tanks of the future going to be so blind?  I can imagine a hull<BR>
dotted with cameras which are then used to give the crew a full 360 degree<BR>
view, even when they're all wrapped up in armor.  Even today, I'm a bit<BR>
surprised they don't do that.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 12:58:01 -0700<BR>
From: "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "SD Mooney" <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 11:37 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> At 9:48 -0400 25/7/00, Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> wrote:<BR>
> > >Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
> > >to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
> > >to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
> > >from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
> > >would build such monsters.<BR>
> >And if you do come up with a solution that does not affect the cost of<BR>
> >starships, those who can afford it would have lots and lots and lots<BR>
> >of ships instead.<BR>
> <BR>
> What about:<BR>
> <BR>
> "Using current technology the maximum size ship which can safely <BR>
> transition into jumpspace is 5000 dT. It is hoped that more advanced <BR>
> technologies will eventually allow this limit to be broken."<BR>
> <BR>
> Dom<BR>
> <BR>
Wasn't the Azhanti High Lightning larger then that?<BR>
<BR>
Jeffrey Yin<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:08:12 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: New from 4U!<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> *** SPLORK!!!!! ***<BR>
><BR>
> First k/b kill in awhile :)<BR>
><BR>
> Jesse<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, now just imagine what Ditzie will do when she hears about it! <eg><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:10:08 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 11:36 AM 7/24/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>response #2:  "Well, my great ancestors lived on Terra, in<BR>
>>Northern California, and they didn't think anything of<BR>
>>earthquakes."<BR>
><BR>
> Exactly  :)  I get more tourist from places that get hit by tornados,<BR>
> hurricanes and killer blizzards telling me that they could never take "all<BR>
> the earthquakes."  What, one major event every thirty years?<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, the stakes are a bit higher with a supernova. It's<BR>
not a case of "you might be killed". It's a case of "you *will* die!".<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:19:16 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Gregory Carl Kettler writes:<BR>
 <BR>
> Are the tanks of the future going to be so blind?  I can imagine a hull<BR>
> dotted with cameras which are then used to give the crew a full 360 degree<BR>
> view, even when they're all wrapped up in armor.  Even today, I'm a bit<BR>
> surprised they don't do that.<BR>
<BR>
Its probably doable with current electronics, but it wasn't doable with the electronics available at the time any current tanks were being designed.  Even today it would probably have significant issues with ruggedness.<BR>
<BR>
That said, all the grav tanks I've designed for GT include 360 camera coverage with HUD for the driver.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:15:29 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: "Neal C. Oldham" <nco@its.caltech.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
> Are the tanks of the future going to be so blind?  I can imagine a<BR>
> hull dotted with cameras which are then used to give the crew a full<BR>
> 360 degree view, even when they're all wrapped up in armor.  Even<BR>
> today, I'm a bit surprised they don't do that.<BR>
<BR>
The only secure way to do this today would be to run fiber-optic line all<BR>
over the tank, as far as I can tell.  This probably would be doable, so<BR>
long as you didn't try to put any holes in the armor, thus reducing your<BR>
protection.  IMHO modern cameras are either too small or too fragile to<BR>
have any practical use on combat vehicles; they would probably be visible<BR>
to infantry and thus susceptible to small-arms fire.  Smaller cameras or<BR>
even fiber optics probably don't have enough field of vision to be useful<BR>
except in large quantities with current technology.  However, some of<BR>
these problems will likely be overcome in the near future.<BR>
<BR>
- ---<BR>
Neal C. Oldham<BR>
nco@caltech.edu<BR>
<BR>
ad astra!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:44:34 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Neal C. Oldham writes:<BR>
> The only secure way to do this today would be to run fiber-optic line all<BR>
> over the tank, as far as I can tell.  This probably would be doable, so<BR>
> long as you didn't try to put any holes in the armor, thus reducing your<BR>
Standard copper wire would work too, though it wouldn't be EMP safe.<BR>
> protection.  IMHO modern cameras are either too small or too fragile to<BR>
> have any practical use on combat vehicles; they would probably be visible<BR>
> to infantry and thus susceptible to small-arms fire.  Smaller cameras or<BR>
> even fiber optics probably don't have enough field of vision to be useful<BR>
> except in large quantities with current technology.  However, some of<BR>
> these problems will likely be overcome in the near future.<BR>
<BR>
If you look at a modern digital camera (designed to take stills) it does pseudo-realtime images at fairly low resolution, and they're small, cheap, and moderately rugged.  A small band of similar sensors would probably give the equivalent of around 20:200 vision, which isn't enough to reliably shoot anything at any significant distance but is plenty to show you infantry trying to attach limpet mines to your hull.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:46:35 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
<BR>
> Via electronic medium on 7/24/00 2:10 PM, gridlore@pop.mindspring.com<BR>
issued<BR>
> forth:<BR>
><BR>
> > Exactly  :)  I get more tourist from places that get hit by tornados,<BR>
> > hurricanes and killer blizzards telling me that they could never take<BR>
"all<BR>
> > the earthquakes."  What, one major event every thirty years?<BR>
> > --<BR>
><BR>
> I'll take the ground shaking over the sky sucking me up anytime.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Just avoid trailer parks and you should be fine.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:51:28 +0100<BR>
From: Stephen Bankhead <bankheas@bankhead.dnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
At 12:55 25/07/00 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>Via electronic medium on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, timmon@primenet.com issued forth:<BR>
><BR>
>> Text, Pressure          TL7    25.0 kg    30.0 ltr       3000<BR>
><BR>
>Should this be "tent"?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
No its correct...its the font you use at 2.00am on the morning of the<BR>
submission of your vital report 8-)<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:59:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Rodney Basler" <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Multichron<BR>
<BR>
>From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
>Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
><BR>
<snip><BR>
>Based on the name, I would expect a multichronometer to be a timepiece<BR>
>that can track and display more than one world's time simultaneously.<BR>
>Thus, with one watch, one can keep track of times and dates on the<BR>
>following example worlds:<BR>
><BR>
>New Washington, with a forty-hour day;<BR>
>Thurstone, with "hours" that are 1.08 standard hours long;<BR>
>Terra, with a day of twenty-four standard hours.<BR>
><BR>
>Presumably, the more expensive multichrons can track more worlds<BR>
>simultaneously.<BR>
<BR>
	If I may ask, of what possible use could that information be?  Remember,<BR>
information only travels at the rate of 1-6 parsecs a week - what good does<BR>
it do you to know that the stockmarket on Regina opened 5 minutes ago, if<BR>
you won't be getting the quotes until next week, and you buy order will not<BR>
go through until the week after that?  On earth, we find a timepiece that<BR>
reads multiple times useful only because we can take an active role in<BR>
events in those timezones.<BR>
<BR>
	Rod Basler, COFIT - (Crochety Old Fart In Training)<BR>
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
- ------<BR>
Disclaimer - I'm at work; they tell me to think, they just don't tell me<BR>
_what_ to think, OK?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:12:05 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 07:09 PM 7/24/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>>>>Only if the penguins beat my Evil Trained Monkeys(TM) to it. Fly, my<BR>
>>>>pretties, fly...<BR>
>>>Feh.  The stalwart Penguins of the 101st Monkey Defense Artillery await<BR>
>>>your aerial simians with anticipation and Vulcans.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Well, I guess that gives you a guaranteed kill on the first six, at which<BR>
>>point you start having reload issues...<BR>
>><BR>
>>But what made you think they flew? The sentence my psy-ops team asked me to<BR>
>>add to the end of the mail? Ah well.... just think how surprised the<BR>
>>penguins'll be when they tunnel up underneath 'em.<BR>
><BR>
> <An Imperial Marine Colonel in dress uniform approaches><BR>
><BR>
> "Right.  Enough of that, this thread has gotten too silly.  Started off<BR>
> with nice little question about author's and artist copies of books, and<BR>
> now we're up to our knickers in heavily armed penguins and tunneling monkeys!<BR>
><BR>
> "This is the Traveller Mailing List, so I want a good clean Traveller<BR>
> topic.  So on command, you will commence the large scale economy discussion.<BR>
><BR>
> "List!  Diisss.. (Wait for it!)  ..cuss!"<BR>
<BR>
Well, if you *really* want us to diss and cuss you, I'm sure it can be<BR>
arranged... :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:26:04 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, J. Paul Sanders at timmon@primenet.com wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> Given that Traveller credits are close to US 1977 dollars, this list is<BR>
> scary.  A few notes based on year 2000 prices:<BR>
><BR>
>> Posted this about three years ago...thought the newer members of the list<BR>
>> might find it useful.<BR>
>> ******<BR>
>> <BR>
>> The following supplies are available at the local port:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Item for Sale       Tech Level Weight    Mass/Volume  Credits<BR>
 <BR>
>> Communicator 500km      TL9    1.5 lg     3.0 ltr       20000<BR>
> Yaesu, Kenwood Icom shortwave rig. ~$2500<BR>
><BR>
>> Detector, Metal         TL6    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr        1200<BR>
> $99 at radio shack<BR>
<BR>
Cheap junk. The professional gear is $200-300 (and in 77 they were<BR>
about 3 times that!)<BR>
<BR>
>> Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
> add a couple thousand and make it a Rolex.  Or buy an electronic for $49<BR>
<BR>
It'd be rather more expensive because it's got to handle different<BR>
length "days" (sols) and different sized (and numbers!) of "hours"<BR>
(durs). As well as have an interface to allow synching it to the local<BR>
timebase (Traveller ships *will* introduce relativistic effects, and<BR>
then there's the fact that time in and outside jump don't always match)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 13:43:39 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
> <<snip>><BR>
>> ><BR>
>> > > Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
>> > add a couple thousand and make it a Rolex.  Or buy an electronic for $49<BR>
>> Hm...what is a 'multichronometer' anyway?  Cost varies heavily with <BR>
> quality, for a basic electronic watch figure $2.95.<BR>
><BR>
> Based on the name, I would expect a multichronometer to be a timepiece<BR>
> that can track and display more than one world's time simultaneously. <BR>
<BR>
Well, properly speaking, a "chronometer" is a *high accuracy* time<BR>
keeping device. That is, if you have a pair of them, after a prolonged<BR>
period (months) they should differ by as little as possible. Seconds<BR>
with modern gear.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:11:26 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
From: "Anthony Jackson" <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
<BR>
> Neal C. Oldham writes:<BR>
> > The only secure way to do this today would be to run fiber-optic line<BR>
all<BR>
> > over the tank, as far as I can tell.  This probably would be doable, so<BR>
> > long as you didn't try to put any holes in the armor, thus reducing your<BR>
> Standard copper wire would work too, though it wouldn't be EMP safe.<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
> If you look at a modern digital camera (designed to take stills) it does<BR>
pseudo-realtime images at > fairly low resolution, and they're small, cheap,<BR>
and moderately rugged.  A small band of similar<BR>
> sensors would probably give the equivalent of around 20:200 vision, which<BR>
isn't enough to<BR>
> reliably shoot anything at any significant distance but is plenty to show<BR>
you infantry trying to<BR>
> attach limpet mines to your hull.<BR>
<BR>
If the target tank system uses copper wires, equip the infantry with EMP<BR>
bombs, which appear to be, in the here and now, about the size of a large<BR>
pipe bomb. Shut down *all*  the systems that rely on copper. (EMP grenades,<BR>
I like that!) Then, assualt the tank.<BR>
<BR>
If I'm way off on the size, somebody correct me, without a flamethrower,<BR>
please.  :)<BR>
<BR>
If the system uses all fiber optic....  Hmmm, theres got to be a weakness<BR>
there. Any ideas?<BR>
<BR>
Pronto<BR>
AKA Brian Taylor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:11:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
A number of people have been expressing the opinion that population should<BR>
be modified based on the "Terran-ness" of a world.  Let me just express<BR>
the dissenting opinion.  I think that if there were any relationship like<BR>
this at all, it would be a very weak one.  The reasons:<BR>
<BR>
Terran planets are not that useful for agriculture.  A terran type world<BR>
might reduce life-support costs to some degree for heating and atmosphere,<BR>
but they will also produce many problems that won't be seen on rockballs<BR>
and so-called hell-worlds.  Namely, crops you plant on a Terran world<BR>
would have to compete with the local ecosystem.  Soil bacteria and other<BR>
simple organisms would fill up niches where similar terran creatures are<BR>
required for plant growth.  To lay down your fields and orchards you'd<BR>
have to sterilize the entire area, which is actually more difficult than<BR>
it sounds, especially keeping it that way without killing the "good" <BR>
bacteria.  You would also have to introduce your good bacteria.  In the<BR>
end, it's really not much more difficult to set up an enclosed area on a<BR>
rockball. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Terran planets are less useful for mining.  Regarding extraction of<BR>
natural resources, rockballs are ripe for the picking.  No worrying about<BR>
the Pan Galactic friends of life protesting your stip-mining operation<BR>
because it's threatening the only known stand of Purple Glueberry Trees. <BR>
You can just tear the place to bits.  The lack of seismic activity on most<BR>
rockballs also makes them easier to deal with.  Finally, the low gravity<BR>
of most rock-balls makes it easier to transport ore into orbit. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Terran planets are not psychologically more appealing.  There seems to be<BR>
the attitude that people would _want_ to live on "Garden Worlds" because<BR>
they're "nicer" or more "like home".  This argument ignores the fact that<BR>
humans have been in space for millenia at this point in Imperial history,<BR>
and "home" hasn't been Terra for a long time.  Most Imperial colonists, if<BR>
they are looking for a place "like home" will be looking for something<BR>
very different from Garden Worlds.  <BR>
<BR>
Consider a person who's been raised on a vaccuum world all his life<BR>
suddenly landing on the planet Gardenia and finding that a) The<BR>
temperature varies significantly from 20 C, b) The air is full of little<BR>
buzzing _living things that aren't people_!  c) The ground is moist,<BR>
squishy, and also crawling with little _lttap_!  Basically it would be<BR>
like someone from Oslo being transported into the heart of the Amazon. The<BR>
reaction would likely be mild to total repugnance, not a feeling of "ahh,<BR>
fresh air!"  Of course, you could always stay in a contained environment,<BR>
but then why bother with the garden world in the first place?<BR>
<BR>
Most likely, colonists will seek out worlds where their existing<BR>
technologies and ways of life can best be transplanted.  This means the<BR>
decendents of those few hundred mining colonists on Olympia will be<BR>
looking for other rockballs.  Or more likely will stay home in their safe<BR>
underground cities and have lots of babies, producing those pop A<BR>
rockballs. <BR>
<BR>
The bottom line is, alien ecosystems are hostile things, or at least<BR>
competitive things.  They produce a lot of bother compared to a nice<BR>
sterile rockball colony which you can easily shape into anything you want.<BR>
Indeed, there's much to recommend abandonning planets altogether and<BR>
staying in orbitting colonies or asteroid bases (see Glisten, e.g.).  Many<BR>
of the "hell world" colonies could consist of this sort of thing.  <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I think one problem we have as Traveller players is truly imagining a<BR>
society of high tech beings with radically different fundamental<BR>
assumptions from our own.  It is very hard for me to get into the head<BR>
space of a Vilani who shuns technological advance and seeks to maintain<BR>
the status quo at all costs, but this is not because it is unrealistic for<BR>
people to think this way (they have in many societies for long periods of<BR>
time). Rather, it reflects a lack of my own imaginative capacities.<BR>
<BR>
Likewise, it is difficult for me to imagine a human being landing on a<BR>
smoking sulfuric rock and saying "perfect!", but again that's just a<BR>
lack of imagination.  People like different environments to the exclusion<BR>
of other peoples' reasons:  Doug refuses to live anywhere where 'water<BR>
takes solid form outside of drinks' and I refuse to live anywhere where<BR>
'earth moves outside of construction sites and sandboxes' :-).  It's all<BR>
in what you're used to. <BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:11:40 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
<BR>
Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Via electronic medium on 7/24/00 2:10 PM, gridlore@pop.mindspring.com issued<BR>
> forth:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Exactly  :)  I get more tourist from places that get hit by tornados,<BR>
> > hurricanes and killer blizzards telling me that they could never take "all<BR>
> > the earthquakes."  What, one major event every thirty years?<BR>
> > --<BR>
> <BR>
> I'll take the ground shaking over the sky sucking me up anytime.<BR>
<BR>
Move to Missouri; you can have _both_ there!  Between the tornadoes and<BR>
the New Madrid fault, there's something for everyone! ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Of course, the state in which I now reside, while apparently<BR>
earthquake-free, has devastating hurricanes (especially the ones at Pat<BR>
O'Brien's!).<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:18:27 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Pronto writes:<BR>
<BR>
> If the target tank system uses copper wires, equip the infantry with EMP<BR>
> bombs, which appear to be, in the here and now, about the size of a large<BR>
> pipe bomb. Shut down *all*  the systems that rely on copper. (EMP grenades,<BR>
> I like that!) Then, assualt the tank.<BR>
<BR>
I didn't say copper wires would be ideal, just that they're possible.  Fortunately, fiber optic cables aren't all that heavy either.<BR>
<BR>
> If the system uses all fiber optic....  Hmmm, theres got to be a weakness<BR>
> there. Any ideas?<BR>
<BR>
By and large the actual camera is going to be electronic, whatever the wires are.  However, it can reasonably be shielded with a fine mesh cage over the camera (which won't really hurt its resolution that much).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:19:22 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Multichron<BR>
<BR>
Rodney Basler wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
> >Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
> ><BR>
> <snip><BR>
> >Based on the name, I would expect a multichronometer to be a timepiece<BR>
> >that can track and display more than one world's time simultaneously.<BR>
> >Thus, with one watch, one can keep track of times and dates on the<BR>
> >following example worlds:<BR>
> ><BR>
> >New Washington, with a forty-hour day;<BR>
> >Thurstone, with "hours" that are 1.08 standard hours long;<BR>
> >Terra, with a day of twenty-four standard hours.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Presumably, the more expensive multichrons can track more worlds<BR>
> >simultaneously.<BR>
> <BR>
>         If I may ask, of what possible use could that information be?  Remember,<BR>
> information only travels at the rate of 1-6 parsecs a week - what good does<BR>
> it do you to know that the stockmarket on Regina opened 5 minutes ago, if<BR>
> you won't be getting the quotes until next week, and you buy order will not<BR>
> go through until the week after that?  On earth, we find a timepiece that<BR>
> reads multiple times useful only because we can take an active role in<BR>
> events in those timezones.<BR>
<BR>
For those who routinely travel between various worlds, having one<BR>
timepiece that can handle the time systems on those worlds without<BR>
constant resetting can be convenient.<BR>
<BR>
Besides, owning such a timepiece marks one as a Traveller, thereby<BR>
imparting a certain dashing image....<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:32:09 -0400<BR>
From: "Roberto L. Vargas" <rlvargas@rochester.rr.com><BR>
Subject: GRIP:Traveller<BR>
<BR>
Hello,<BR>
<BR>
I'm new to the list so I apologize if this has been discussed before.<BR>
I am seriously considering getting the GRIP program for Traveller.<BR>
What is the general perception about the program?  How<BR>
easy (or hard) is it to find a game online?<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
Roberto<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:43:12 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Stephen Bankhead wrote:<BR>
> At 12:55 25/07/00 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> >Via electronic medium on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, timmon@primenet.com issued forth:<BR>
> ><BR>
> >> Text, Pressure          TL7    25.0 kg    30.0 ltr       3000<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Should this be "tent"?<BR>
> ><BR>
> <BR>
> No its correct...its the font you use at 2.00am on the morning of the<BR>
> submission of your vital report 8-)<BR>
<BR>
2:00 am?  You should just be getting started then.  Now 7:00 am, that's<BR>
when you should worry.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:34:30 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
From: "Leonard Erickson" <shadow@krypton.rain.com><BR>
<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
<<Snip>><BR>
><BR>
> Well, properly speaking, a "chronometer" is a *high accuracy* time<BR>
> keeping device. That is, if you have a pair of them, after a prolonged<BR>
> period (months) they should differ by as little as possible. Seconds<BR>
> with modern gear.<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
It more properly should be called an "auto-chronometer" in that it is a high<BR>
precision time piece but it also performs the neat trick of automaticaly<BR>
determining the local time, amongst other useful data.<BR>
<BR>
Pronto<BR>
AKA Brian Taylor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:42:52 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
From: "Anthony Jackson" <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
<BR>
> Pronto writes:<BR>
><BR>
> > If the target tank system uses copper wires, equip the infantry with EMP<BR>
> > bombs, which appear to be, in the here and now, about the size of a<BR>
large<BR>
> > pipe bomb. Shut down *all*  the systems that rely on copper. (EMP<BR>
grenades,<BR>
> > I like that!) Then, assualt the tank.<BR>
><BR>
> I didn't say copper wires would be ideal, just that they're possible.<BR>
Fortunately, fiber optic cables aren't all that heavy either.<BR>
><BR>
> > If the system uses all fiber optic....  Hmmm, theres got to be a<BR>
weakness<BR>
> > there. Any ideas?<BR>
><BR>
> By and large the actual camera is going to be electronic, whatever the<BR>
wires are.  However, it can > reasonably be shielded with a fine mesh cage<BR>
over the camera (which won't really hurt its<BR>
> resolution that much).<BR>
><BR>
Hmmm, I fear you are correct. Oh, well, theres always that favorite infantry<BR>
device, smoke, and lots of it.   :)     Goodness, how low tech. But it<BR>
works!   Hmmm, smoke and EMP grenades?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:50:05 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
> >> Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
> > add a couple thousand and make it a Rolex.  Or buy an electronic for $49<BR>
><BR>
> It'd be rather more expensive because it's got to handle different<BR>
> length "days" (sols) and different sized (and numbers!) of "hours"<BR>
> (durs). As well as have an interface to allow synching it to the local<BR>
> timebase (Traveller ships *will* introduce relativistic effects, and<BR>
> then there's the fact that time in and outside jump don't always match)<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
With electronics this is not difficult.  And it is TL9.  Assuming a standard<BR>
time broadcast frequency (Imperial standard -- where's the RFC?), it should<BR>
be rather easy to pass this information to the local user on planetfall a la<BR>
UTC radio broadcasts.  As for multiple planet's data, COFIT already pointed<BR>
out that with a travel time of weeks between worlds, this is useless.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:59:14 -0400<BR>
From: "Roberto L. Vargas" <rlvargas@rochester.rr.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
> Terran planets are not psychologically more appealing.  There seems to be<BR>
> the attitude that people would _want_ to live on "Garden Worlds" because<BR>
> they're "nicer" or more "like home".  This argument ignores the fact that<BR>
> humans have been in space for millenia at this point in Imperial history,<BR>
> and "home" hasn't been Terra for a long time.  Most Imperial colonists, if<BR>
> they are looking for a place "like home" will be looking for something<BR>
> very different from Garden Worlds.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Speaking as a devoted reductionalist what I am going to say is hard to<BR>
really argue in favor of, but here it goes anyway.  While I cetainly would<BR>
agree with most of what has been said in the post some would suggest<BR>
that if humans share an evolutive origin some information from that<BR>
origin may be imprinted on people.  Say a primordial identification with<BR>
the conditions of origin.  Assuming this is true, if a person is of terran<BR>
descent, even if thousands of years have passed and the person is only<BR>
familiar with sterile rocks floating in space, a sense of familiarity may<BR>
develop when he is in an evironment similar to Earth.<BR>
I would take it a bit farther and say that while this is probably<BR>
environment specific (i.e. snowy landscapes vs. tropical rainforests) but<BR>
that<BR>
people of terran descent probably have an appreciation for other<BR>
environments from their planet of origin.  They may not feel comfortable<BR>
in a barren cold field with naked trees but it will appear attractive.<BR>
Hard to prove and explain but I feel it is certainly possible IMHO.<BR>
<BR>
The point about imagining how a character in the game would consider<BR>
other environments familiar to what we are used to is well taken, though.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2807<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (rly-zc02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.2]) by air-zc01.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:04:47 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:04:26 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id RAA20461;<BR>
	Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:53:31 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:53:28 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id RAA20421<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:53:27 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:53:27 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007252153.RAA20421@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2807<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2808</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/25/00 4:57:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Tuesday, July 25 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2808<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Multichron<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Marc Miller email<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Industrial Worlds<BR>
unsubscribe<BR>
Re: Multichron<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
Re: GRIP:Traveller<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Marc Miller email<BR>
Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Population "Problems"<BR>
PE PBEM<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: GRIP:Traveller<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2807<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:05:18 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin writes:<BR>
> A number of people have been expressing the opinion that population should<BR>
> be modified based on the "Terran-ness" of a world.  Let me just express<BR>
> the dissenting opinion.  I think that if there were any relationship like<BR>
> this at all, it would be a very weak one.  The reasons:<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
There are several reasons for seeking out habitable worlds:<BR>
<BR>
1)  Sealed structures are expensive to create and maintain.<BR>
2)  Life requires ample supplies of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon (in the long run, no life support system is leakproof).  Of these, only oxygen is readily available on a rockball.<BR>
<BR>
As such, there should be penalties for each of the following:<BR>
Non-breatheable atmosphere (requires sealed structures)<BR>
Zero hydrographics (requires importing hydrogen)<BR>
Zero atmosphere (requires importing nitrogen).  If size < 3, also will have lost most of its carbon since it can no longer hold on to CO2.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:08:13 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Multichron<BR>
<BR>
> For those who routinely travel between various worlds, having one<BR>
> timepiece that can handle the time systems on those worlds without<BR>
> constant resetting can be convenient.<BR>
<BR>
So the Imperium sets a standard time sync signal frequency.  Land on the<BR>
local planet, and voila!, your timepiece is set to the local atomic clock.<BR>
Anything from TL7 up should have this feature.<BR>
><BR>
> Besides, owning such a timepiece marks one as a Traveller, thereby<BR>
> imparting a certain dashing image....<BR>
<BR>
OK, I'll buy this.  A Quartz digital watch is much more accurate than a<BR>
Rolex, Hamilton or similar analog chronograph.  People don't wear them for<BR>
their accuracy.  IMTU, the watch of the stylish/rich/chronophile is the<BR>
PikChron, an amazingly complex mechanical watch which sells for thousands of<BR>
credit.  Nowhere near as accurate as a $20 electronic job.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:10:26 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
> Hmmm, I fear you are correct. Oh, well, theres always that favorite<BR>
infantry<BR>
> device, smoke, and lots of it.   :)     Goodness, how low tech. But it<BR>
> works!   Hmmm, smoke and EMP grenades?<BR>
<BR>
Make sure it's prismatic or has a high random thermal element, or TI devices<BR>
will see right through it.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:17:37 -0400<BR>
From: "Roberto L. Vargas" <rlvargas@rochester.rr.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
> Terran planets are not psychologically more appealing.  There seems to be<BR>
> the attitude that people would _want_ to live on "Garden Worlds" because<BR>
> they're "nicer" or more "like home".  This argument ignores the fact that<BR>
> humans have been in space for millenia at this point in Imperial history,<BR>
> and "home" hasn't been Terra for a long time.  Most Imperial colonists, if<BR>
> they are looking for a place "like home" will be looking for something<BR>
> very different from Garden Worlds.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Speaking as a devoted reductionalist what I am going to say is hard to<BR>
really argue in favor of, but here it goes anyway.  While I certainly would<BR>
agree with most of what has been said in the post some would suggest<BR>
that if humans share an evolutive origin some information from that<BR>
origin may be imprinted on people.  Say a primordial identification with<BR>
the conditions of origin.  Assuming this is true, if a person is of terran<BR>
descent, even if thousands of years have passed and the person is only<BR>
familiar with sterile rocks floating in space, a sense of familiarity may<BR>
develop when he is in an environment similar to Earth.<BR>
I would take it a bit farther and say that while this is probably<BR>
environment specific (i.e. snowy landscapes vs. tropical rainforests) but<BR>
that<BR>
people of terran descent probably have an appreciation for other<BR>
environments from their planet of origin.  They may not feel comfortable<BR>
in a barren cold field with naked trees but it will appear attractive.<BR>
Hard to prove and explain but I feel it is certainly possible IMHO.<BR>
<BR>
The point about imagining how a character in the game would consider<BR>
environments which we are familiar with is well taken, though.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:22:33 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Marc Miller email<BR>
<BR>
Greetings all,<BR>
<BR>
I have a licensing question for Marc.  Anyone know an email address I can<BR>
send it to?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks, Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:24:32 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
> Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
>  white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
>  BSG)?<BR>
<BR>
2 choices: <BR>
<BR>
1) Camoflaged<BR>
<BR>
2) Maroon<BR>
<BR>
There are no other options.    :  )<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:25:05 EDT<BR>
From: Ludowick@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Industrial Worlds<BR>
<BR>
J. Raynor writes:<BR>
<BR>
 >And, frankly, the canonical definition of "Industrial" planets is<BR>
 >*broken*, or at least a bit questionable.  If there's plenty of energy,<BR>
 >and space is easily accessible, why keep dirty, pollution-producing,<BR>
 >factories on the surfaces of planets where they can taint your<BR>
 >atmosphere?<BR>
 >I suspect that "industry on the ground" is something that most<BR>
 >technological civilizations outgrow *very* quickly, probably by Tech<BR>
 >Level<BR>
 >9 or so (when contragravity becomes available).<BR>
<BR>
You could assume that the atmospheres/environments of most Industrial <BR>
worlds were tainted before they were colonized.  Because the local <BR>
environment is hostile to standard agriculture/aquaculture/herding or<BR>
whatever, the colonists developed heavy industry as their means of <BR>
economic support (exploiting native bio-resources was impossible, not<BR>
feasible, or just not done).  This makes Industrial worlds the high-pop<BR>
versions of "Poor" worlds (sort of).<BR>
<BR>
It is also possible that the world went through a low-tech stage, during<BR>
which the environment was polluted, before the current era.  These <BR>
could be worlds with an indigenous civilization, or ones that suffered a<BR>
collapse/dark age.<BR>
<BR>
Ludowick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:25:22 -0400<BR>
From: "Daniel Phelps" <phelpsd@gate.net><BR>
Subject: unsubscribe<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:40:39 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Multichron<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Rodney Basler" <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 9:59 PM<BR>
Subject: RE: Multichron<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> >From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
> >Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
> ><BR>
> <snip><BR>
> >Based on the name, I would expect a multichronometer to be a timepiece<BR>
> >that can track and display more than one world's time simultaneously.<BR>
> >Thus, with one watch, one can keep track of times and dates on the<BR>
> >following example worlds:<BR>
> ><BR>
> >New Washington, with a forty-hour day;<BR>
> >Thurstone, with "hours" that are 1.08 standard hours long;<BR>
> >Terra, with a day of twenty-four standard hours.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Presumably, the more expensive multichrons can track more worlds<BR>
> >simultaneously.<BR>
><BR>
> If I may ask, of what possible use could that information be?  Remember,<BR>
> information only travels at the rate of 1-6 parsecs a week - what good<BR>
does<BR>
> it do you to know that the stockmarket on Regina opened 5 minutes ago, if<BR>
> you won't be getting the quotes until next week, and you buy order will<BR>
not<BR>
> go through until the week after that?  On earth, we find a timepiece that<BR>
> reads multiple times useful only because we can take an active role in<BR>
> events in those timezones.<BR>
<BR>
Of course, it is more useful if you use it to track Standard Imperial Time,<BR>
as well as the Local Time and date on, e.g. Terra, Luna, Mars, Titan,<BR>
Europe, Pluto etc. There are usually multiple occupied planets and<BR>
satellites within a single system, for which comms is relatively 'instant'.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe the Naasirka 20SLL MultiChron (as well as being able to track the 20<BR>
local times in the system [20S]) can also take into account Light-Lag (the<BR>
higher priced LL model...), so you can at a glance see that it is X hours<BR>
here, Y hours on Titan, and any message you send won't arrive until at least<BR>
Z (and the message you just received was sent at V your time and W theirs)<BR>
etc as well as handling different timezones on each planet.<BR>
<BR>
Probably, each starport would be transmitting synchronisation data for the<BR>
system, so new arrivals find their multichrons updated almost immediately<BR>
upon emerging from Jump. Quite a useful piece of kit.<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:38:35 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/25/00 at 12:58 PM,  "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> At 9:48 -0400 25/7/00, Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> wrote:<BR>
>> > >Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
>> > >to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
>> > >to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
>> > >from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
>> > >would build such monsters.<BR>
>> >And if you do come up with a solution that does not affect the cost of<BR>
>> >starships, those who can afford it would have lots and lots and lots<BR>
>> >of ships instead.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> What about:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> "Using current technology the maximum size ship which can safely <BR>
>> transition into jumpspace is 5000 dT. It is hoped that more advanced <BR>
>> technologies will eventually allow this limit to be broken."<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Dom<BR>
<BR>
Won't work, Dom. I wish it would, but then you just end up limiting<BR>
*jump* capable ships and end up with 500,000 dton monitors making<BR>
invasions of defended systems totally impossible.  If there is a<BR>
solution, it needs to affect jump and non-jump ships equally.<BR>
<BR>
As an aside, it's not a problem for me IMTU, because maneuver and<BR>
jump use the same basic technology and limits apply equally to both.<BR>
I'm looking for a more general (even OTU) "solution" to this<BR>
perceived problem, and yes, I know not everyone sees this as a<BR>
problem.<BR>
 <BR>
>Wasn't the Azhanti High Lightning larger then that?<BR>
<BR>
Yep, 60 kdtons.  When I saw that *way* back when it came out, I just<BR>
about choked.  "Surely," I thought, "that's a typo and it's really 6<BR>
kdtons." It wasn't.<BR>
<BR>
So, far the best solutions I've seen are:<BR>
<BR>
1.  More realistic radiators limiting volume<BR>
<BR>
    This has a lot going for it because it works on boats and ships.<BR>
    Unfortunately, it also might work against Up Ports.  Oh, the up<BR>
    side, it doesn't require major revisions to fixed OTU world<BR>
    stats.  Hum, might also explain why all those ships *land*<BR>
    instead of docking at the Up Port.<BR>
        <BR>
2.  Reducing and/or more reasonable population figures<BR>
<BR>
    Reduces money for ships, thereby reducing ship numbers.<BR>
    Important, but doesn't directly address ship volume, and going<BR>
    back to change all the Pops in the OTU isn't very feasible.<BR>
    <BR>
3.  Hull sizes being restricted by TL <BR>
<BR>
    Might/might not relate back to #1.  <BR>
    <BR>
What no one has suggested is having cost of ships increase in a<BR>
non-linear fashion.  What about slow or flat cost increases up to<BR>
some TL limit, then rapid cost increases above that? <BR>
<BR>
Perhaps a flat rate up 3*(2^TL) dtons and then ?exponential?<BR>
increases above that?<BR>
<BR>
Example at TL10:  50,000 Cr/dton up to 3,072 dtons, and a much higher<BR>
                  rate/dton above that (anyone want to give a try at<BR>
                  a reasonable formula for this part?)<BR>
<BR>
Eris <BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:01:30 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
><BR>
> Ian Whitchurch wrote,<BR>
> >Commercial starships in Trav are built to very tight tolerances. <<BR>
><BR>
> That is definitely true. Twitching the least little thing in CT can easily<BR>
> make a ship impossible to run with financing. And then trying to upgrade<BR>
the<BR>
> thing? Definitely impossible. The Type R has to have a subsidy or payments<BR>
> can't be made. How the A2 is supposed to operate is also a "mystery"<BR>
(read:<BR>
> invitation to smuggling or worse). (And what about the "other" A2, the one<BR>
> in the summary on page 24 with Maneuver and Power Plant 2 and only 46 tons<BR>
> of cargo?)<BR>
<BR>
Well, the cargo and financing rules are also FUBAR, but even then ...<BR>
<BR>
Type A2s make their money out of risk premiums. An A2 is relatively agile<BR>
and relatively well-armed (especially if you put in a HePlar boost-pack), so<BR>
it can go places that are outside the protective shell of the starport's<BR>
defenses.<BR>
<BR>
As an example, lets look at a mining colony on Titan.<BR>
<BR>
Earth, not being stupid, has bought or built some impressive space-based<BR>
defenses to stop pirates holding the planet to ransom, but even a Telstar<BR>
'Communications Satellite' or a Lab Ship in Earth orbit is little use to<BR>
defend people picking up this month's production from Titan Mining LIC.<BR>
Sure, the PEMS will detect the fact that some nasty individual has lit up<BR>
their AEMS and has a lock on your cargo shuttle, but what can anyone *do*<BR>
about it in time ?<BR>
<BR>
The solutions either involve spending a lot to defend that cargo shuttle, or<BR>
paying someone to take those risks (even if you cant capture it, because the<BR>
cargo shuttle hits 0.1 C halfway thru, threatening "We'll blow up your cargo<BR>
shuttles unless you pay us MCr 1 a month" is still effective. In jumpspace,<BR>
no-one can bushwhack you).<BR>
<BR>
Thus, Titan Mining LIC offers Cr 3500 a dton for taking their production to<BR>
the processing facility on Barnard's Star, or offers their production at Cr<BR>
4000 less a dton if you pick it up at the mine, rather than at their<BR>
warehouse on Barnard's.<BR>
<BR>
This is the flip side of the Sunbeard Declaration that pretty much ended the<BR>
Great Piracy Debate of 1997-8 ("Worlds with significant trade or economies<BR>
can and will defend their space out to the 100 diameter limit, but these<BR>
defenses do not extend to the entire system") - in the Outsystem, you are<BR>
consenting to take the risk of piracy. Lets face it, who cares about belters<BR>
and smugglers, anyway ?<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:43:53 -0400<BR>
From: "Hunter Gordon" <trav@RPGRealms.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GRIP:Traveller<BR>
<BR>
On 7/25/2000 at 5:32 PM Roberto L. Vargas wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Hello,<BR>
><BR>
>I'm new to the list so I apologize if this has been discussed before.<BR>
>I am seriously considering getting the GRIP program for Traveller.<BR>
>What is the general perception about the program?  How<BR>
>easy (or hard) is it to find a game online?<BR>
<BR>
Perception of the program I'll leave to users, hehe obviously I'm biased....<BR>
<BR>
As far as easy (or hard) to find a game, we try to make this as easy as possible from providing a Game Scheduler on the website, an Active Message Boards area, and the IRC network support with GRIPNet. Currently I know of 3 Traveller games on the Scheduler, my own (which is on hold during Convention season), our regular Thursday night game, and a new game (Hefry Starport) starting in August I believe. Of course there are more run that are not listed on the scheduler that I don't know of...<BR>
<BR>
Don't forget also that the player side of the program is Free and available for download from the website. This should make it a bit easier to find players willing to join your games!<BR>
<BR>
If there are any other suggestions or ideas on helping put Traveller players and GMs together I'd be happy to see about getting them implemented!<BR>
<BR>
Hunter<BR>
The GRIP Team<BR>
http://www.RPGRealms.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:49:46 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
<BR>
> > Hmmm, I fear you are correct. Oh, well, theres always that favorite<BR>
> infantry<BR>
> > device, smoke, and lots of it.   :)     Goodness, how low tech. But it<BR>
> > works!   Hmmm, smoke and EMP grenades?<BR>
><BR>
> Make sure it's prismatic or has a high random thermal element, or TI<BR>
devices<BR>
> will see right through it.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
Thats what the EMP grenade is for. Hopefully. We need a new set of rules for<BR>
induced EMP.<BR>
Please, godlike rule making types, hear our plea.  :)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:48:08 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
GDWGAMES@aol.com wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
> >  white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
> >  BSG)?<BR>
> <BR>
> 2 choices:<BR>
> <BR>
> 1) Camoflaged<BR>
> <BR>
> 2) Maroon<BR>
> <BR>
> There are no other options.    :  )<BR>
<BR>
For Imperial Marines, certainly.  But what about Imperial Army BD?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:52:07 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Marc Miller email<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
To: "TML" <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 11:22 PM<BR>
Subject: Marc Miller email<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Greetings all,<BR>
> <BR>
> I have a licensing question for Marc.  Anyone know an email address I can<BR>
> send it to?<BR>
> <BR>
> Thanks, Tod<BR>
<BR>
CardSharks@aol.com<BR>
<BR>
is the one he uses posting here, though <BR>
<BR>
FarFuture@aol.com <BR>
<BR>
is probably better for business related emails<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:08:50 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
<BR>
> From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Bitching about the brain-damaged Streamlining rules in G:T<BR>
><BR>
> Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
><BR>
> > > Gee, feeling bitter or something?  Personally, I agree that<BR>
streamlining<BR>
> > should have been done differently, but on the other hand GT doesn't have<BR>
> > things like minimum bridge volume 20 tons, or multi-ton computers.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Neither of those decisions have anywhere near the impact.<BR>
><BR>
> True, but the lack of power plant slices has a pretty big impact.  GT USL<BR>
merchant ships have way more free space than CT merchants.<BR>
<BR>
Well, most CT designs are horribly over-powered. A merchant starship should<BR>
have a power output of about 30 megawatts per 100 dtons, per jump number,<BR>
and anything more should be provided by battery boost packs. And that<BR>
definitely includes the power for the lasers (every megawatt of power at<BR>
TL12 costs KCr 100 in sticker costs, which turns into about KCr 5 a year<BR>
extra off the bottom line. Thus, if you have 20% too much power in a jump-2<BR>
200 dton trader, you are spending KCr 240 a year too much. It adds up,<BR>
doesnt it ...).<BR>
<BR>
But in general, this added advantage for USL ships makes things worse, as<BR>
streamlined ships become even less economic.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:00:27 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Pronto writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Thats what the EMP grenade is for. Hopefully. We need a new set of rules<BR>
> for induced EMP.<BR>
> Please, godlike rule making types, hear our plea.  :)<BR>
<BR>
That's easy.  Try this one:<BR>
'EMP: portable EMP generators are available at TL 8+.  They will shut down the electronics in civilian vehicles which are not intended for use in vacuum.  They have no effect on other targets'.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 15:59:32 -0700<BR>
From: "Rodney Basler" <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Population "Problems"<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Roberto L. Vargas" <rlvargas@rochester.rr.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
><BR>
<snip><BR>
>  Assuming this is true, if a person is of terran<BR>
>descent, even if thousands of years have passed and the person is only<BR>
>familiar with sterile rocks floating in space, a sense of familiarity may<BR>
>develop when he is in an evironment similar to Earth.<BR>
>I would take it a bit farther and say that while this is probably<BR>
>environment specific (i.e. snowy landscapes vs. tropical rainforests) but<BR>
>that<BR>
>people of terran descent probably have an appreciation for other<BR>
>environments from their planet of origin.  They may not feel comfortable<BR>
>in a barren cold field with naked trees but it will appear attractive.<BR>
>Hard to prove and explain but I feel it is certainly possible IMHO.<BR>
><BR>
>The point about imagining how a character in the game would consider<BR>
>other environments familiar to what we are used to is well taken, though.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
	While I had lived all of my life no farther north than San Fransisco, I had<BR>
always felt this strange affinity for the cold, bleak places.  I moved to<BR>
Iceland for a year and loved it - in one season I had adapted pretty well to<BR>
the weather, and even felt comfortable with the constant dark of the winter<BR>
(most of the time, at least).  Coming back to smoggy southern California,<BR>
though, it took about eight years before I felt cold during the winter - and<BR>
the summers were simply unspeakable.  Why is that?  It has been generations<BR>
since my ancestors left the fjords of Norway or the snowy peaks and high<BR>
valleys of the Alps, but those are the places that I feel most comfortable.<BR>
Give me pine and oak trees any day - palm trees just don't look right.  But<BR>
how long does it take for "genetic memories" of the Olduvai gorge to get<BR>
overwritten by memories of snow and mountain peaks?  Is it all just personal<BR>
affinity??  One of my neighbors in Iceland was a woman from the Maritius<BR>
Islands in the Indian Ocean.  She grew up in a place that most Icelanders<BR>
consider heaven - warm seas, sunshine, white sand beaches, palm trees...and<BR>
hated it.  She married an Icelander and never looked back.  Even after<BR>
getting a divorce, she remained a citizen, and has never regretted moving<BR>
there for a minute.<BR>
	Would our distant descendants get the same feeling about large planets with<BR>
9.8 m/s^2 gravity and a sky just that certain shade of blue?  Or is it<BR>
personal preference?<BR>
	Nope...no conclusion, just questions.<BR>
<BR>
	Rod Basler, COFIT - (Crochety Old Fart In Training)<BR>
- ----------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Disclaimer - They just tell me to think, they don't tell me _what_ to think<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 01:05:25 +0200 (MET DST)<BR>
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no><BR>
Subject: PE PBEM<BR>
<BR>
Hi all,<BR>
<BR>
is anyone out there interested in a PBEM Pocket Empire<BR>
game? I'm tinkering with starting one, but I don't want<BR>
to do the work if no one wants to play :-) <BR>
<BR>
Tommy Grav<BR>
- -------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
tommy.grav@astro.uio.no     http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/  <BR>
Institute of Astrophysics, UiO, No  <BR>
IMTU tn++t4+tg+ ru+ge++ !3i jt+au+st+ls hi++dr-so++zh-sy-sw++ <BR>
 <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:10:58 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
> > > Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
> > >  white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
> > >  BSG)?<BR>
> > <BR>
> > 2 choices:<BR>
> > <BR>
> > 1) Camoflaged<BR>
> > <BR>
> > 2) Maroon<BR>
> > <BR>
> > There are no other options.    :  )<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Camouflage?  For what world?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:12:44 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GRIP:Traveller<BR>
<BR>
> Perception of the program I'll leave to users, hehe obviously I'm<BR>
biased....<BR>
><BR>
> As far as easy (or hard) to find a game, we try to make this as easy as<BR>
possible from providing a Game Scheduler on the website, an Active Message<BR>
Boards area, and the IRC network support with GRIPNet. Currently I know of 3<BR>
Traveller games on the Scheduler, my own (which is on hold during Convention<BR>
season), our regular Thursday night game, and a new game (Hefry Starport)<BR>
starting in August I believe. Of course there are more run that are not<BR>
listed on the scheduler that I don't know of...<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
So, is a Mac port planned?  If so when? Most of my players are mac users.<BR>
<BR>
(If you build it, I will buy)<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:24:06 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Pronto writes:<BR>
><BR>
> > If the target tank system uses copper wires, equip the infantry with EMP<BR>
> > bombs, which appear to be, in the here and now, about the size of a large<BR>
> > pipe bomb. Shut down *all*  the systems that rely on copper. (EMP grenades,<BR>
> > I like that!) Then, assualt the tank.<BR>
><BR>
> I didn't say copper wires would be ideal, just that they're possible.  Fortunately, fiber optic cables aren't all that heavy either.<BR>
><BR>
> > If the system uses all fiber optic....  Hmmm, theres got to be a weakness<BR>
> > there. Any ideas?<BR>
><BR>
> By and large the actual camera is going to be electronic, whatever the wires are.  However, it can reasonably be shielded with a fine mesh cage over the camera (which won't really hurt its resolution that much).<BR>
<BR>
dazzle it with a low power laser?<BR>
<BR>
Other Rob<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:28:11 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Pronto wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Anthony Jackson" <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
><BR>
> > Pronto writes:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > > If the target tank system uses copper wires, equip the infantry with EMP<BR>
> > > bombs, which appear to be, in the here and now, about the size of a<BR>
> large<BR>
> > > pipe bomb. Shut down *all*  the systems that rely on copper. (EMP<BR>
> grenades,<BR>
> > > I like that!) Then, assualt the tank.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I didn't say copper wires would be ideal, just that they're possible.<BR>
> Fortunately, fiber optic cables aren't all that heavy either.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > > If the system uses all fiber optic....  Hmmm, theres got to be a<BR>
> weakness<BR>
> > > there. Any ideas?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > By and large the actual camera is going to be electronic, whatever the<BR>
> wires are.  However, it can > reasonably be shielded with a fine mesh cage<BR>
> over the camera (which won't really hurt its<BR>
> > resolution that much).<BR>
> ><BR>
> Hmmm, I fear you are correct. Oh, well, theres always that favorite infantry<BR>
> device, smoke, and lots of it.   :)     Goodness, how low tech. But it<BR>
> works!   Hmmm, smoke and EMP grenades?<BR>
<BR>
Smoke, EMP grenades and anti-laser aerosols?<BR>
<BR>
Other  Rob<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:29:37 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2807<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> In addition, note that the majority of a planet's population is _not_ at <BR>
> the starport. 100,000 people on a planet is functionally uninhabited; I <BR>
> don't think there's any significant area on earth with a population density <BR>
> that low...<BR>
<BR>
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but if you have 100,000 people on a planet, <BR>
I'd expect more than half of them to live within 10 miles of a (not the) <BR>
starport.<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:42:53<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 01:19 PM 7/25/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Its probably doable with current electronics, but it wasn't doable with<BR>
the electronics available at the time any current tanks were being<BR>
designed.  Even today it would probably have significant issues with<BR>
ruggedness.<BR>
><BR>
>That said, all the grav tanks I've designed for GT include 360 camera<BR>
coverage with HUD for the driver.<BR>
<BR>
As I mentuioned before, the battledress (and just abvout everything else)<BR>
has chameleon coverings, so visual sitings will be touchy.  Most other<BR>
forms of sensor will also be spoofed.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb01.mx.aol.com (rly-zb01.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.1]) by air-zb05.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:57:22 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb01.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:56:55 2000<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id TAA25537;<BR>
	Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:50:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:50:39 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id TAA25445<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:50:39 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:50:39 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007252350.TAA25445@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2809</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/25/00 7:33:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Tuesday, July 25 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2809<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2807<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2807<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
Space Docking<BR>
RE: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:49:43<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
At 05:48 PM 7/25/2000 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>For Imperial Marines, certainly.  But what about Imperial Army BD?<BR>
<BR>
BD will be either in cammo mode, where it reacts to the local environment,<BR>
or in a neutral color.. olive-drab, khaki, gray.<BR>
<BR>
For certain purposes, other color schemes might be used.  For example,<BR>
troops helping in a winter rescue operation might set their suits to<BR>
high-visability orange.<BR>
- --<BR>
<BR>
Duugirashir Irebamenagiin  gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
  http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/sylea.html<BR>
Inquisitor Maximus, Reformed Canon Church of Sylea<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:47:02<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
At 06:24 PM 7/25/2000 EDT, you wrote:<BR>
>> Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
>>  white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
>>  BSG)?<BR>
><BR>
>2 choices: <BR>
><BR>
>1) Camoflaged<BR>
><BR>
>2) Maroon<BR>
><BR>
>There are no other options.    :  )<BR>
<BR>
Gee, does this mean the chapter on "color coordination and accessorizing"<BR>
has been cut?<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas "Penguin Boy" Berry  <BR>
gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
Alle preisen den Pinguinherrscher!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:50:16<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
At 04:10 PM 7/25/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Camouflage?  For what world?<BR>
<BR>
for what ever world you are on, obviously.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:53:53 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2807<BR>
<BR>
Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
> Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> > In addition, note that the majority of a planet's population is _not_ at <BR>
> > the starport. 100,000 people on a planet is functionally uninhabited; I <BR>
> > don't think there's any significant area on earth with a population<BR>
> > density  that low...<BR>
> <BR>
> Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but if you have 100,000 people on a planet,<BR>
>  I'd expect more than half of them to live within 10 miles of a (not the) <BR>
> starport.<BR>
<BR>
It depends on why the world has a low population.  Most extremely low population areas on earth also lack major cities.  I would expect no more than a thousand people to live near the starport, unless the starport is the world's only excuse for existence.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:06:19 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2807<BR>
<BR>
At 08:53 PM 7/25/00, you wrote:<BR>
>Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
> > Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but if you have 100,000 people on a planet,<BR>
> >  I'd expect more than half of them to live within 10 miles of a (not the)<BR>
> > starport.<BR>
><BR>
>It depends on why the world has a low population.  Most extremely low <BR>
>population areas on earth also lack major cities.  I would expect no more <BR>
>than a thousand people to live near the starport, unless the starport is <BR>
>the world's only excuse for existence.<BR>
<BR>
         In my TNEC1 game, the Colony world of Bahqui'vi that the players <BR>
call home has the population of ~8800.  About 60% live in the Colony main, <BR>
whose major function is care and feeding of the Starport as well as <BR>
centralized admin, subsistence agriculture and industry.  The 3 Outposts <BR>
house the remaining ~40% at resource exploitation camp-towns.  The rest of <BR>
the planet is deserted, as far as anyone knows.  A lot of Frontier worlds <BR>
in TNEC are pretty much the same arrangement, just with more people and <BR>
Outposts.  It seemed to be a pretty reasonable way of doing things.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
	---------------------------------------	<BR>
	The TNEC Guy<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:29:10 +1000<BR>
From: "Paul Harris" <ref_harry@eudoramail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
 <BR>
- --<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:11:26   Pronto wrote:<BR>
<lots of cutting - see previous posts for thread><BR>
<BR>
>If the system uses all fiber optic....  Hmmm, theres got to be a weakness<BR>
>there. Any ideas?<BR>
<BR>
Electrostatic Aerosol Paint Bomb/Mortar round. Designed to molecularly bind with metallic/ceramic/whatever surfaces and produce a layer opaque to radiation from IR to visual to whatever. Blocks vision and some sensors. Effectively blinds Tanks and Battledress/Combat wearing troops. <BR>
<BR>
Obviously not 100% effective, probably not even 50% effective, but would be effective enough to cause problems on the battlefield (well, hopefully).    <BR>
<BR>
Available from tech level 10 to 15. Higher tech levels cover a larger range of frequencies.<BR>
<BR>
This just off the top of my head.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
scout_harris<BR>
(back on the list after a few months break, hello everybody)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:38:05 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
<BR>
Pinkerdoo is proud to announce the release of the first part of the AMWS<BR>
1.0, the FGPP-12. The FGPP-12 is a powerful GTL-12 Penguin Portable Fusion<BR>
Gun. Able to defeat more then 1.4 inches of Hard Steel with each blast, the<BR>
FGPP-12 is a fearsome weapon indeed. Most small children can operate the<BR>
device, and integral gravatics and recoil compensation make this weapon a<BR>
pleasure to fire.<BR>
<BR>
Stats are on line at http://members.home.com/pinkerdoo<BR>
<BR>
As always, Pinkerdoo appreciates your patronage.<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of John Groth<BR>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 6:37 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Peter Newman wrote:<BR>
><BR>
<<snip>><BR>
><BR>
> Solution Number three: The Emperor, blessed be his name, shall<BR>
> direct the Imperial General Directorate on Revenue and Income<BR>
> Procurement [IGDRIP] to recruit all PEM's into Imperial Service<BR>
> by persuading them that they can accomplish more evil as Auditors<BR>
> than they can in their tunnels. In your analysis you must include<BR>
> a proposal for alternative employment of current IGDRIP auditors<BR>
> 89% of whom are currently Bwap's [Newts].<BR>
<BR>
Please note the following URL:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.monkeybagel.com/monkeybagel.html<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:31:48 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 09:29 PM 7/25/00, you wrote:<BR>
>Electrostatic Aerosol Paint Bomb/Mortar round. Designed to molecularly <BR>
>bind with metallic/ceramic/whatever surfaces and produce a layer opaque to <BR>
>radiation from IR to visual to whatever. Blocks vision and some sensors. <BR>
>Effectively blinds Tanks and Battledress/Combat wearing troops.<BR>
><BR>
>Obviously not 100% effective, probably not even 50% effective, but would <BR>
>be effective enough to cause problems on the battlefield (well, hopefully).<BR>
><BR>
>Available from tech level 10 to 15. Higher tech levels cover a larger <BR>
>range of frequencies.<BR>
><BR>
>This just off the top of my head.<BR>
<BR>
         ...and gets shot out of the air by point defense 95% of the time.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:42:10 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Paul Harris writes:<BR>
> Electrostatic Aerosol Paint Bomb/Mortar round. Designed to molecularly bind<BR>
> with metallic/ceramic/whatever surfaces and produce a layer opaque to radiation from IR to visual to whatever. Blocks vision and some sensors. Effectively blinds Tanks and Battledress/Combat wearing troops.  <BR>
<BR>
Not to mention being pretty lethal against most forms of plant life, and probably pretty unpleasant for animals as well.<BR>
> <BR>
> Obviously not 100% effective, probably not even 50% effective, but would be<BR>
> effective enough to cause problems on the battlefield (well, hopefully). <BR>
<BR>
It would force having some form of lens cover where you can flake off an outer<BR>
layer where necessary.  Or just an electronic 'eyelid'.  Or a liquid lens coating.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:53:38 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
IMHO that tech is not _knowledge level_ but _production level_ - in grant's<BR>
case perhaps there are 20 miners there. Miners cannot _produce_ TL-15 stuff,<BR>
but they very well might use it. The Imperium is at TL-12/15 IMTU - 12 is<BR>
the common mans stuff (and 80% of the stuff you run into) and 15 is the max.<BR>
(80% of the civilian stuff is common, 15% is higher 5% is lower).<BR>
<BR>
Ie you get into gun fight with joe gunfighter on 457-973. He is _not_<BR>
carrying a Colt .45 Black powder. He _is_ carrying an imported 9mm<BR>
Autopistol. I actually tend to ignore TL's (unless they are higher - then<BR>
all the citizens get the goodies of living somewhere nice) - they import<BR>
what they need and fabricate the rest..<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Samuel D.<BR>
Weiss<BR>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 8:52 AM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Grant/Jewell has a Pop of 20 and a TL of 0. While you could<BR>
stretch and call that the interdicting force, then why would they have a TL<BR>
of 0? Or 457-973/Rhylanor. 500 people and a TL4 with a government 1. How<BR>
could an Interstellar company get there with a TL of 4? And if established<BR>
by an Interstellar community, why would it only have a TL of 4? Would it<BR>
really be possible for Boeing to set up a factory to make biplanes these<BR>
days? It would only be worse with higher TLs.<BR>
So I'd start with reassigning Pops and TLs first before worrying about<BR>
reducing those A pop worlds. Spreading the people out a bit more evenly<BR>
first and I think the other problems will shrink a bit.<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:14:51 +1000<BR>
From: "Paul Harris" <ref_harry@eudoramail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
 <BR>
- --<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:31:48   Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
>At 09:29 PM 7/25/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>Electrostatic Aerosol Paint Bomb/Mortar round. Designed to molecularly <BR>
>>bind with metallic/ceramic/whatever surfaces and produce a layer opaque to <BR>
>>radiation from IR to visual to whatever. Blocks vision and some sensors. <BR>
>>Effectively blinds Tanks and Battledress/Combat wearing troops.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Obviously not 100% effective, probably not even 50% effective, but would <BR>
>>be effective enough to cause problems on the battlefield (well, hopefully).<BR>
>><BR>
>>Available from tech level 10 to 15. Higher tech levels cover a larger <BR>
>>range of frequencies.<BR>
>><BR>
>>This just off the top of my head.<BR>
><BR>
>         ...and gets shot out of the air by point defense 95% of the time.<BR>
<BR>
Hmmm... so now we have point defense wasting time on paint round/missiles and the real anti_armour weaponry is sneaking through. Meanwhile decoy rounds are also being launched/fired... the point I am trying to make is point defense is going to be busy, unless paint rounds are the only things being launched, then I'll accept that 95% figure. <BR>
<BR>
And then point defence will be exploding paint warheads mid air, the paint will probably still be released (in substantially smaller quantities I will admit, and probably over 'friendlies' as well....).<BR>
Actually the warhead is probably designed to aerosol when the propulsion unit is taken out (the 'Patriot' problem, you can hit the missile, but the warhead will probably still survive, as shown numerous times in the gulf war, and go on to cause problems). <BR>
<BR>
So I will even accept a 95% hit rate... but the effectiveness of those hits are a different matter....<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for the reminder about point defence..., now I have something else to throw at player objections... (hee hee)<BR>
<BR>
scout_harris<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Join 18 million Eudora users by signing up for a free Eudora Web-Mail account at http://www.eudoramail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:20:50 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
Pinkerdoo is amazed to announce, that after digging through their arhives<BR>
they came up with this gem (full stats at http://members.home.com/pinkerdoo.<BR>
It was, by the archives, developed by Mr Pinkly's great great ... great<BR>
grandfather for the ISS.<BR>
<BR>
Crew: 9 Total. 8 Command and Control, 1 Maneuver Drive. 1 Command doubles as<BR>
Turret Gunner, 1 Command doubles as Flight Crew.<BR>
<BR>
Hull: 100-ton SSL, Heavy Frame, Expensive Materials, Durasteel (Expensive)<BR>
Armored Wedge configuration Hull (DR 100), Heavy Compartmentalization, Basic<BR>
Stealth(-5, AMod 3), Basic Emission Cloaking(-5, PMod 3 [-2, PMod 6 in<BR>
space]).<BR>
<BR>
Control Areas: Basic Bridge(Complexity 6), Scientific Sensors.<BR>
<BR>
Engineering: 3 Jump Drive, 17 Maneuver Drive(1.59 / 2.04 Gs, 510 stons<BR>
thrust), 21.5 Fuel Tank(Loaded with 20.09 stons, 1 Scoops), Fuel<BR>
Processor(5.9 hours to refine Fuel Tank), 41.6 Man-Hours/day Maintenance.<BR>
<BR>
Accommodations: Full Life Support, 2 Total Life Support, 4 Stateroom, 2 Low<BR>
Berth(8 Cryoberths), Gymnasium(4 Users), Mini-Workshop(3 Users).<BR>
<BR>
Armaments: 1 Turret Battery of 1 (DR100, 2x40 Mj Pulse Laser[RoF Bonus +1],<BR>
101 Mj Std Laser).<BR>
<BR>
Stores: Vehicle Bay(Air/raft, 0.5 dtons for small craft available), 2.5<BR>
Hold.<BR>
<BR>
Statistics: EMass 250.4 stons, LMass 320.49 stons, Cost MCr75.08, HP 25,230,<BR>
Size Mod 8, HT 12, CP 27.<BR>
<BR>
Performance: Jump-1 (2), Acc 1.59 / 2.04 Gs, Airspeed 3,017 mph, Skimming<BR>
Airspeed 6,033 mph, Aerostatic Lift 510 stons.<BR>
<BR>
Sample Times (Earth Std, Full Load): Orbit 0.14 Hrs, Escape Velocity 0.2<BR>
Hrs, 100D 5.06 Hrs, Earth-Mars 86.91 Hrs.<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of allensh<BR>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 7:16 AM<BR>
To: Traveller Mailing List<BR>
Cc: Raymond Sinclair; Mary Zawacki; Becky Ames; Wayne Cook; David<BR>
Nelson; Blair Reamy<BR>
Subject: A New Campaign Direction<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
In my Mileau 0 campaign (which converted to GURPS<BR>
Traveller sometime ago), the characters are<BR>
approaching the end of their first tour of duty in the<BR>
IISS. Rather than neccesarily allowing them to go<BR>
freelance, or end the campaign, I was thinking of an<BR>
idea that might get them to re-up. It's somewhere<BR>
around Year 5 in our game, and I was thinking that it<BR>
would be fun to set up a long-term exploration mission<BR>
in the direction of the Great Rift. Here's some<BR>
questions I have about that for the experts on the<BR>
TML. (This is being forwarded to my players, btw, and<BR>
I think they should ALL subscribe to the TML, don't<BR>
you? <g>)<BR>
<BR>
1. How far could you reasonably expect to explore in a<BR>
four year hitch? (say, 2 years out, 2 years back?) I'd<BR>
LIKE them to make it behind the claw as far as, say,<BR>
Mora, but my sense of astrography is worse than my<BR>
sense of geography.<BR>
<BR>
2. I've been trying to come up with a long-range ship<BR>
that would be self-sufficient for up to five years,<BR>
kind of a space-going Scout Base. Having a little<BR>
trouble with it; any of you starship architects out<BR>
there want to give it a go? (of course, it needs to be<BR>
in the GT modular system.) I can't offer any prizes<BR>
for the contest except for the knowledge that your<BR>
creation will be helping to roll back the frontiers of<BR>
the Imperium :)<BR>
<BR>
We only play this campaign about once every two<BR>
months, so I try to make the adventures as memorable<BR>
as possible. Just trying to pump some life into the<BR>
ol' campaign :)<BR>
<BR>
Allen<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 21:18:10 -0700<BR>
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net><BR>
Subject: Space Docking<BR>
<BR>
I just watched the docking of the Russian module with the International<BR>
Space Station. The Russian crew used their "AUTOMATIC" docking computer and<BR>
it was a perfect connection.....Excuse the language but I got an instant<BR>
"Woody". Considering my age and the medications I'm on, that would be<BR>
considered a minor miracle in most religions. Excuse me now, I have to go<BR>
find my wife....Nothing further to report!<BR>
<BR>
Thom Harris - GOFIR - <Gnarly Old Fart In Residence><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 18:27:36 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
This is not the General Store - this is where the 'Real Spacers' shop (read<BR>
the main plaza at the star port - most shops are called things like<BR>
Adventurer Outfitters or Rockhounds R Us) lol..<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Tod Glenn<BR>
Sent: Monday, July 24, 2000 8:13 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, J. Paul Sanders at timmon@primenet.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
Given that Traveller credits are close to US 1977 dollars, this list is<BR>
scary.  A few notes based on year 2000 prices:<BR>
<BR>
> Posted this about three years ago...thought the newer members of the list<BR>
> might find it useful.<BR>
> ******<BR>
><BR>
> The following supplies are available at the local port:<BR>
><BR>
> Item for Sale       Tech Level Weight    Mass/Volume  Credits<BR>
><BR>
> Binoculars              TL3    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         300<BR>
Nice binoculars!  Seviceable pair: more like Cr100<BR>
<BR>
> Boots, Climbing         TL3    1.5 kg     3.0 ltr         200<BR>
Hmmm.  About right<BR>
<BR>
> Bullhorn                TL6    0.5 kg     2.5 ltr         500<BR>
More like Cr50<BR>
<BR>
> Calculator, Hand Solar  TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr          50<BR>
Just looked at one of these.  TI scientific solar $9.95<BR>
<BR>
> Clothing, Cold Weather  TL9    2.0 kg     9.0 ltr        2500<BR>
Mink coat? a full set of ECWS gear will set you back about $1000<BR>
<BR>
> Clothing, Desert        TL3    -          -               400<BR>
Mon Dieu.  Is that burnoose made with gold leaf?<BR>
<BR>
> Communicator 500km      TL9    1.5 lg     3.0 ltr       20000<BR>
Yaesu, Kenwood Icom shortwave rig. ~$2500<BR>
<BR>
> Detector, Metal         TL6    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr        1200<BR>
$99 at radio shack<BR>
<BR>
> Goggles (IR/LI)         TL9    0.2 kg     0.3 ltr        5000<BR>
AN/PVS-7B State of the art LI/IR goggles $2795<BR>
<BR>
> Machete                 TL4    1.0 kg     2.0 ltr         500<BR>
OK, this is way off.  How about $20 at the local surplus store<BR>
<BR>
> Map, Electronic         TL9    1.0 kg     1.0 ltr       10000<BR>
Garmin streetpilot color ~$650<BR>
<BR>
> Multichronometer        TL9    0.1 kg     0.2 ltr        2000<BR>
add a couple thousand and make it a Rolex.  Or buy an electronic for $49<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm Magnum Revolver     TL5    1.2 kg     1.2 ltr        1200<BR>
Must be a Korth.  S&W 686 about $600<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm Revolver            TL4    0.9 kg     0.9 ltr         600<BR>
High end.  But a Rossi for $350<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm Auto Pistol         TL5    0.7 kg     0.7 ltr         800<BR>
Glock-17.  $525<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm Rifle               TL7    5.0 kg     4.0 ltr        4000<BR>
Well, if this is some big bore, like a Dakota arms, yes.<BR>
<BR>
> 13mm Hunting Rifle      TL5    6.0 kg     4.5 ltr        8000<BR>
.500+ caliber double rifle?  Cheap at that price.  Plain Jane Butch Searcy<BR>
double: $9000, Holland and Holland:  $30,000+<BR>
<BR>
> 18mm Auto Shotgun       TL7    4.0 kg     4.0 ltr        2000<BR>
Remington 11-87: $736 MSRP (from their website)<BR>
<BR>
> 18mm Shotgun Shells     TL7    0.75 kg    0.75 ltr         40<BR>
about $1 a round for buckshot<BR>
<BR>
> 9mm SMG                 TL5    2.5 kg     2.5 ltr        2000<BR>
Right on for a PAWS pre 1986 transferable gun. a realistic price is probably<BR>
something like $500<BR>
<BR>
> 5mm Assault Rifle       TL7    3.0 kg     3.0 ltr        1200<BR>
$7000 for a Colt M16 pre 1986 transferable.  Semi-auto for ~$700.<BR>
<BR>
> Bottle of Wine, Good    TL3    1.2 kg     1.0 ltr         100<BR>
> Bottle of Beer, Good    TL3    0.6 kg     0.5 ltr          20<BR>
> Bottle of Beer, Poor    TL3    0.5 kg     0.4 ltr          10<BR>
Holy Cow!  the 3I must have one hell of a sin tax! Anybody on this list pay<BR>
$10 per beer?<BR>
<BR>
> Hallucinogenic Drugs    TL0-9  Varies     Varies          100<BR>
> Narcotic Drugs          TL0-9  -          -               100<BR>
Must be a big stash.  More like $10 per dose<BR>
<BR>
> Deck of Cards           TL5    0.1 kg     0.1 ltr          12<BR>
Bought these for $1 a pack<BR>
<BR>
> Bolt of Cloth           TL3    12.0 kg    12.0 ltr       4000<BR>
Cloth of gold, maybe?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Just my Cr.02.  Time to update the list?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- --<BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:41:34 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collins wrote,<BR>
>A number of people have been expressing the opinion that population should<BR>
be modified based on the "Terran-ness" of a world.  Let me just express<BR>
the dissenting opinion.  I think that if there were any relationship like<BR>
this at all, it would be a very weak one.  The reasons:<<BR>
<BR>
As a clarification, by "hell holes" I mean worlds with Corrosive or<BR>
Insidious atmospheres and some with Exotic atmospheres. Given a choice<BR>
between a Fluorine world and a Rockball, I can't see anyone actually<BR>
choosing to live on the Fluorine world. Mine it yes, build there no.<BR>
Of course that might mean adding a world definer to replace most of those A+<BR>
atmosphere types, the Artificial Satellite or equivalent.<BR>
<BR>
As for the difficulties in terraforming, I think that has both pro and con<BR>
elements.  I suppose we would actually have to terraform an alien (as<BR>
opposed to home but different ecology)  world before we knew just how<BR>
difficult or easy it might be. Our earth bugs, plants and beasts just might<BR>
be the baddest boys in the universe and not have any trouble kicking<BR>
eco-butt with ease/<BR>
In terms of acclimation, I really don't think you will ever acclimate the<BR>
need for blue skies and unprocessed air out of people. Even someone like me<BR>
who hates going out still appreciates outside as a place available for use<BR>
upon whim.<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson writes,<BR>
>As such, there should be penalties for each of the following:<BR>
Non-breatheable atmosphere (requires sealed structures)<BR>
Zero hydrographics (requires importing hydrogen)<BR>
Zero atmosphere (requires importing nitrogen).  If size < 3, also will have<BR>
lost most of its carbon since it can no longer hold on to CO2.<<BR>
<BR>
I might point to the basic classifications of Poor and Desert plus the<BR>
potential of Non-agricultural for just these points.<BR>
<BR>
Ludowick wrote,<BR>
>This makes Industrial worlds the high-pop versions of "Poor" worlds (sort<BR>
of).<<BR>
<BR>
Again note, Poor didn't seem to originally mean "poor in industrial<BR>
resources" but "poor piece of real estate to have to call home".<BR>
Still, taking this in with what Anthony noted defines "Poor" rather adeptly.<BR>
Also note, Poor worlds can also be Industrial worlds at the same time. This<BR>
should affect calculations as well.<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson again,<BR>
>It depends on why the world has a low population.  Most extremely low<BR>
population areas on earth also lack major cities.  I would expect no more<BR>
than a thousand people to live near the starport, unless the starport is the<BR>
world's only excuse for existence.<<BR>
<BR>
First ask how was the world colonized I'd say.<BR>
If a straightforward "build for the future" job, I'd say everyone is within<BR>
spitting distance of the Starport, or at least as close as farming and<BR>
industrial sites allow.<BR>
If for exploitation, then a more dispersed pattern is likely as all the<BR>
resources won't clump together for ease of extraction (damn ecological and<BR>
geological realities!) and building a starport at each site would obviously<BR>
be impractical unless the world has 1 Class C+ and 500 Class E (which isn't<BR>
unreasonable).<BR>
If settled by people who want their elbow room, you would also have<BR>
significant dispersal.<BR>
So, Government, Corporate of Private Colonization and go from there.<BR>
<BR>
Tsykoyduk responded on Tech,<BR>
>IMHO that tech is not _knowledge level_ but _production level_ <<BR>
<BR>
Given how few people today can manufacture black powder, I find it hard to<BR>
believe that number will increase significantly in the future. Given how few<BR>
people today can make a flint knife, I envision the number hovering someone<BR>
between 0% and less-than-0% when the average sidearm is a gauss or laser<BR>
pistol.<BR>
As such, I find the explanation of "local production level" to fail upon<BR>
more than cursory analysis. If not, then perhaps TL needs to be officially<BR>
divided into Local and Imported values for the UPP, possibly with the<BR>
additions of "Artifacts unreproduceable" and "No Local Production" as<BR>
additional modifiers. In a place like Grant, I doubt the Interdiction force<BR>
produces anything rather than assuming they make flint knives and bearskin<BR>
rugs in their spare time. To me, this is quite different from TL 0, even<BR>
taken as local production level.<BR>
Extending this, Mithras/Glisten 0302 Spinward Marches 1932  has a TL of 6.<BR>
Even as local production, the 300,000 Imperial felons incarcerated there<BR>
will soon be dead from the Corrosive atmosphere, taking their guards with<BR>
them. Therefore, we might have a TL 6 for production (still odd, who would<BR>
have the prisoners make such utterly obsolete junk as rehabilitation<BR>
training in a TL F empire?), TL 7 minimum artifacts (so they don't all die<BR>
when life support fails) and TL C imports (or B, depending on how far down<BR>
on the procurement lists prison guards are). Clunky to be sure, but it would<BR>
explain things more when presented to people in a product.<BR>
Or not, these are just ideas rumbling around so far.<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:09:31 -0400<BR>
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
>> I would wonder if they even have universities in that sense. Colleges to<BR>
>> teach non-technical subjects, like history or business management maybe,<BR>
but<BR>
>> schools to teach engineering and such will probably be technical schools.<BR>
>> These will have very little in common with the way that American<BR>
>> Universities are set up, but will be student centered, like U.S.<BR>
technical<BR>
>> schools with their primary purpose to turn out engineers and technicians,<BR>
>> not to do research.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>My old Jesuit profs would be shocked.  No philosophy? no literature? Just<BR>
>crank out tons of technicians with no foundation in the humanities, no<BR>
>ethics? I hate to think that the Imperium has gone down that road. IMTU, I<BR>
>favor the idea of the gentlebeing scholar.<BR>
<BR>
I would certainly include subjects like philosophy, literature, law and<BR>
ethics in the same group as history and business. I simply meant that<BR>
scientific and technical subjects would be treated different.<BR>
<BR>
Terry C<BR>
All that is Gold does not glitter<BR>
Not all who travel are lost<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:21:19 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
From: "Paul Harris" <ref_harry@eudoramail.com><BR>
> Electrostatic Aerosol Paint Bomb/Mortar round. Designed to molecularly<BR>
bind with metallic/ceramic/whatever surfaces and produce a layer opaque to<BR>
radiation from IR to visual to whatever. Blocks vision and some sensors.<BR>
Effectively blinds Tanks and Battledress/Combat wearing troops.<BR>
><BR>
> Obviously not 100% effective, probably not even 50% effective, but would<BR>
be effective enough to cause problems on the battlefield (well, hopefully).<BR>
><BR>
> Available from tech level 10 to 15. Higher tech levels cover a larger<BR>
range of frequencies.<BR>
><BR>
> This just off the top of my head.<BR>
><BR>
> scout_harris<BR>
> (back on the list after a few months break, hello everybody)<BR>
><BR>
Cool! I like it.  Just one more incremental stick up armors b......   uh,<BR>
you know.<BR>
Infantry fighting armor isn't just one tactic or weapon. Its all the nasty<BR>
efforts that can be come up with through long, careful thought and spur of<BR>
the moment expedience.<BR>
<BR>
Pronto<BR>
AKA Brian Taylor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:28:30 -0400<BR>
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
>Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
>white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
>BSG)?<BR>
<BR>
Why if the suits aren't camouflage they'll be maroon, of course. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Terry C<BR>
All that is Gold does not glitter<BR>
Not all who travel are lost <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2809<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb05.mx.aol.com (rly-zb05.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.5]) by air-zb05.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:33:09 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb05.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:32:31 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA31746;<BR>
	Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:32:29 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:32:13 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA31706<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:32:13 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:32:13 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007260232.WAA31706@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2809<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2810</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/25/00 11:14:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Wednesday, July 26 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2810<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Space Docking<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Population "Problems"<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller <BR>
The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: BD Colors<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits, was Re: Classic Traveller <BR>
strange UWPs, and Tech level advancement<BR>
RE: Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:56:59 -0700<BR>
From: "Thing" <gduke@telebyte.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
On Tuesday, July 25, 2000 2:18 PM<BR>
Anthony Jackson said,<BR>
<BR>
> By and large the actual camera is going to be electronic, whatever the<BR>
wires are.  However, it can<BR>
> reasonably be shielded with a fine mesh cage over the camera (which won't<BR>
really hurt its resolution<BR>
> that much).<BR>
<BR>
So how about some paintball grenades for the camera and maybe mix in a<BR>
little phosphorous in case of IR?<BR>
<BR>
All of the talk about chameleonic surfaces on BD got me thinking about doing<BR>
a mod on a system similar to the new  BugZapper 1.0 Umbral Universal Unique<BR>
Utilities (and Pinkerdoo),  but replacing the laser with a paintball gun to<BR>
put a little tag on top of the chameleon surface of any nearby unfriendly BD<BR>
troops.  If you make sure your paint pellets have a high radar reflectivity<BR>
and or a slight rad signature it should help with any of your other<BR>
automated welcoming systems.<BR>
<BR>
G.D.D.<BR>
Thing under the stairs,<BR>
Minion of Shechemist & GothBunny,<BR>
Grand Master of the Electron Flow.<BR>
===========================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 22:19:29 -0500<BR>
From: "D. Smart" <dsmart@imagin.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Space Docking<BR>
<BR>
Thom Harris posted:<BR>
> <BR>
> I just watched the docking of the Russian module with the International<BR>
> Space Station. The Russian crew used their "AUTOMATIC" docking computer and<BR>
> it was a perfect connection.....Excuse the language but I got an instant<BR>
> "Woody". Considering my age and the medications I'm on, that would be<BR>
> considered a minor miracle in most religions. Excuse me now, I have to go<BR>
> find my wife....Nothing further to report!<BR>
> <BR>
> Thom Harris - GOFIR - <Gnarly Old Fart In Residence><BR>
<BR>
It's a good time to be alive, isn't it?<BR>
<BR>
Playing Traveller and seeing parts of it become reality<BR>
always sends chills up my spine. Thanks again, Marc and<BR>
Loren, for letting us peek into the future.<BR>
<BR>
David Smart<BR>
NOFITAPOI <BR>
(Narly Old Fart In Training And Proud Of It)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 20:50:37 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
>> My old Jesuit profs would be shocked.  No philosophy? no literature? Just<BR>
>> crank out tons of technicians with no foundation in the humanities, no<BR>
>> ethics? I hate to think that the Imperium has gone down that road. IMTU, I<BR>
>> favor the idea of the gentlebeing scholar.<BR>
> <BR>
> I would certainly include subjects like philosophy, literature, law and<BR>
> ethics in the same group as history and business. I simply meant that<BR>
> scientific and technical subjects would be treated different.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
I guess I should have mentioned I was a double major in Chemistry and<BR>
Mathematics.  Are these technical subjects?  I still had to take literature,<BR>
philosophy, religion, ethics, history and all that liberal arts stuff.  I am<BR>
constantly astounded by my technical coworkers' lack of liberal arts<BR>
education. A serious failing of the American public university, IMHO.  As I<BR>
said, I hope the 3I does a better job.<BR>
<BR>
Are the Jesuits still running schools in the 3I?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 15:48:20 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
On 24 Jul 2000, at 20:12, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, J. Paul Sanders at timmon@primenet.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > 5mm Assault Rifle       TL7    3.0 kg     3.0 ltr        1200<BR>
> $7000 for a Colt M16 pre 1986 transferable.  Semi-auto for ~$700.<BR>
<BR>
In the mid-late 80s the NZ armed forces were looking for a new standard issue <BR>
rifle to replace the old SLRs and M16A1s we had (in the end we went with Steyr <BR>
AUGs). Colt's offer was for M16A2s, plus cleaning kits, bayonet (the nice Buck <BR>
things), 5 30-round magazines, slings and other accesories, etc, for about <BR>
$1250 (US, I think).<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 15:48:20 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
On 25 Jul 2000, at 9:37, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Tod Glenn writes:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Given that Traveller credits are close to US 1977 dollars, this list is<BR>
> > scary.  A few notes based on year 2000 prices:<BR>
> <BR>
> Are they?  Based on economics in various supplements, you can argue they're<BR>
> worth well over a 1977 dollar (and in any case should be at least<BR>
<BR>
I always figured them to be worth about CRImp1 = US$2, about what the TCS <BR>
exchange table suggests.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 19:56:55 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems"<BR>
<BR>
"Rodney Basler" <rgb@odetics.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> While I had lived all of my life no farther north than San Fransisco, I had<BR>
> always felt this strange affinity for the cold, bleak places.  <BR>
<BR>
I've lived in Anchorage, Alaska since I was three years old.<BR>
I don't like the cold despite that when I go someplace else <BR>
south of about 50 degrees North I find that the air smells <BR>
wrong,  it does not have that proper cool tang, the daylight <BR>
is much too bright (I wear sunglasses even here, in the lower <BR>
48 the light is blindingly bright), and the gravity runs about<BR>
just a tad less (0.4%?) than I am used to. (Local gravity<BR>
varies with local geological mascons and Anchorage is in a dense<BR>
area, apparent gravity drops off very slightly because of the<BR>
rotation as the Earth rotation pushes you up as a function<BR>
of the cosine of the latitude.<BR>
<BR>
In addition all US east coast drivers (especially Boston drivers) <BR>
act as if they are on amphetamines, learned to drive (if at all) <BR>
by watching The Dukes of Hazard, and will, apparently, be castrated <BR>
if they are ever nice to anyone else on the road.)<BR>
<BR>
> I moved to<BR>
> Iceland for a year and loved it - in one season I had adapted pretty well to<BR>
> the weather, and even felt comfortable with the constant dark of the winter<BR>
> (most of the time, at least).  Coming back to smoggy southern California,<BR>
> though, it took about eight years before I felt cold during the winter - and<BR>
> the summers were simply unspeakable.  Why is that?  It has been generations<BR>
> since my ancestors left the fjords of Norway or the snowy peaks and high<BR>
> valleys of the Alps, but those are the places that I feel most comfortable.<BR>
<BR>
Europeans are/were (apparently) evolved for near glacial conditions. <BR>
We are not meant to live in California (if you don't believe me <BR>
check out the skin cancer rates of Caucasians in California, <BR>
South Africa, Australia, etc). 'White' skin is intended to be<BR>
light enough in color that an exposed face can soak up enough <BR>
vitamin D while the rest of the body is covered with furs to keep <BR>
off the glacial cold.<BR>
<BR>
> Give me pine and oak trees any day - palm trees just don't look right. <BR>
<BR>
Give me black spruce, white spruce, aspen, and cottonwood.<BR>
All other trees including pines and oaks look unnatural.<BR>
All the trees at lower latitudes are too sprawling, trees should<BR>
go straight up and not reach out to the sides so much. <BR>
Moreover the very idea of having more than four or five kinds<BR>
of trees is just wrong. Temperate latitudes have too many<BR>
different species the diversity is bizarre. Insects (except <BR>
for mosquitos) should be rare, belong to only a few species, <BR>
and should exist only in the outdoors during the summer only.<BR>
<BR>
Summer days should be at least sixteen to eighteen hours long <BR>
and winter days should be no more than six to eight hours long.<BR>
Days that do not vary in length are unnatural and wrong.<BR>
<BR>
> Would our distant descendants get the same feeling about large planets with<BR>
> 9.8 m/s^2 gravity and a sky just that certain shade of blue?<BR>
<BR>
The sky of earth is not one certain shade of blue. The proper<BR>
color blue is found only at around 61 degrees North (or presumably<BR>
61 south although that area has a dearth or real estate). As you<BR>
head south the sunlight starts coming down at an insufficiently<BR>
oblique angle and consequently the sky is too dark a blue, as<BR>
you travel north it becomes too light a blue. Moreover sunrise<BR>
and sunset are too rapid  south of 60 north and twilight lasts<BR>
an insufficiently long amount of time. Normally twilight should<BR>
last at least an hour, all else is an aberration.<BR>
<BR>
Other areas of the earth have way too many bizarrely old<BR>
buildings, an old building is one that is more than twenty five<BR>
years old and a very old building is one that predates the<BR>
Second World War. Air conditioning is a plot to ensure that<BR>
everyone inside any building will freeze to death in any clothes<BR>
that might have been remotely comfortable while they were outside<BR>
reaching that building.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:00:06 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
On 25 Jul 2000, at 20:50, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I guess I should have mentioned I was a double major in Chemistry and<BR>
> Mathematics.  Are these technical subjects?  I still had to take literature,<BR>
> philosophy, religion, ethics, history and all that liberal arts stuff.  I am<BR>
> constantly astounded by my technical coworkers' lack of liberal arts education.<BR>
> A serious failing of the American public university, IMHO.  As I said, I hope<BR>
> the 3I does a better job.<BR>
<BR>
Same here in NZ. OTOH I was constantly shocked by the technical and scientific <BR>
illiteracy of my classmates in CLassics, History, etc. while studying these at <BR>
varsity. The funny thing is that the Arts lecturers are usually like their <BR>
students, but (where I went at least) the Science lecturers were mostly very <BR>
well read in the Arts.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 14:09:37 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> While really Hi Pop worlds might be a problem, I see more of a difficulty<BR>
> with the random nature of the distributions.<BR>
> Why are some prime worlds sitting around with only 2-5000 people while dirt<BR>
> balls or hell holes are teeming with billions? Past a certain point the<BR>
> "Imperial Reservation" bit wears thin. Never mind anything else, reserving<BR>
> every garden world and its brother for a bunch of nobles will result in a<BR>
> rebellion well before 1000 years have passed. Likewise the "preparing for<BR>
> colonization" and certain other explanations.<BR>
<BR>
The random generation system is actually better suited to unexplored<BR>
sector. <BR>
<BR>
> Related to this is TL variation. While nice in theory to have a few "lost<BR>
> colonies" here and there, it has also been several hundred years since most<BR>
> of them would have been rediscovered.  Even the most conservative,<BR>
> isolationist Vilani colony should have managed to claw its way back to CT TL<BR>
> 7 in that time if not 9. Even more is the number of non-viable colonies<BR>
> existing on artifacts from the previous Imperium or even Ancient technology.<BR>
<BR>
Well there ae always religious and social movements that don't *want*<BR>
higher tech. Think of a group like the Amish, but less flexible about<BR>
some things.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:09:53 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
on 7/26/00 8:48 AM, Rupert Boleyn at rboleyn@paradise.net.nz wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> On 24 Jul 2000, at 20:12, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
>> on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, J. Paul Sanders at timmon@primenet.com wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
>>> 5mm Assault Rifle       TL7    3.0 kg     3.0 ltr        1200<BR>
>> $7000 for a Colt M16 pre 1986 transferable.  Semi-auto for ~$700.<BR>
> <BR>
> In the mid-late 80s the NZ armed forces were looking for a new standard issue<BR>
> rifle to replace the old SLRs and M16A1s we had (in the end we went with Steyr<BR>
> AUGs). Colt's offer was for M16A2s, plus cleaning kits, bayonet (the nice Buck<BR>
> things), 5 30-round magazines, slings and other accesories, etc, for about<BR>
> $1250 (US, I think).<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Bad deal for the Kiwis.  I think the US paid about $450 for the last<BR>
contract.  A bidding war between FN and Colt helps.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, my dad is visiting and wants to know what part of NZ you're in.<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:18:32 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
<<snip>><BR>
> <BR>
> Are the Jesuits still running schools in the 3I?<BR>
<BR>
IMTU, not only are the Jesuits running schools, they are running _at<BR>
least_ one of the most sophisticated non-governmental intelligence<BR>
services in known space.  Art imitating life....<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:24:23 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
on 7/25/00 6:27 PM, Tsykoduk at Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> This is not the General Store - this is where the 'Real Spacers' shop (read<BR>
> the main plaza at the star port - most shops are called things like<BR>
> Adventurer Outfitters or Rockhounds R Us) lol..<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
Well the General Store used to be pretty cool.  I remember when they had a<BR>
gunfight in the store.<BR>
<BR>
And in general, the seasoned traveller knows how to shop and not get<BR>
screwed.  $200 for a machete!?  It had better say something like 'Al Mar'.<BR>
I Buy a lot of my personal gear from Brigade Quartermaster and US Cavalry.<BR>
I find their catalogs to be an excellent resource for players.<BR>
<BR>
I stand by my assertion that guns are way overpriced on the list (unless<BR>
artificially made so).<BR>
<BR>
My players shop around carefully.  Of course, I don't hand out bags of money<BR>
on every adventure.  The characters buy the best they can for the least they<BR>
can.  What else is streetwise and trader for?<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 00:24:40 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote,<BR>
>The random generation system is actually better suited to unexplored<BR>
sector. <<BR>
<BR>
Absolutely.<BR>
Or as a starting point for settled Sectors. Settled Sectors need definite<BR>
editing to smooth out the rough edges of basic generation.<BR>
<BR>
>Well there ae always religious and social movements that don't *want*<BR>
higher tech. Think of a group like the Amish, but less flexible about<BR>
some things.<<BR>
<BR>
Actually I'd think they'd have to be more flexible to ever get off their<BR>
home world in the first place. But once they've done that, they still need<BR>
to meet certain basic minimums. While we might be able to make an exception<BR>
for the Pysadians being willing to accept not being able to construct sealed<BR>
houses so they can eat without having to breathe their tainted air because<BR>
of their particular religious persuasion and the particular taint given to<BR>
their planet, in most cases this simply isn't going to work. And again, just<BR>
how many planets of Luddites and back to nature types are we willing to<BR>
accept? One per Sector?<BR>
And then there are fun places like Asmodeus and its nuclear war. After 100+<BR>
years, for the people to still be at TL 4 they have either been abandoned or<BR>
are into a serious of game of Gamma World about now.<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 20:29:32 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller <BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >> "Using current technology the maximum size ship which can safely <BR>
> >> transition into jumpspace is 5000 dT. It is hoped that more advanced <BR>
> >> technologies will eventually allow this limit to be broken."<BR>
> >> Dom<BR>
<BR>
> Won't work, Dom. I wish it would, but then you just end up limiting<BR>
> *jump* capable ships and end up with 500,000 dton monitors making<BR>
> invasions of defended systems totally impossible.  If there is a<BR>
> solution, it needs to affect jump and non-jump ships equally.<BR>
<BR>
> 1.  More realistic radiators limiting volume<BR>
> <BR>
>     This has a lot going for it because it works on boats and ships.<BR>
>     Unfortunately, it also might work against Up Ports. <BR>
<BR>
> 2.  Reducing and/or more reasonable population figures<BR>
>     Reduces money for ships, thereby reducing ship numbers.<BR>
>     Important, but doesn't directly address ship volume, and going<BR>
>     back to change all the Pops in the OTU isn't very feasible.<BR>
<BR>
It has the additional benefit of helping players to believe<BR>
that their actions have the potential to have meaning. The<BR>
Imperium's emphasis on the personal responsibility (and sometimes<BR>
even honor or even nobility) among its Nobility and other<BR>
higher ups is predicated on the notion that the actions of<BR>
individuals have meaning. If a ships captain knows that if <BR>
and when he fails the Navy has hundreds of thousands of other <BR>
ships to pick up the slack he is not as likely to be willing <BR>
to sacrifice his ship defending 'king and country' (er Emperor <BR>
and Imperium ?) as he is if he knows that it falls to him and <BR>
his crew alone to be 'The thin red line holding back the Zho <BR>
horde.'<BR>
<BR>
> 3.  Hull sizes being restricted by TL <BR>
>     Might/might not relate back to #1.  <BR>
> What no one has suggested is having cost of ships increase in a<BR>
> non-linear fashion.  What about slow or flat cost increases up to<BR>
> some TL limit, then rapid cost increases above that? <BR>
<BR>
Not a bad idea, what's the hand wave?<BR>
<BR>
> Perhaps a flat rate up 3*(2^TL) dtons and then ?exponential?<BR>
> increases above that?<BR>
> <BR>
> Example at TL10:  50,000 Cr/dton up to 3,072 dtons, and a much higher<BR>
>                   rate/dton above that (anyone want to give a try at<BR>
>                   a reasonable formula for this part?)<BR>
<BR>
How about if maximum ship size (in DT's) is normally equal <BR>
to 100 * ((TTL -6) ^3).  This would make result in<BR>
<BR>
TL	Normal Max Ship Size in DT's<BR>
6           0<BR>
7         100<BR>
8         800<BR>
9       2,700     <BR>
A       6,400<BR>
B      12,500<BR>
C      21,600<BR>
D      34,300<BR>
E      51,200<BR>
F      72,900<BR>
G     100,000  <BR>
<BR>
This would result in ships whose sizes fit much more closely <BR>
with the ship sizes seen in Imperium. It would make the 3,000 <BR>
ton Midu Agashim class ship a powerhouse and would make the <BR>
AHL a giant.<BR>
		<BR>
For ships of greater than this size that <BR>
<BR>
Hull cost = (Size/Max size) ^ TL.<BR>
<BR>
Thus the 60,000 ton TL 14 AHL's hull would have<BR>
cost (60,000/51,200)^ 14 = 9.211 times the normal<BR>
cost.<BR>
<BR>
A 500,000 ton TL 15 Tigress's Hull would cost<BR>
(500,000/72,900)^ 15 = 3.5 x 10^ 12 times<BR>
normal and the whole Imperium could not afford<BR>
to build one.<BR>
<BR>
Additionally for jump capable ships any ship of over the normal <BR>
maximum would have a plus (Size/normal maximum size)^ 4 round up <BR>
chance of a misjump.  Thus the AHL would have a +1 chance of<BR>
a misjump. A 100,000 ton TL 15 battleship (whose hull would<BR>
cost 114.57 times normal) would have a +4 chance of a misjump.<BR>
Its SOP would be to always make cautious jumps.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:33:14 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
Well, this is an interesting thread. This is how I see the future battlefield. <BR>
All elements on would be fitted with a range of active and passive sensors. <BR>
However, these would be supplimented by a central data net that would <BR>
take all these inputs plus the inputs of sensor drones, saterlites etc to <BR>
provide a real time picture of the battlefield far better than any single unit <BR>
could "see". In this environment, you live or die on the quality of your ECM <BR>
and ECCM. Its an environment full of decoys, jamming and fog; rather <BR>
frightening really.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 00:38:11 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
> For Imperial Marines, certainly.  But what about Imperial Army BD?<BR>
<BR>
Jesse's cover assignment calls for Marines . . . hmmm, I don't think we've <BR>
ever specified what color dress BD is for Imperial Army. <BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 00:41:23 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: BD Colors<BR>
<BR>
> Gee, does this mean the chapter on "color coordination and accessorizing"<BR>
>  has been cut?<BR>
<BR>
'Fraid so -- the chapter "nicknames given to field rations" is also gone . . .<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 01:10:25 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits, was Re: Classic Traveller <BR>
<BR>
I've been meaning to comment. There already is a limiter on ship sizes -<BR>
computer size! Instead of going elsewhere, why not just revise the table<BR>
down?<BR>
Computer TL HG Size New Size 1 New Size 2 New Size 3<BR>
1                5        6                6                  6<BR>
6<BR>
1bis           6        6                6                  6<BR>
6<BR>
2                7        A               A                  A<BR>
A<BR>
2bis           8        A               A                  A<BR>
A<BR>
3                9        D               D                  A<BR>
A<BR>
4                A        K               H                  B<BR>
B<BR>
5                B        P               L                  C<BR>
C<BR>
6                C        R               P                  D<BR>
D<BR>
7                D        Y               S                  L<BR>
E<BR>
8                E         -               V                  R<BR>
R<BR>
9                F         -               Z                   V<BR>
V<BR>
<BR>
New Size 1 delays our super giants for a few TLs, the Dreadnaughts and such<BR>
not coming until TL 13. New Size 2 is harsher, making AHLs around half the<BR>
maximum size possible at the new TL of 14 and keeping the smaller Book 2<BR>
sizes dominate until TL 13. New Size 3 is utterly savage delaying anything<BR>
above Book 2 size until TL 14.<BR>
Each of these is based on smoothing out the jumps in ship sizes somewhat. It<BR>
probably needs tweaking, but these options can find a way to please the<BR>
various preferences.<BR>
(I first realized this years ago when I tried designing ships for TCS in the<BR>
Islands Cluster campaign given. Esperanza with its TL B is limited to ships<BR>
half the size of the other planets while having a Pop 10 times theirs (A vs<BR>
9s) resulting in the "swarms" people described.)<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:02:05 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Kyle Schuant <kyle3054@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: strange UWPs, and Tech level advancement<BR>
<BR>
GM Lesson #314:<BR>
"You can rationalise ANY crazy stuff if you try hard<BR>
enough."<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>>Grant/Jewell has a Pop of 20 and a TL of 0.">><BR>
Sounds like that world in Alien 3, ie an (almost)<BR>
abandoned prison. Or maybe Khan's world in Star Trek<BR>
II? Crash victims the Scouts didn't have room on their<BR>
ship to rescue? Heaps of possibilities.<BR>
<BR>
>>Or 457-973/Rhylanor. 500 people and a TL4 with a<BR>
government 1. How could an Interstellar company get<BR>
there with a TL of 4?>> <BR>
A corporate prison? Or again, a crash... or maybe a<BR>
private university with an archaeological team<BR>
studying Precursor ruins?<BR>
<BR>
>>really be possible for Boeing to set up a factory to<BR>
make biplanes these days?>><BR>
Sure, why not? There's a company in the UK that's<BR>
making Spitfires (WWII UK fighter planes, for the<BR>
younger on the list). They're $2 million each, a bit<BR>
more expensive than the orginals, but then, they're<BR>
only making a dozen a year, when in WWII they used to<BR>
make hundreds (?) a week. <BR>
<BR>
On Tech level advancement: would the Imperial<BR>
authorities, and corporations, really deisre that all<BR>
the worlds reach Tech Level 15? And if so, wouldn't it<BR>
be difficult to go directly from, say, GTL4 to 15 in<BR>
just a year or two? Maybe Acme Interstellar has been<BR>
making Jump-6 ships for the past five hundred years,<BR>
but if it comes across a world where they're still<BR>
rattling around in carts drawn by servants, they might<BR>
be better off making biplanes for the locals, which<BR>
after all, they're more likely to be able to afford<BR>
(30kCr vs 30MCr) <BR>
Thoughts, anybody?<BR>
<BR>
=====<BR>
KA Schuant<BR>
member: Chef's Guild International, Sporting Shooter's Assoc, Amnesty Int, Carlton Soccer Club<BR>
Melbourne<BR>
Australia<BR>
"Duct tape is like the Force: it has a light side, a dark side, and it binds the universe together"<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:03:07 -0700<BR>
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
<BR>
Rob didn't get the stutter in there though ;)<BR>
<BR>
BTW Glenn, thanks for doing that Ditzie illo =D  I about died laughing when<BR>
I heard about it since I hadn't seen it yet at the time.<BR>
<BR>
"See, she's in the book!  That means she's canon now!  Run for your<BR>
lives!!!"<BR>
<BR>
Jesse<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Glenn Grant<BR>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 10:01 AM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Re: Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> John Groth <wombat@premier.net> writes:<BR>
><BR>
> >Yet another reason to subscribe to JTAS:<BR>
> >This week's edition includes an "Amber Zone" adventure, written by Rob<BR>
> >Prior, that features none other than Hengabar Spofulam and his niece.<BR>
> >Glenn Grant provides a fine illustration of Miss Ditzjammer Spofulam.<BR>
><BR>
> Based heavily on Jesse's cartoons of Ditzie, I hasten to point out.<BR>
><BR>
> Best,<BR>
><BR>
> Glenn<BR>
> --<BR>
>     ------------------------Glenn Grant------------------------<BR>
>                           <neo@total.net><BR>
>        "I don't want to achieve immortality through my work.<BR>
>          I want to achieve it by not dying." -- Woody Allen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:05:24 -0700<BR>
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
1.Camouflaged<BR>
2.Green<BR>
<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
Jesse<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of John Groth<BR>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 3:48 PM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> GDWGAMES@aol.com wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> > > Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
> > >  white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
> > >  BSG)?<BR>
> > <BR>
> > 2 choices:<BR>
> > <BR>
> > 1) Camoflaged<BR>
> > <BR>
> > 2) Maroon<BR>
> > <BR>
> > There are no other options.    :  )<BR>
> <BR>
> For Imperial Marines, certainly.  But what about Imperial Army BD?<BR>
> <BR>
> -- <BR>
> AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
> "Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
> Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
> <BR>
> http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2810<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.34]) by air-yh01.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:14:37 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:14:06 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id CAA44150;<BR>
	Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:14:04 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:13:56 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id CAA44074<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:13:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:13:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007260613.CAA44074@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2810<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2811</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/26/00 5:55:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Wednesday, July 26 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2811<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: New from 4U!<BR>
RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
RE: Aaaah!  Carnivorous Robots on the loose!<BR>
strange UWPs #02<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2809<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: Population "Problems"<BR>
Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Multichron<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Ali-G in BD (was: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805)<BR>
Re: Ali-G in BD (was: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805)<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: BD Colors<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:04:16 -0700<BR>
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: New from 4U!<BR>
<BR>
All I know is that I don't wanna' be ANYwhere near it when she turns it on<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
Jesse<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Leonard<BR>
> Erickson<BR>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 2:08 PM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Re: New from 4U!<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > *** SPLORK!!!!! ***<BR>
> ><BR>
> > First k/b kill in awhile :)<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Jesse<BR>
><BR>
> Yeah, now just imagine what Ditzie will do when she hears about it! <eg><BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:09:22 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of John P.<BR>
> Raynor<BR>
> Sent: Tuesday, 25 July 2000 02:35<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: RE: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> On Sat, 22 Jul 2000, Frank G. Pitt wrote:<BR>
> > I'd disagree. To me the Imperium and it's institutions is what<BR>
> makes CT CT.<BR>
><BR>
> Bah!<BR>
> In my opinion, "Traveller" is neither about a specific set of<BR>
> rules, nor about a specific campaign world, it's an *attitude*.<BR>
> "Traveller" strives for technological plausibility and reasonably strict<BR>
> internal consistancy, and "Traveller" is about the kind of societies that<BR>
> real human beings build (with both good and bad points), rather than about<BR>
> utopian (Roddenberry) or dystopian (Huxley/Orwell) fantasies.<BR>
><BR>
>                                                                - J. Raynor<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:21:04 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Aaaah!  Carnivorous Robots on the loose!<BR>
<BR>
> Any thoughts on the conversion efficiency.  How many calories of intake to<BR>
> power a carnivorous warbot? Will fatty targets be preferred?<BR>
<BR>
Why does this remind me of thiose discussions about man-powered starships ?<BR>
<BR>
> Of course, this brings up the thought of a whole series of meat powered<BR>
> devices, robotic or not.<BR>
<BR>
So that's what those flesh-eating diseases are, outbreaks of meat-powered<BR>
nano-bots...<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:36:03 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Kyle Schuant <kyle3054@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: strange UWPs #02<BR>
<BR>
> Why are some prime worlds sitting around with only<BR>
2-5000 people <BR>
while dirt<BR>
> balls or hell holes are teeming with billions? <BR>
Any number of explanations:<BR>
   The hell hole WAS a prime world, teeming billions<BR>
went there, and made it a hell hole. While<BR>
interstellar travel lets you steal the resources of<BR>
other worlds, I imagine it's always easier to rape<BR>
your own first.<BR>
   History shows many examples of lovely places with<BR>
few people (Ivory Coast, Ghana) and dreadful places<BR>
with heaps (Vladivostok, Riyadh) There can be many<BR>
many reasons: wars, religions, periods of small<BR>
empires exploiting smaller worlds (the Belgians, for<BR>
example, plundered the Congo, but didn't settle there<BR>
much). <BR>
   I know the "Earth in Space" idea may only be a<BR>
small step above the "Yanks in Space" style, but just<BR>
think of all the lovely and dreadful places on Earth,<BR>
and their relative populations, tech levels... some,<BR>
at first glance, make no sense at all... but there's<BR>
usually historical reasons for them.<BR>
   Unless of course you think that the very passage of<BR>
time will make all the galaxy be the same? I certainly<BR>
hope not, otherwise, why are we Travellers? ;)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Past a certain point <BR>
the<BR>
> "Imperial Reservation" bit wears thin. Never mind<BR>
anything else, <BR>
reserving<BR>
> every garden world and its brother for a bunch of<BR>
nobles will result <BR>
in a<BR>
> rebellion well before 1000 years have passed.<BR>
Likewise the "preparing <BR>
for<BR>
> colonization" and certain other explanations.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
=====<BR>
KA Schuant<BR>
member: Chef's Guild International, Sporting Shooter's Assoc, Amnesty Int, Carlton Soccer Club<BR>
Melbourne<BR>
Australia<BR>
"Duct tape is like the Force: it has a light side, a dark side, and it binds the universe together"<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail  Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:40:30 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
> >Personally, I find the 'skirt' rather funny looking.<BR>
><BR>
> Sadly, there's no real good way to armor that area (which most people feel<BR>
> is somewhat vital) and maintain mobility *and* deal with all the...<BR>
> plumbing required.  Using the usual BD plate would require a codpiece that<BR>
> would make Dirk Diggler green with envy.  And that would be for the female<BR>
> Marines.<BR>
<BR>
> Keeping enough mobility for the hips to allow BD-equipped troopers to move<BR>
> in a tactical sense just precludes heavy armor around the hips and groin.<BR>
<BR>
I'm afraid I have to say that this is just plain silly.<BR>
<BR>
We're talking _battledress_ here, in other words high-tech _powered_ armour,<BR>
not combat armour.<BR>
<BR>
I'd agree with skirts for combat armour, but not battledress, as it makes no<BR>
sense.<BR>
<BR>
There is absolutely no requirement for 'cod-pieces' (battledress is _not_<BR>
skin-tight, and does not have to follow body contours, though I'm sure the<BR>
people who put nipples on Batman's chest plate would disagree ) and there is<BR>
also no need for hip mobility, as it's the suit that moves, not the person<BR>
inside it.<BR>
<BR>
Think small (as in under fifteen feet tall) mech, or the original 'Iron<BR>
Man'- only with  better fashion sense hopefully.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:32:07 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
At 17:53 -0400 25/7/00,  "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu> wrote:<BR>
> > "Using current technology the maximum size ship which can safely<BR>
> > transition into jumpspace is 5000 dT. It is hoped that more advanced<BR>
> > technologies will eventually allow this limit to be broken."<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Dom<BR>
> ><BR>
>Wasn't the Azhanti High Lightning larger then that?<BR>
<BR>
Yes.<BR>
<BR>
But that kind of misses the point of the thread which was 'how could <BR>
you justify Bk 2 sized ships as the only vessels in the Traveller <BR>
Universe'. At 65kdT the AHL is a Book 5 ship.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:56:18 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry wrote :<BR>
<BR>
> BD will be either in cammo mode, where it reacts to the local environment,<BR>
> or in a neutral color.. olive-drab, khaki, gray.<BR>
><BR>
> For certain purposes, other color schemes might be used.  For example,<BR>
> troops helping in a winter rescue operation might set their suits to<BR>
> high-visability orange.<BR>
<BR>
And troops going to a disco or rave party would hook up the suit to a<BR>
visualizer like those you get with WinAmp.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 02:39:18 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2809<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 16:47:02<BR>
>From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
><BR>
>At 06:24 PM 7/25/2000 EDT, you wrote:<BR>
>>> Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars  Stormtrooper<BR>
>>>  white, or give it a Reflec finish (and look  like  a  Cylon  from<BR>
>>>  BSG)?<BR>
>><BR>
>>2 choices:<BR>
>><BR>
>>1) Camoflaged<BR>
>><BR>
>>2) Maroon<BR>
>><BR>
>>There are no other options.    :  )<BR>
><BR>
>Gee, does this mean the chapter on "color coordination and accessorizing"<BR>
>has been cut?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Mr Man: You see, what I really wanted was a regiment where I could be<BR>
  really quiet and have more time to myself to work with fabrics, and<BR>
  creating new concepts in interior design.<BR>
RSM: Working with fabrics and interior design!<BR>
Mr Man: Yes.<BR>
RSM: Oh well you want the Durham Light Infantry then, sir.<BR>
<BR>
(From The Complete Monty Pythons Flying Circus: All the Words Volume 2)<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 23:27:23 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
John Groth <wombat@premier.net> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> > Are the Jesuits still running schools in the 3I?<BR>
<BR>
> IMTU, not only are the Jesuits running schools, they are running _at<BR>
> least_ one of the most sophisticated non-governmental intelligence<BR>
> services in known space.  Art imitating life....<BR>
<BR>
All Jesuits are required to learn fencing since the Jesuit<BR>
order is supposed to be the sword arm of the church. It kind<BR>
of makes you wonder why all Imperial Marines learn Cutlass.<BR>
Obviously all Imperial Marine D.I's are Jesuit Priests of the<BR>
Imperial Catholic Church. Possibly The Society of Jesus is locked <BR>
in mortal combat with The Knights Templar and the Imperium as <BR>
the prize. Perhaps the reason that the Shroud of Turin tests <BR>
as less than two thousand years old is that the years its wearer <BR>
spent in a Vilani low birth stopped the Shroud's aging process?<BR>
<BR>
Another important Traveller question is which male Imperial <BR>
leaders mothers outlived their fathers, that is to say who is <BR>
the Widow's son? <BR>
<BR>
It's not Strephon, nor his father Paulo III, nor his son<BR>
Avery. Margaret is doubly disqualified.<BR>
<BR>
I suppose it could be Varian or Lucan if their mother Princess <BR>
Lydia slightly outlived her husband, Duke Dresden but since <BR>
they both died as a result of the same 'accident' in 1108 this<BR>
seems unlikely. IIRC Norris's mother died when he was young so <BR>
it's not him. We don't have sufficient data on Archduke Brzk or <BR>
on Duke Craig.<BR>
<BR>
If Dulinor's mother outlived his father that would make Dulinor <BR>
the Widows son. Thus the Rebellion could be seen as a Masonic <BR>
attack on the Jesuits. <BR>
<BR>
"Illumination, not just a good idea, it's the law."<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 03:50:24 EDT<BR>
From: RBasler1@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems"<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 7/25/00 11:14:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
 Subject: Re: Population "Problems"<BR>
 <BR>
 <snip> <BR>
 > Would our distant descendants get the same feeling about large planets with<BR>
 > 9.8 m/s^2 gravity and a sky just that certain shade of blue?<BR>
 <BR>
 The sky of earth is not one certain shade of blue. The proper<BR>
 color blue is found only at around 61 degrees North (or presumably<BR>
 61 south although that area has a dearth or real estate). As you<BR>
 head south the sunlight starts coming down at an insufficiently<BR>
 oblique angle and consequently the sky is too dark a blue, as<BR>
 you travel north it becomes too light a blue. Moreover sunrise<BR>
 and sunset are too rapid  south of 60 north and twilight lasts<BR>
 an insufficiently long amount of time. Normally twilight should<BR>
 last at least an hour, all else is an aberration.<BR>
  >><BR>
<BR>
    Oh good lords but the northern twilight is incredible - mid to late <BR>
December with a fresh snowfall there is this (I kid you not) cobolt blue glow <BR>
that shines off of everything for about a half an hour just before the orange <BR>
starts.  That light is the deepest and clearest blue you can imagine and when <BR>
it reflects off the new fallen snow it seems to come from everywhere at once. <BR>
 Unbelievable.<BR>
    And as for air conditioning, California would be unlivable without it - <BR>
my Cherokee ancestors were lunatics for ever coming farther south than the <BR>
Canadian border.<BR>
<BR>
    Rod Basler, COFIT (must have been a Sami [Lapplander] in a former life <BR>
... mmmm, reindeer is sure tasty)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 05:15:57 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:38:35 -0500<BR>
>From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
>Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
><BR>
>So, far the best solutions I've seen are:<BR>
><BR>
>1.  More realistic radiators limiting volume<BR>
><BR>
>    This has a lot going for it because it works on boats and ships.<BR>
>    Unfortunately, it also might work against Up Ports.  <BR>
<BR>
Fixed facilities like highports can have great gaudy radiator fins that<BR>
aren't feasible for mobile ships (especially streamlined ones). It doesn't<BR>
totally solve the problem, but it goes a long way in that direction.<BR>
<BR>
I like Ian's complementary suggestion on limiting starship power output. If<BR>
you begrudge every erg-fraction in your design, it not only limits heat<BR>
buildup and optimizes cost, but also give the engineer character something<BR>
to do during combat (juggle power allocation) and supports the notion of<BR>
jump-dimming.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 00:34:33 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> So, far the best solutions I've seen are:<BR>
><BR>
> 1.  More realistic radiators limiting volume<BR>
><BR>
>     This has a lot going for it because it works on boats and ships.<BR>
>     Unfortunately, it also might work against Up Ports.  Oh, the up<BR>
>     side, it doesn't require major revisions to fixed OTU world<BR>
>     stats.  Hum, might also explain why all those ships *land*<BR>
>     instead of docking at the Up Port.<BR>
<BR>
Keep in mind that for the *port*, all it does is require it to be<BR>
spread out. This makes it more vulnerable to damage from attack, but is<BR>
otherwise ok. After all, the port doesn't have to manuever.<BR>
<BR>
A good shape is a flat disk (think a *really* overgrown coin). Lots of<BR>
area for a given volume, and you can add more stuff around the rim and<BR>
maintain the same surface to volume ratio. <BR>
<BR>
That quickly ceases to work for a ship because the structure can't<BR>
handle the stresses caused by trying to move it around.<BR>
<BR>
For rotating habitats, you make them long thin cylinders (thin being<BR>
purely relative). You can just keep adding onto the ends. In fact, you<BR>
can keep doing so and introduce a tiny "bend" which doesn't interfere<BR>
with the rotation, and eventually you wind up with a "donut" maybe a km<BR>
"thick" and going all the way around the planet (or even the *star*)<BR>
and rotating in the manner of a smoke ring (ie a point on the outside<BR>
of the ring slowly moves up to the top, then down to the inside, then<BR>
to the bottom, and back to the outside again)<BR>
<BR>
Unlike a ringworld, such a toroid can be built *without* "magic"<BR>
materials. But like a ringworld, it'll use up literally astronomical<BR>
amounts of materials.<BR>
<BR>
See Niven's essay "Bigger than Worlds" for some of the things you can<BR>
do with this "rotating tube" idea.<BR>
<BR>
> What no one has suggested is having cost of ships increase in a<BR>
> non-linear fashion.  What about slow or flat cost increases up to<BR>
> some TL limit, then rapid cost increases above that? <BR>
<BR>
Actually, they *will* increase non-linearly. Double the size of the<BR>
hull, and the volume goes up by a factor of 8, while the areas (not<BR>
merely surface area, but cross-sectional areas of parts) goes up by a<BR>
factor of 4. <BR>
<BR>
Since the *stresses* go up by the cube, that means that everything has<BR>
to be made proportionally thicker to handle the extra mass. Which<BR>
increases the mass, which means they need to be even thicker, which<BR>
increases the mass again...<BR>
<BR>
An elephant and an antelope have the exact same leg-bone *design*. But<BR>
due to scaling factors, they are not proportioned the same.<BR>
<BR>
As you make a design larger, the series if increments of area & mass<BR>
converge more and more slowly, until you hit a size at which they<BR>
*don't* converge. At that point, you can't build a bigger unit because<BR>
it's impossible to support itself against normal stresses, regardless<BR>
of how thick you make the parts.<BR>
<BR>
Figuring out *where* that point is for various ship designs would<BR>
require a *real* engineering analysis, and figures for the various<BR>
structural materials available.<BR>
<BR>
> Perhaps a flat rate up 3*(2^TL) dtons and then ?exponential?<BR>
> increases above that?<BR>
<BR>
Make the limits go with the available structural materials, *and* with<BR>
the sort of forces that must be handled. That is, high accel ships have<BR>
to be smaller, and ships that make "violent manuevers" (ie anything<BR>
that involves turning the ship rapidly, or subjecting it to other<BR>
"twisting" forces such as atmospheric turbulence) will have to be<BR>
smaller yet. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 00:58:56 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Multichron<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
>>Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
>><BR>
> <snip><BR>
>>Based on the name, I would expect a multichronometer to be a timepiece<BR>
>>that can track and display more than one world's time simultaneously.<BR>
>>Thus, with one watch, one can keep track of times and dates on the<BR>
>>following example worlds:<BR>
>><BR>
>>New Washington, with a forty-hour day;<BR>
>>Thurstone, with "hours" that are 1.08 standard hours long;<BR>
>>Terra, with a day of twenty-four standard hours.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Presumably, the more expensive multichrons can track more worlds<BR>
>>simultaneously.<BR>
><BR>
>     If I may ask, of what possible use could that information be?  Remember,<BR>
> information only travels at the rate of 1-6 parsecs a week - what good does<BR>
> it do you to know that the stockmarket on Regina opened 5 minutes ago, if<BR>
> you won't be getting the quotes until next week, and you buy order will not<BR>
> go through until the week after that?  On earth, we find a timepiece that<BR>
> reads multiple times useful only because we can take an active role in<BR>
> events in those timezones.<BR>
<BR>
It'll be useful if the worlds are in the same system.<BR>
<BR>
Also, it'll be useful for folks who need (or want) to keep track of<BR>
stuff by another planet's time system. Things like religious<BR>
observances. Or even just birthdays.<BR>
<BR>
Heck, just *imagine* what a personal appointment minder will be like<BR>
when it needs to track stuff on multiple worlds. <BR>
<BR>
"You need to book passage in the next 5 sols so you can make<BR>
 connections to get to your son's birthday on time..."<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 01:05:42 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Charles Collin writes:<BR>
>> A number of people have been expressing the opinion that population should<BR>
>> be modified based on the "Terran-ness" of a world.  Let me just express<BR>
>> the dissenting opinion.  I think that if there were any relationship like<BR>
>> this at all, it would be a very weak one.  The reasons:<BR>
><BR>
> <snip><BR>
><BR>
> There are several reasons for seeking out habitable worlds:<BR>
><BR>
> 1)  Sealed structures are expensive to create and maintain.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, and alien protiens may affect most people they way ragweed<BR>
affects allergy sufferers. Even on a ?-877??? world there's no<BR>
guarantee that you *won't* have to seal everything. <BR>
<BR>
> 2)  Life requires ample supplies of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon <BR>
> (in the long run, no life support system is leakproof).  Of these, only <BR>
> oxygen is readily available on a rockball.<BR>
<BR>
What about iceballs? And with traveller tech, comets are *easy* to mine<BR>
for volatiles.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:32:39 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: Ali-G in BD (was: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805)<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> > > > Second:  Are you going to make this  in  Star  Wars<BR>
> > > > Stormtrooper white, or give it a Reflec finish (and<BR>
> > > > look  like  a  Cylon  from  BSG)?<BR>
> > > <BR>
> > > 2 choices:<BR>
> > > <BR>
> > > 1) Camoflaged<BR>
> > > <BR>
> > > 2) Maroon<BR>
> > > <BR>
> > > There are no other options.    :  )<BR>
> > <BR>
> <BR>
> Camouflage?  For what world?<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, I just  got  this  image  of  a  Marine  in  BD  in  urban<BR>
camouflage: psychedelic colours so he blends  in  with  the  punk<BR>
rockers and other street  life  ...  complete  with  swagger  and<BR>
saying "Yo, homeboy!" on his external speaker system!<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:26:12 +0100<BR>
From: Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ali-G in BD (was: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805)<BR>
<BR>
Reading the title, I imagined the Stain's massive turning up in bright<BR>
yellow Tommy gear Battle dress. On being asked what their view on the<BR>
killing of people at a certain age was, the leader lowers a FMPG-15 at<BR>
the questioner and comes out with :-<BR>
<BR>
"An wot has i' go' to doo wiv d youth in aasure ?"<BR>
<BR>
This was a sobering thought .... I .... :-)<BR>
<BR>
Ewan<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
   Ewan Quibell                       Their's not to make reply,<BR>
   Senior Communications Engineer     Their's not to reason why,<BR>
   Computer Centre                    Their's but to do and die:<BR>
   University of Brighton             Into the valley of Death<BR>
                                      Rode the six hundred.<BR>
   E.D.Quibell@brighton.ac.uk              Alfred, Lord Tennyson<BR>
<BR>
   #include<stddisclaimer.h><BR>
<BR>
   My spelling is entirerly due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic license<BR>
<BR>
   University of Brighton - Sunday Times' University of the Year<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:27:05 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
On 25 Jul 2000, at 21:09, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> on 7/26/00 8:48 AM, Rupert Boleyn at rboleyn@paradise.net.nz wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > <BR>
> > <BR>
> > On 24 Jul 2000, at 20:12, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> >> on 7/24/00 4:46 PM, J. Paul Sanders at timmon@primenet.com wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> >>> 5mm Assault Rifle       TL7    3.0 kg     3.0 ltr        1200<BR>
> >> $7000 for a Colt M16 pre 1986 transferable.  Semi-auto for ~$700.<BR>
> > <BR>
> > In the mid-late 80s the NZ armed forces were looking for a new standard issue<BR>
> > rifle to replace the old SLRs and M16A1s we had (in the end we went with Steyr<BR>
> > AUGs). Colt's offer was for M16A2s, plus cleaning kits, bayonet (the nice Buck<BR>
> > things), 5 30-round magazines, slings and other accesories, etc, for about<BR>
> > $1250 (US, I think).<BR>
> > <BR>
> <BR>
> Bad deal for the Kiwis.  I think the US paid about $450 for the last<BR>
> contract.  A bidding war between FN and Colt helps.<BR>
<BR>
I can't remember whether it was NZ or US dollars, if it was NZ$, then the US <BR>
equivilent at that time would've been about $550-600. I do remember that the <BR>
AUGs cost quite a bit more, and the Aussie made ones weren't very good (don't <BR>
get me started on that).<BR>
<BR>
> BTW, my dad is visiting and wants to know what part of NZ you're in.<BR>
<BR>
Wellington at the moment (the capital). I originally come from the Palmerston <BR>
North, which is about 100 miles north of Wellington. which is at the southern <BR>
end of the North Island. Actually my flat is about as far south as you can go <BR>
and still be on the North Island. Just around the corner is a beach where you <BR>
can look out over the Southern Ocean (and feel the wind straight up from <BR>
Antartica).<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:30:10 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
On 25 Jul 2000, at 21:24, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> My players shop around carefully.  Of course, I don't hand out bags of money on<BR>
> every adventure.  The characters buy the best they can for the least they can. <BR>
> What else is streetwise and trader for?<BR>
<BR>
I dunno about Trader, but Streetwise is for getting guns (at any price) on high <BR>
Law Level worlds. Leastwire that's what we always used it for.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:31:20 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Well, this is an interesting thread. This is how I see the future battlefield.<BR>
> All elements on would be fitted with a range of active and passive sensors.<BR>
> However, these would be supplimented by a central data net that would<BR>
> take all these inputs plus the inputs of sensor drones, saterlites etc to<BR>
> provide a real time picture of the battlefield far better than any single unit<BR>
> could "see". In this environment, you live or die on the quality of your ECM<BR>
> and ECCM. Its an environment full of decoys, jamming and fog; rather<BR>
> frightening really.<BR>
<BR>
One problem with the central data net is it is subject to jamming...if you are<BR>
using radio you are subject to jamming...laser is subject to LOS and<BR>
tracking...you cant give every grunt a lascomm transceiver...meson is heavy and<BR>
High tech...<BR>
<BR>
Other Rob<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:32:27 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: BD Colors<BR>
<BR>
GDWGAMES@aol.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > Gee, does this mean the chapter on "color coordination and accessorizing"<BR>
> >  has been cut?<BR>
><BR>
> 'Fraid so -- the chapter "nicknames given to field rations" is also gone . . .<BR>
><BR>
> LKW<BR>
<BR>
...sounds like a good title for a sidebar though...<BR>
<BR>
Other Rob<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2811<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (rly-yb03.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.3]) by air-yb04.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:55:11 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:54:09 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id IAA57798;<BR>
	Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:54:06 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:53:59 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id IAA57753<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:53:58 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:53:58 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007261253.IAA57753@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2811<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2812</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/26/00 9:00:55 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Wednesday, July 26 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2812<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Industrial Worlds<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Mr Sulu ... shields up!<BR>
Re: Starship Sizes<BR>
RE: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Population "Problems"<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Minis Questions<BR>
Way OT, but fun<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: strange UWPs, and Tech level advancement<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:09:12 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
> >Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:38:35 -0500<BR>
> >From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
> >Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
> ><BR>
> >So, far the best solutions I've seen are:<BR>
> ><BR>
> >1.  More realistic radiators limiting volume<BR>
> ><BR>
> >    This has a lot going for it because it works on boats and ships.<BR>
> >    Unfortunately, it also might work against Up Ports.  <BR>
> <BR>
> Fixed facilities like highports can have great gaudy radiator fins that<BR>
> aren't feasible for mobile ships (especially streamlined ones). It doesn't<BR>
> totally solve the problem, but it goes a long way in that direction.<BR>
<BR>
Space stations, furthermore, don't have to go anywhere, and thus don't<BR>
need to have great big reactors to supply power for maneuver drives.<BR>
This factor alone should give them a better "heat production / surface<BR>
area" ratio than most spaceships.<BR>
                                                              - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:18:55 +0000 (GMT)<BR>
From: Michel R Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Robert Houghton wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Well, this is an interesting thread. This is how I see the future battlefield.<BR>
> > All elements on would be fitted with a range of active and passive sensors.<BR>
> > However, these would be supplimented by a central data net that would<BR>
> > take all these inputs plus the inputs of sensor drones, saterlites etc to<BR>
> > provide a real time picture of the battlefield far better than any single unit<BR>
> > could "see". In this environment, you live or die on the quality of your ECM<BR>
> > and ECCM. Its an environment full of decoys, jamming and fog; rather<BR>
> > frightening really.<BR>
> <BR>
> One problem with the central data net is it is subject to jamming...if you are<BR>
> using radio you are subject to jamming...laser is subject to LOS and<BR>
> tracking...you cant give every grunt a lascomm transceiver...meson is heavy and<BR>
> High tech...<BR>
> <BR>
> Other Rob<BR>
<BR>
	Worse... At lower TL's, ARH (anti=radiation homing) technology<BR>
gets cheaper and cheaper, smaller and smaller...  start fitting it onto<BR>
artillery shells and MRL rounds and doing area-bombardments...  that kind<BR>
of environment will quickly convince any sane grunt or tanker to turn his<BR>
transmitters off.  Even in a point defense enviroment, just having to<BR>
content with a constant stream of "on target" MRL AP salvoes is going to<BR>
be hard on the crew...  the knowledge that it is just a matter of time<BR>
before *one* gets through will murder morale.<BR>
<BR>
	Hell, get *really* mean and develop a shell that is a<BR>
two-parter...  CPR gun lobs it up in the air and a parachute deploys to<BR>
hang it up there... turn a transmitter on, it pops fins and turns a rocket<BR>
motor on and gives you one hell of a head-ache...<BR>
<BR>
	There is a reason that us Navy-types *really*, *really* like EMCON<BR>
Policy:  Silent/ Silent.<BR>
<BR>
	--Michel<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:20:23 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Industrial Worlds<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 25 Jul 2000 Ludowick@aol.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> J. Raynor writes:<BR>
> <BR>
>  >And, frankly, the canonical definition of "Industrial" planets is<BR>
>  >*broken*, or at least a bit questionable.  If there's plenty of energy,<BR>
>  >and space is easily accessible, why keep dirty, pollution-producing,<BR>
>  >factories on the surfaces of planets where they can taint your<BR>
>  >atmosphere?  I suspect that "industry on the ground" is something that<BR>
>  >most technological civilizations outgrow *very* quickly, probably by<BR>
>  >Tech Level 9 or so (when contragravity becomes available).<BR>
> <BR>
> You could assume that the atmospheres/environments of most Industrial <BR>
> worlds were tainted before they were colonized.  Because the local <BR>
> environment is hostile to standard agriculture/aquaculture/herding or<BR>
> whatever, the colonists developed heavy industry as their means of <BR>
> economic support (exploiting native bio-resources was impossible, not<BR>
> feasible, or just not done).  This makes Industrial worlds the high-pop<BR>
> versions of "Poor" worlds (sort of).<BR>
> <BR>
> It is also possible that the world went through a low-tech stage, during<BR>
> which the environment was polluted, before the current era.  These <BR>
> could be worlds with an indigenous civilization, or ones that suffered a<BR>
> collapse/dark age.<BR>
<BR>
These are both valid possibilities, but the central sectors of the<BR>
Imperium have been inhabited for *thousands* of years, and although<BR>
the general level of technology dropped during the Long Night, I doubt<BR>
that very many once-starfaring worlds lost contra-gravity, and thus had to<BR>
abandon their orbital factories.  After several *thousand* years with<BR>
clean fusion and/or solar power and convenient access to orbit via<BR>
contra-gravity, you would think that most industry-induced environmental<BR>
problems would be solved *long* ago (heck, even the nastiest *radioactive*<BR>
waste is no problem for anyone with nuclear dampers!).<BR>
<BR>
Here's a proposal:<BR>
continue to require a Tainted atmosphere for Tech Level 8 or less <BR>
(expensive and/or experimental fusion, no contra-gravity), abolish the<BR>
atmosphere requirement for Tech Level 9 or more.<BR>
                                                           - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:21:11 +0100<BR>
From: "Robert Parry" <Robert.Parry@crowncastle.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
- --------------B310698292079282F2F22193<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
<BR>
>If the system uses all fiber optic....  Hmmm, theres got to be a<BR>
weakness<BR>
>there. Any ideas?<BR>
<BR>
I seem to remember from my dim and distant past at university that<BR>
optical fibre becomes opaque when subjected to high EM fields, such as<BR>
from a nuke.  This opacity does disappear over time (how long I can't<BR>
remember).  So perhaps those EMP grenades could knock out (temporarily)<BR>
the optical fibre as well, or at least sections of it.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Rob Parry<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
************************<BR>
NOTICE TO USERS<BR>
The contents of this e-mail are confidential to the ordinary user of the e-mail address to which it was addressed and may also be privileged. <BR>
If you are not the addressee of this e-mail you may not copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any form whatsoever, or take any action in reliance on its contents. <BR>
If you have received this e-mail in error please e-mail the author by replying to this message and delete the material from your computer. <BR>
While reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure no viruses are present in this e-mail, you are responsible for carrying out your own virus checks and Crown Castle International does not accept responsibility for any loss or damage thereby arising. <BR>
The views of the author may not necessarily reflect those of Crown Castle International. At present the integrity of e-mail across the Internet cannot be guaranteed and messages sent via this medium are potentially at risk. <BR>
All liability is excluded to the extent permitted by law for any claims arising as a result of the use of this medium to transmit information by or to Crown Castle International.<BR>
<BR>
Visit Crown Castle International web site on: http://www.crowncastle.com<BR>
<BR>
- --------------B310698292079282F2F22193<BR>
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii;<BR>
 name="robert.parry.vcf"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
Content-Description: Card for Robert Evans-Parry<BR>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<BR>
 filename="robert.parry.vcf"<BR>
<BR>
begin:vcard <BR>
n:Evans-Parry;Robert<BR>
tel;pager:07626 844768<BR>
tel;cell:07710 198223<BR>
tel;fax:01204 696168<BR>
tel;work:01204 696324<BR>
x-mozilla-html:FALSE<BR>
org:Crown Castle International;Field Operations<BR>
version:2.1<BR>
email;internet:robert.parry@crowncastle.co.uk<BR>
title:Transmitter Engineer<BR>
adr;quoted-printable:;;Winterhill Transmitter Station=0D=0AHorwich=0D=0ABolton=0D=0ABL6 6SL;;;;<BR>
fn:Robert J Evans-Parry<BR>
end:vcard<BR>
<BR>
- --------------B310698292079282F2F22193--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 06:54:21 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
> I dunno about Trader, but Streetwise is for getting guns (at any price) on<BR>
> high <BR>
> Law Level worlds. Leastwire that's what we always used it for.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Don't forget bribery.  Or outright theft.  Cops can be a good source of gun<BR>
is you're careful about it.<BR>
<BR>
And streetwise does tell you something about the going rate.<BR>
<BR>
"The 9mm will cost you Cr1000"<BR>
"Lenny the 'weasel' offered me two at 500 a piece. I don't pay the yokel<BR>
price. I'll pass"<BR>
"Did I say 1000?  I meant 1000 for the three guns plus ammo"<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:06:36 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Mr Sulu ... shields up!<BR>
<BR>
Or at least a sort of cloaking device...<BR>
<BR>
http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/technology/cold_plasma_000724.html<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:06:19 -0600<BR>
From: "Eric T. Holmes" <eholmes@lanl.gov><BR>
Subject: Re: Starship Sizes<BR>
<BR>
Fellow TMLers:<BR>
<BR>
When I had PCs that wanted to design their own ship, I handled<BR>
it quite simply....They got Book 2, not Book 5.....<BR>
<BR>
Book 5 was the Imperial Naval Standard Starship Design Manual <BR>
<BR>
Book 2 was the Imperial Civil Board of Space Navigation: Uniform Code of<BR>
Starship Design<BR>
<BR>
They had to be pretty special PCs to get their starship built to Naval<BR>
standards.<BR>
This helps explain why a Broadsword is a "cruiser" and the Kinunir is a<BR>
"colonial cruiser."<BR>
They are "civilian" designs.<BR>
<BR>
Eric<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 07:35:36 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
Lol - My obtuse point is that IMTU the list prices are for the tourists -<BR>
haggling is allowed at some stores... On the main plaza at the starport,<BR>
usally only tourists shop unless the ship is lifting really soon and a real<BR>
space hand forgot somthing (damn, I need another 15,000 rounds of 9mm<BR>
pistol!). Sorta like the mall vs the general store - You can get cammies,<BR>
guns, knives etc at the Mall - but - the price is the tourist price.<BR>
<BR>
the General store is _still_ cool.. tho no gunfights for a while..<BR>
<BR>
I agree that the stuff in Traveller is overpriced for US 2000 $ (and prolly<BR>
for US 1970 $)... I usally cut it about in half for used, scuffed, or not on<BR>
the plaza prices..<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Tod Glenn<BR>
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2000 9:24 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
on 7/25/00 6:27 PM, Tsykoduk at Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> This is not the General Store - this is where the 'Real Spacers' shop<BR>
(read<BR>
> the main plaza at the star port - most shops are called things like<BR>
> Adventurer Outfitters or Rockhounds R Us) lol..<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
Well the General Store used to be pretty cool.  I remember when they had a<BR>
gunfight in the store.<BR>
<BR>
And in general, the seasoned traveller knows how to shop and not get<BR>
screwed.  $200 for a machete!?  It had better say something like 'Al Mar'.<BR>
I Buy a lot of my personal gear from Brigade Quartermaster and US Cavalry.<BR>
I find their catalogs to be an excellent resource for players.<BR>
<BR>
I stand by my assertion that guns are way overpriced on the list (unless<BR>
artificially made so).<BR>
<BR>
My players shop around carefully.  Of course, I don't hand out bags of money<BR>
on every adventure.  The characters buy the best they can for the least they<BR>
can.  What else is streetwise and trader for?<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- --<BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:37:38 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
> As a clarification, by "hell holes" I mean worlds with Corrosive or<BR>
> Insidious atmospheres and some with Exotic atmospheres. Given a choice<BR>
> between a Fluorine world and a Rockball, I can't see anyone actually<BR>
> choosing to live on the Fluorine world. Mine it yes, build there no.<BR>
> Of course that might mean adding a world definer to replace most of those A+<BR>
> atmosphere types, the Artificial Satellite or equivalent.<BR>
<BR>
What if whoever lives there isn't human?  There could be Imperial species<BR>
from Exotic atmosphere worlds more tolerant to conditions on particular<BR>
kinds of Insidious worlds -- it could be argued the Jgdi are in this <BR>
category, for example.  <BR>
<BR>
  -- Steve Bonneville<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 06:52:40 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems"<BR>
<BR>
RBasler1@aol.com wrote<BR>
<BR>
> << From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
<BR>
>  The sky of earth is not one certain shade of blue. The proper<BR>
>  color blue is found only at around 61 degrees North  As you<BR>
>  head south the sunlight starts coming down at an insufficiently<BR>
>  oblique angle and consequently the sky is too dark a blue, as<BR>
>  you travel north it becomes too light a blue. Moreover sunrise<BR>
>  and sunset are too rapid south of 60 north and twilight lasts<BR>
>  an insufficiently long amount of time. <BR>
<BR>
> Oh good lords but the northern twilight is incredible - mid to late<BR>
> December with a fresh snowfall there is this (I kid you not) cobolt blue glow<BR>
> that shines off of everything for about a half an hour just before the orange<BR>
> starts.  <BR>
<BR>
Since sunrise is at around 10:15 am there at that time of year<BR>
you can actually watch the sunrise even if you are not a morning <BR>
person. I prefer the summer light at midnight, the sun has just<BR>
set but as you look north the alpenglow illuminates the sky giving<BR>
a beautiful yellowish pink tint to the otherwise slate grey sky.<BR>
<BR>
> That light is the deepest and clearest blue you can imagine and when<BR>
> it reflects off the new fallen snow it seems to come from everywhere at once.<BR>
>  Unbelievable.<BR>
<BR>
Er, it is coming from everywhere at once, the snow is reflective<BR>
enough to ensure that.<BR>
<BR>
> And as for air conditioning, California would be unlivable without it -<BR>
> my Cherokee ancestors were lunatics for ever coming farther south than the<BR>
> Canadian border.<BR>
<BR>
Some parts of it are apparently unlivable, or at least unbreathable<BR>
even with it. What I was decrying was the tendency to keep air<BR>
conditioning at 65 to 70 F instead of at 75 to 80 F the lowest<BR>
temperature that might be remotely comfortable in the (almost<BR>
nothing) you have to wear outside when its ninety something.<BR>
Admittedly I may be prejudiced by the fact that I did not own a<BR>
car when I lived in Austin and thus had to do a lot of walking<BR>
in what was, to me at least, a very hot climate.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:01:04 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
<BR>
> Lol - My obtuse point is that IMTU the list prices are for the tourists -<BR>
> haggling is allowed at some stores... On the main plaza at the starport,<BR>
> usally only tourists shop unless the ship is lifting really soon and a<BR>
real<BR>
> space hand forgot somthing (damn, I need another 15,000 rounds of 9mm<BR>
> pistol!). Sorta like the mall vs the general store - You can get cammies,<BR>
> guns, knives etc at the Mall - but - the price is the tourist price.<BR>
><BR>
> the General store is _still_ cool.. tho no gunfights for a while..<BR>
><BR>
> I agree that the stuff in Traveller is overpriced for US 2000 $ (and<BR>
prolly<BR>
> for US 1970 $)... I usally cut it about in half for used, scuffed, or not<BR>
on<BR>
> the plaza prices..<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
This makes sense, think of the list price as the Manufactures Suggested<BR>
Retail. MSR is always higher than what the retailer *needs* to get to make a<BR>
profit. Characters in the know should be able to get a better deal.<BR>
<BR>
Pronto<BR>
AKA Brian Taylor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 06:58:30 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
<BR>
> > So, far the best solutions I've seen are:<BR>
> > More realistic radiators limiting volume<BR>
> >    This has a lot going for it because it works on boats and ships.<BR>
> >    Unfortunately, it also might work against Up Ports.<BR>
> <BR>
> Fixed facilities like highports can have great gaudy radiator fins that<BR>
> aren't feasible for mobile ships (especially streamlined ones). It doesn't<BR>
> totally solve the problem, but it goes a long way in that direction.<BR>
<BR>
Aren't big gaudy radiator fins as feasible for 1 million<BR>
ton dispersed structure 0.1 G maneuver drive jump ships as they<BR>
are for 1 million ton dispersed structure 0.1 G maneuver drive<BR>
high ports?<BR>
<BR>
Maybe we could include a thruster plate maximum size by<BR>
tech level as well. That way high ports, which have little<BR>
need to maneuver could be over the size limit if they simply<BR>
used HEPLAR for their rare maneuvers but thruster equipped<BR>
ships could not.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:26:19 -0500<BR>
From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com><BR>
Subject: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
More miniatures questions -- mostly brainstorming at this point, we still<BR>
haven't decided yes or no for Traveller stuff, but SJ Games will definitely<BR>
be doing Ogre, so the possibility exists of a Traveller line, and of a more<BR>
general SF line:<BR>
<BR>
Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
<BR>
- -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All<BR>
of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
- -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, etc.<BR>
Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
- -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
- -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd<BR>
have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
- -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules, or<BR>
Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
the like are certainly doable).<BR>
<BR>
- -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
"Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
- -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
Opinions are solicited.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Loren Wiseman<BR>
     Traveller Line Manager/Traveller Guru-in-Residence<BR>
     Editor, Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society  http://jtas.sjgames.com/<BR>
     SJ Games<BR>
     lkw@io.com http://www.io.com/~lkw/<BR>
     (512) 447-7866 VOX<BR>
     (512) 447-1144 FAX<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:02:54<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Way OT, but fun<BR>
<BR>
A friend of ours posted to another list that she was going to China, and<BR>
asked folks to send her their addresses if the wanted postcards.<BR>
<BR>
Kirsten's occasionally clueless OSO sent his address to the list.  Biiigg<BR>
mistake.  When it was pointed out to him what he had done he stated "go<BR>
ahead, bury me in postcards."<BR>
<BR>
So what I need folks who can spare a moment to do is find the strangest<BR>
postcard you can, write a wish you were here message on it, and mail it to:<BR>
<BR>
David Barr<BR>
1087 Foxchase Drive<BR>
San Jose CA  95123-1111<BR>
<BR>
Don't spread this any farther, we don't want to create a Craig Shergold<BR>
here, but just torture the Daffyd for a while.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry      )+(      gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
    http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
"Well, thanks to the Internet, I'm now bored with sex."<BR>
	                    - Fry, Futurama<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:25:40<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 06:40 PM 7/26/2000 +1200, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>There is absolutely no requirement for 'cod-pieces' (battledress is _not_<BR>
>skin-tight, and does not have to follow body contours, though I'm sure the<BR>
>people who put nipples on Batman's chest plate would disagree ) and there is<BR>
>also no need for hip mobility, as it's the suit that moves, not the person<BR>
>inside it.<BR>
<BR>
Except that Traveller battle-dress has always been human-sized.  Arms and<BR>
legs in the suit arms and legs.  That is why you need to address the<BR>
mobility issue.<BR>
<BR>
There is no canonical source for battledress being hideously oversized.<BR>
<BR>
>Think small (as in under fifteen feet tall) mech, or the original 'Iron<BR>
>Man'- only with  better fashion sense hopefully.<BR>
<BR>
OK, how do the Marines do ship boardings in BD that won't fit in an<BR>
airlock, or down a standard corridor?<BR>
- --<BR>
<BR>
Duugirashir Irebamenagiin  gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
  http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/sylea.html<BR>
Inquisitor Maximus, Reformed Canon Church of Sylea<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:32:13<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
At 01:18 PM 7/26/2000 +0000, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>	There is a reason that us Navy-types *really*, *really* like EMCON<BR>
>Policy:  Silent/ Silent.<BR>
<BR>
*WEG*  All of these things came up during the GF playtest, and it was<BR>
pointed out that emitting anything would likely bring death unto thoust<BR>
quickly.<BR>
<BR>
Even tankers while have to shoot and scoot, using pop-up manuvers and<BR>
hugging terrain.<BR>
<BR>
So what do you do?  You send in the PBI who don't cause massive EM spikes<BR>
everytime they fire, and don't have massive fusion reactors.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:33:28<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
At 11:05 PM 7/25/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>1.Camouflaged<BR>
<BR>
Woodland? Desert (Brit or American)? Urban?<BR>
<BR>
>2.Green<BR>
<BR>
That's OD to you.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:34:19<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
At 12:38 AM 7/26/2000 EDT, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> For Imperial Marines, certainly.  But what about Imperial Army BD?<BR>
><BR>
>Jesse's cover assignment calls for Marines . . . hmmm, I don't think we've <BR>
>ever specified what color dress BD is for Imperial Army. <BR>
<BR>
Off the top of my head, black with red highlights.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:43:03 -0500<BR>
From: Stormhound <stormhnd@fidnet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
    None of the above.  I don't buy minis, though I've been happy enough to<BR>
use them if others in the group had them.  Just not one of my priorities,<BR>
money-wise.<BR>
<BR>
    (I figured you might want to know what percentage you were looking at<BR>
here, and didn't know how many of the non-buyers would respond, so I figured<BR>
I'd stick my neck out. (g))<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Stormhound<BR>
DNRC Ombudsman for Induhvidual Affairs, Holder of Past Knowledge<BR>
Come visit my web page at http://www.fidnet.com/~stormhnd<BR>
Or my new Amateur Radio web page at http://www.qsl.net/kc0ekv<BR>
Or my JN6 course design page at http://www.fidnet.com/~stormhnd/golfpage.htm<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 08:47:49<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
At 10:26 AM 7/26/2000 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>-- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
>skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
>and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All<BR>
>of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
Absolutely.  I would buy these in bulk (as my wife cries out "I just got<BR>
the dining room table back, and you're painting again?")<BR>
<BR>
>-- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, etc.<BR>
>Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
>isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
Pieces that large are of limited utility to me.. too much work to paint,<BR>
and not overly useful in the game.<BR>
<BR>
>-- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
>consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
>beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
I would rather see these done as cardboard heroes-type items.  As above,<BR>
they cut into painting time for other figures, and are of limited use.<BR>
<BR>
>-- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
>on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd<BR>
>have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
>starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
>the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
Yes!  This is a must-have.  Getting good figures of the ships used by PCs<BR>
would make ship combat much better.<BR>
<BR>
I'm not as excited about the larger ships, simply because I don't use them<BR>
as much in the game.<BR>
<BR>
>-- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
>available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules, or<BR>
>Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
>the like are certainly doable).<BR>
<BR>
This would be cool.<BR>
<BR>
>-- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
>"Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
While interesting, this should be at the bottom of the priority chain.<BR>
<BR>
>-- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
>costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
>anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
*grin* Well, *I'm* certainly interested...<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
 "Non possum existimare plus quemquem facini"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:55:40 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: strange UWPs, and Tech level advancement<BR>
<BR>
Kyle Schuant wrote,<BR>
>GM Lesson #314:<BR>
"You can rationalise ANY crazy stuff if you try hard enough."<<BR>
<BR>
I know. My point is, it gets really tired after awhile. The whole point of<BR>
"unusual" is that is just that, unusual. 11,000 worlds in the Imperium and a<BR>
good 25% are downright peculiar in terms of TL/Pop/World Conditions. That's<BR>
not "offbeat", that's pathological.<BR>
<BR>
>Sounds like that world in Alien 3, ie an (almost)<BR>
abandoned prison. Or maybe Khan's world in Star Trek<BR>
II? Crash victims the Scouts didn't have room on their<BR>
ship to rescue? Heaps of possibilities.<<BR>
<BR>
Nope. Then it has a TL of 7 at least for artifacts just like Darrian. If one<BR>
world gets its artifact level listed, all do. Standardized data, not random<BR>
choices please.<BR>
Also, we have canon establishing it as system interdicted by the Navy. How<BR>
long could you be marooned there?<BR>
<BR>
>A corporate prison? Or again, a crash... or maybe a<BR>
private university with an archaeological team<BR>
studying Precursor ruins?<<BR>
<BR>
We are going to allow the Megacorps their own prisons too? A private<BR>
research team would either not have any manufacturing capability or would<BR>
have a much higher "import" TL.<BR>
And as a note, there are a number of Ancients sites listed for the Spinward<BR>
Marches on "odd" worlds. I would leave any such settlements in place by<BR>
default as there would always be someone researching it all.<BR>
<BR>
>Sure, why not? There's a company in the UK that's<BR>
making Spitfires (WWII UK fighter planes, for the<BR>
younger on the list).<<BR>
<BR>
Spitfires are still well above Boeings. But these are for private<BR>
collectors, what national air force is arming with Spitfires in preparation<BR>
for the EMP strike by the Race? (See Harry Turtledove's World War series.)<BR>
<BR>
>The hell hole WAS a prime world, teeming billions<BR>
went there, and made it a hell hole. <<BR>
<BR>
And then promptly died or fled when they world went into runaway hothouse<BR>
mode. Those colonization fleets work both ways.<BR>
<BR>
>Unless of course you think that the very passage of<BR>
time will make all the galaxy be the same? I certainly<BR>
hope not, otherwise, why are we Travellers? ;)<<BR>
<BR>
Not in the least. But see above as for when any world can be a Hi Pop world,<BR>
the magic begins to go away after visiting what should have been the only<BR>
one in the whole Imperium only to discover there are 5 per Sector.<BR>
<BR>
Steve Bonneville wrote,<BR>
>What if whoever lives there isn't human?  There could be Imperial species<BR>
from Exotic atmosphere worlds more tolerant to conditions on particular<BR>
kinds of Insidious worlds -- it could be argued the Jgdi are in this<BR>
category, for example. <<BR>
<BR>
But the Jgdi are only on gas giants which have a significantly different UPP<BR>
code.<BR>
This is  good concept, only many worlds are listed as being inhabited by<BR>
humans in one canon or other. In fact, GT has a number of these hell holes<BR>
described with population living elsewhere and simply doing remote mining.<BR>
To me, this means they aren't on the planet in question and so shouldn't be<BR>
described as such.<BR>
"Space Control to Beowulf, what are you doing down there?"<BR>
"Beowulf to Space Control, we landed looking to trade. Where is everybody?"<BR>
"Space Control to Beowulf, where are we? We are out here in the asteroid<BR>
belt, where do you think we are?"<BR>
"Beowulf to Space Control, well the TAS UPP says you all live on the world<BR>
with the Fluorine atmosphere. What are you doing out there?"<BR>
"Space Control to Beowulf, we mine that stupid planet with remotes. Do you<BR>
think we're crazy enough to try and live down there?"<BR>
"Beowulf to Space Control, but the book says..."<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2812<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za04.mx.aol.com (rly-za04.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.100]) by air-za04.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:00:54 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za04.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:58:21 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id LAA64572;<BR>
	Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:57:51 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:57:44 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id LAA64537<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:57:44 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:57:44 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007261557.LAA64537@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2812<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2813</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/26/00 10:25:51 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Wednesday, July 26 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2813<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Strange UWPs, and Tech Level Advancement<BR>
Re: strange UWPs, and Tech level advancement<BR>
Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:58:42 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson writes:<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>In addition, note that the majority of a planet's population is _not_ at the<BR>
>starport.  100,000 people on a planet is functionally uninhabited; I don't<BR>
>think there's any significant area on earth with a population density that<BR>
low<BR>
<BR>
	My own system defines the proportion of a world's citizens that may be<BR>
	found near the starport based on the starport type and Pop.  Naturally,<BR>
	A starports tend to have more sophonts nearby than D starports, and<BR>
	the numbers for X starports simply imply the largest settlement on the<BR>
	world.  Generally, I assume that lower Pop worlds will tend to have a<BR>
	greater proportion of their citizenry in one place.  Thus, if 73 sophonts<BR>
	live on a rockball with a starport C, you might find as many as 66 of<BR>
	them in the starport dome (I don't recall the figures from my table).<BR>
	The other 7 are probably concentrated within perhaps 1,000 km, but they<BR>
	may be more spread out in some cases.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:59:34 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
<BR>
<Anthony Jackson><BR>
As such, there should be penalties for each of the following:<BR>
Non-breatheable atmosphere (requires sealed structures)<BR>
Zero hydrographics (requires importing hydrogen)<BR>
Zero atmosphere (requires importing nitrogen).  If size < 3, also will<BR>
have lost most of its carbon since it can no longer hold on to CO2.<BR>
</AJ><BR>
<BR>
As Leonard said, sealed structures may well be necessary on terran worlds<BR>
as well, especially if you have agressive local microbes trying to invade<BR>
your soil all the time.  Note that terran bacteria might be better<BR>
competitors, especially if genetically engineered, but most likely the<BR>
local critters will be better adapted to the subtleties of gas-mix,<BR>
pressure, gravity, etc that are present on any given world.<BR>
<BR>
Zero hydrographics merely means a lack of open water.  A few trillion-ton<BR>
aquifers will keep you going for a long while.  If you start to run out,<BR>
there are any number of easy solutions given Traveller tech.  Also, one<BR>
might choose rock-balls that happen to have large deposits of carbonaceous<BR>
rocks (from meteor impacts and so on).  This would be a good explanation<BR>
for why the majority of rock-balls are not teeming with colonists: They<BR>
select the particularly useful ones.<BR>
<BR>
Nitrogen is more difficult.  It might have to be mined from elsewhere in<BR>
the system, but the cost would not be prohibitive.  Alternatively, if you<BR>
have a starport, you could take organic wastes "off the hands" of ships<BR>
coming in.  You could also park a nice big comet in orbit and use that. <BR>
<BR>
Note that I'm not disagreeing that these are concerns, but I do disagree<BR>
that the difficulties are significant enough to prompt modifiers to the<BR>
pop digit, especially considering the centuries of experience people have<BR>
with these problems by the 1100 Imperial.  A -1 DM is a order of magnitude<BR>
reduction in population, more than the above considerations would produce,<BR>
I think.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<Sam><BR>
Of course that might mean adding a world definer to replace most of those<BR>
A+ atmosphere types, the Artificial Satellite or equivalent.<BR>
</Sam<BR>
<BR>
The notion of adding a world definer to the UPP is interesting, but<BR>
defining things too much stultifies the imagination.  The point of<BR>
difficult UPPs IMO is to force the GM to come up with interesting worlds.<BR>
Without them you risk ending up with an endless series of futuristic<BR>
Terranoid suburb-planets and Outland-style mining colonies. (oops, I've<BR>
mentioned Outland, here comes Leonard's rant about explosive decompression<BR>
of humans :-)<BR>
<BR>
<Sam><BR>
of 0? Or 457-973/Rhylanor. 500 people and a TL4 with a government 1. How<BR>
could an Interstellar company get there with a TL of 4? And if established<BR>
by an Interstellar community, why would it only have a TL of 4? Would it<BR>
</Sam><BR>
<BR>
The govt 1 type doesn't specifically say "interstellar" corporation, does<BR>
it?  I could certainly see a large monopolizing "Company" taking over a TL<BR>
4 world.  Especially if it's the company/guild/whatever that produces the<BR>
filter masks or other vital supplies...<BR>
<BR>
<Sam><BR>
Extending this, Mithras/Glisten 0302 Spinward Marches 1932  has a TL of 6.<BR>
Even as local production, the 300,000 Imperial felons incarcerated there<BR>
will soon be dead from the Corrosive atmosphere, taking their guards with<BR>
</Sam><BR>
<BR>
Well, the TL as production level doesn't have to mean that they _do_<BR>
produce at that level, just that it's the best they _could_ do.  So the<BR>
prison has machine shops and what-not.  The best the prison world could<BR>
produce if it had to would be TL-6.  It obviously imports stuff to keep<BR>
the prison going. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Back to the psychological factor.  The descriptions by several people of<BR>
their love of cold climates are telling.  These might be considered<BR>
analogies to rockballs in the TU:  Life-support is more difficult as well<BR>
as agriculture, but people who live there find it difficult to go anywhere<BR>
else.  Many large cities are located in these areas, and while one might<BR>
argue that more population tends to live in warmer areas, this is<BR>
primarily due to archaic pre-technological factors.  Civil engineers will<BR>
tell you that the way in which cities arise has little to do with climate<BR>
or anything else.  Population clumps in a chaotic manner on earth, and<BR>
will likely continue to do so across interstellar space.<BR>
<BR>
As for a possible evolutionarily built-in desire for blue skies and such,<BR>
there is really no way of knowing.  I do know many people who have little<BR>
affinity for such things and I seriously doubt that they would pine for<BR>
them if given a comfortable sealed environment.  But that's purely<BR>
annecdotal, I think this point has to go down to personal intuition for<BR>
now.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Just to prove I am not fanatically against modifications to world<BR>
generation, I have to agree that I don't like the fact that every<BR>
industrial world _has_ to have a tainted atmosphere and have at least<BR>
billions of people.  Because I haven't run merchant campaigns much, I've<BR>
never worried about it to any great degree, but I think they should be<BR>
probabilistic: Roll 21+ to be industrial, add pop, add TL, +1 for tainted<BR>
atmosphere, +1 for govt type 1, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Ciao,<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:14:50 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Charles Collin writes:<BR>
> >> A number of people have been expressing the opinion that population<BR>
> >> should be modified based on the "Terran-ness" of a world.  Let me just<BR>
> >> express the dissenting opinion.  I think that if there were any<BR>
> >> relationship like this at all, it would be a very weak one.  The reasons:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > <snip><BR>
> ><BR>
> > There are several reasons for seeking out habitable worlds:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > 1)  Sealed structures are expensive to create and maintain.<BR>
> <BR>
> Yeah, and alien protiens may affect most people they way ragweed<BR>
> affects allergy sufferers. Even on a ?-877??? world there's no<BR>
> guarantee that you *won't* have to seal everything. <BR>
<BR>
That's what we call a 'tainted' atmosphere.  For atmosphere 5,6, and 8, by definition you don't have to seal everything.<BR>
> <BR>
> > 2)  Life requires ample supplies of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and<BR>
> > carbon  (in the long run, no life support system is leakproof).  Of<BR>
> > these, only  oxygen is readily available on a rockball.<BR>
> <BR>
> What about iceballs? And with traveller tech, comets are *easy* to mine<BR>
> for volatiles.<BR>
<BR>
Iceballs are low-metal, which can also be an annoyance (however, they do have all the other materials I mentioned).  While its possible to get your volatiles from elsewhere (typically somewhere in the outer system) that's kind of like getting your water delivered by truck on earth -- you can do it, but it doesn't make for cheap water...<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:20:14 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry writes:<BR>
>As I mentuioned before, the battledress (and just abvout everything else)<BR>
>has chameleon coverings, so visual sitings will be touchy.  Most other<BR>
>forms of sensor will also be spoofed.<BR>
Shrug.  The sensor band on the tanks exceeds normal human vision, and chameleon surfaces simply aren't that effective in GT (they cut typical spotting distance from 100 yards down to 30, or to 10 if you aren't moving).  At 'toe to toe' range you're still going to be spotted reliably.<BR>
<BR>
> There is no canonical source for battledress being hideously oversized.<BR>
With the exception of the suit in Star Mercs, which is hideously oversized.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:21:44 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin writes:<BR>
> Note that I'm not disagreeing that these are concerns, but I do disagree<BR>
> that the difficulties are significant enough to prompt modifiers to the<BR>
> pop digit, especially considering the centuries of experience people have<BR>
> with these problems by the 1100 Imperial.  A -1 DM is a order of magnitude<BR>
> reduction in population, more than the above considerations would produce,<BR>
> I think.<BR>
<BR>
I was giving them a DM of -1/2 (half-digits divide the population by 3, which <BR>
may or may not reduce size code).<BR>
> <BR>
> Just to prove I am not fanatically against modifications to world<BR>
> generation, I have to agree that I don't like the fact that every<BR>
> industrial world _has_ to have a tainted atmosphere and have at least<BR>
> billions of people.  Because I haven't run merchant campaigns much, I've<BR>
> never worried about it to any great degree, but I think they should be<BR>
> probabilistic: Roll 21+ to be industrial, add pop, add TL, +1 for tainted<BR>
> atmosphere, +1 for govt type 1, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Well, an industrial world which doesn't have to import a lot of parts is going to need a fairly high population.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:24:34 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
Frank G. Pitt writes:<BR>
 <BR>
> And troops going to a disco or rave party would hook up the suit to a<BR>
> visualizer like those you get with WinAmp.<BR>
<BR>
Hm...disco in battledress.  Now that's a charming concept.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:26:02 -0500<BR>
From: "Moody, Danny M." <DMoody@bridge.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Loren Wiseman [mailto:lkw@io.com]<BR>
> -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. <BR>
<BR>
Yes, yes, yes.  Especially if some of the figures shows people just doing their jobs (engineers with spanner and ears, ship's purser with clipboard, doctor with medpouch, etc) and not armoured up and carrying FGMPs.<BR>
<BR>
Even better if they were 'true' 25mm scale, not the oversized GW scale.<BR>
<BR>
> -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, <BR>
<BR>
Air/rafts, gravbikes, yes.  Anything bigger than a small automobile, prolly not.  Unless they were consistent in size with the Ground Zero Games' resin vehicles, that is.  Then they could be put to dual use.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
<BR>
Tables, chairs, and generic ship's furniture would be nice, in metal or resin.  Not much is needed here, since a lot of it can be done with cardboard.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant <BR>
> Lances, and so<BR>
> on.<BR>
<BR>
Ab-so-frikin-loot-ley!  I was just painting up the last of the Traveller starships I hoarded at the demise of GDW last night, wishing for more.<BR>
<BR>
> Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the <BR>
> larger ships we'd<BR>
> have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a <BR>
> constant scale in<BR>
> starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress <BR>
> or Ramparts<BR>
> the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
Constant scale amongst the different types of ships - all the fighters/free traders are at the smaller scale, larger vessels at another - would be nice.  The rafm(?) Traveller ship mini's seemed to go for constant size instead of constant scale.<BR>
<BR>
> -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
<BR>
Yes - especially vehicles.<BR>
<BR>
> -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
> "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
Probably not, unless the quality was high enough.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these <BR>
<BR>
Only if you could also get a set of patches of various services/units/etc.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
 -- vargr1                                              UPP-8D9B85 --<BR>
The three principle virtues of a good programmer   | dmoody@bridge-dot-com<BR>
 are Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris.             | vargr1@jcn1-dot-com<BR>
             ** Omnia dicta fortiora, si dicta latina. **           <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:26:02 -0500<BR>
From: "Moody, Danny M." <DMoody@bridge.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Loren Wiseman [mailto:lkw@io.com]<BR>
> -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. <BR>
<BR>
Yes, yes, yes.  Especially if some of the figures shows people just doing their jobs (engineers with spanner and ears, ship's purser with clipboard, doctor with medpouch, etc) and not armoured up and carrying FGMPs.<BR>
<BR>
Even better if they were 'true' 25mm scale, not the oversized GW scale.<BR>
<BR>
> -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, <BR>
<BR>
Air/rafts, gravbikes, yes.  Anything bigger than a small automobile, prolly not.  Unless they were consistent in size with the Ground Zero Games' resin vehicles, that is.  Then they could be put to dual use.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
<BR>
Tables, chairs, and generic ship's furniture would be nice, in metal or resin.  Not much is needed here, since a lot of it can be done with cardboard.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant <BR>
> Lances, and so<BR>
> on.<BR>
<BR>
Ab-so-frikin-loot-ley!  I was just painting up the last of the Traveller starships I hoarded at the demise of GDW last night, wishing for more.<BR>
<BR>
> Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the <BR>
> larger ships we'd<BR>
> have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a <BR>
> constant scale in<BR>
> starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress <BR>
> or Ramparts<BR>
> the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
Constant scale amongst the different types of ships - all the fighters/free traders are at the smaller scale, larger vessels at another - would be nice.  The rafm(?) Traveller ship mini's seemed to go for constant size instead of constant scale.<BR>
<BR>
> -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
<BR>
Yes - especially vehicles.<BR>
<BR>
> -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
> "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
Probably not, unless the quality was high enough.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these <BR>
<BR>
Only if you could also get a set of patches of various services/units/etc.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
 -- vargr1                                              UPP-8D9B85 --<BR>
The three principle virtues of a good programmer   | dmoody@bridge-dot-com<BR>
 are Laziness, Impatience, and Hubris.             | vargr1@jcn1-dot-com<BR>
             ** Omnia dicta fortiora, si dicta latina. **           <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:26:31 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
Eris writes:<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>So, far the best solutions I've seen are:<BR>
>1.  More realistic radiators limiting volume<BR>
>    This has a lot going for it because it works on boats and ships.<BR>
>    Unfortunately, it also might work against Up Ports.  Oh, the up<BR>
>    side, it doesn't require major revisions to fixed OTU world<BR>
>    stats.  Hum, might also explain why all those ships *land*<BR>
>    instead of docking at the Up Port.<BR>
<snipped><BR>
<BR>
	This would seem to be the easiest to employ.  Up Ports do not<BR>
	have to accelerate much, and may be designed for better heat<BR>
	dissipation.  On top of that they may have less power to deal<BR>
	with, and in extremis can ship ice from the surface.  How big<BR>
	do people imagine their Up Ports get?<BR>
<BR>
>What no one has suggested is having cost of ships increase in a<BR>
>non-linear fashion.  What about slow or flat cost increases up to<BR>
>some TL limit, then rapid cost increases above that? <BR>
<snipped><BR>
<BR>
	I have always favoured M-drives requiring a greater % of tonnage<BR>
	in larger ships.  This makes sense from an engineering POV<BR>
	(taking into account superstructure, bracing, inertial comp.,<BR>
	etc.)and tends to make very large ships less efficient.  For<BR>
	example, using cube roots:<BR>
<BR>
		ship tonnage	% required for M-1	tonnage required for M-1<BR>
		10		1.1			0.1<BR>
		100		2.3			2.3<BR>
		1,000		5.0			50<BR>
		10,000		11			1,100<BR>
		100,000	23			23,000<BR>
		1,000,000	50			500,000<BR>
<BR>
	The curve could be flattened from 100-5,000 tons to maintain<BR>
	consistency with Book 2.  Perhaps halve requirements for ships<BR>
	10-99 tons, double them for 10,000-99,999 tons, quadruple them<BR>
	for 100,000-999,999 tons, etc.  This would make agile fighters<BR>
	easier to build as well.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:32:57<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 09:20 AM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Shrug.  The sensor band on the tanks exceeds normal human vision, and <BR>
>chameleon surfaces simply aren't that effective in GT (they cut typical <BR>
>spotting distance from 100 yards down to 30, or to 10 if you aren't moving). <BR>
>At 'toe to toe' range you're still going to be spotted reliably.<BR>
<BR>
The standard Imperial anti-tank missile is going to be deadly at that<BR>
range.  At ten yards, a Marine sniper can take out your sensors.<BR>
<BR>
>> There is no canonical source for battledress being hideously oversized.<BR>
<BR>
>With the exception of the suit in Star Mercs, which is hideously oversized.<BR>
<BR>
And is hideously broken in several other ways.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:34:37 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
<BR>
Suppose the square-cube law, familiar from biology and engineering, applies<BR>
to sociology as well? that the ratio of "external" members of a group<BR>
(those dealing primarily with others outside the group) to "internal"<BR>
members (those dealing primarily with others inside the group) is directly<BR>
proportional to the 2/3 power of the number of group members.<BR>
<BR>
Haire ("Biological Models and Empirical Histories of the Growth of<BR>
Organizations", cited in Stephan, The Division of Territory in Society,<BR>
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~stephan/Book/chap9/9.html) derives this relationship<BR>
empirically from studying business organizations. Stephan (ibid.) provides<BR>
an analytical derivation, based on minimizing the time required for<BR>
interactions among group members.<BR>
<BR>
If this relationship holds, it provides a possible rationale for making<BR>
large fleet organizations less efficient than small ones: more resources<BR>
are spent on command and control, supply and logistics, auxiliaries,<BR>
escorts, etc. (the "internal" aspects of fleet operations -- the "tail")<BR>
and relatively less on major combatant vessels (the "external" aspects --<BR>
the "tooth"). <BR>
<BR>
This also perhaps provides an insight into why Imperial fleet operations<BR>
are predominantly conducted at the subsector and sector level. The Imperial<BR>
Navy is too impossibly huge to manage as a whole; instead, it is<BR>
effectively broken up into smaller, more efficient packages, with only<BR>
token oversight and guidance from above. The same argument applies with<BR>
equal force to the subsector bureaucracies and the Imperial nobility, and<BR>
to the organization of megacorporations.<BR>
<BR>
Applied to demographics, this relation also provides an answer (though not<BR>
"the" answer, by any means) to the question I posed Mr. Miller: what<BR>
proportion of a world's population is actually involved with offworld<BR>
trade, commerce, and other interactions? Taking for granted that at Pop 0.0<BR>
(1 person), the entire population is somehow involved offworld, we get the<BR>
following results:<BR>
<BR>
UWP	Population			Offworld		%<BR>
0	1-9				1-5			50-100<BR>
1	10-99				5-21			22-50<BR>
2	100-999			22-100			10-22<BR>
3	1000-9999			100-460		4.6-10<BR>
4	10000-99999			460-2200		2.2-4.6<BR>
5	100000-999999			2200-10000		1.0-2.2<BR>
6	1000000-9999999		10000-46000		0.5-1.0<BR>
7	10000000-99999999		46000-220000		0.2-0.5<BR>
8	100000000-999999999		220000-1000000	0.1-0.2<BR>
9	1000000000-9999999999	1000000-4600000	0.05-0.10<BR>
A	10000000000-99999999999	4600000-22000000	0.02-0.05<BR>
<BR>
The "Offworld" column, then, becomes the "population base" for determining<BR>
the demographics of Travellers. Note that the Offworld "UWP" is simply the<BR>
total UWP * 2/3.<BR>
<BR>
This could also be considered a constraint on the size of navies (both<BR>
military and commercial), if desired. It represents the available manpower<BR>
pool for interstellar activities -- one of Mahan's elements of sea power:<BR>
<BR>
"and so, in point of population, it is not only the grand total, but the<BR>
number following the sea, or at least readily available for employment on<BR>
ship-board and for the creation of naval material, that must be counted."<BR>
(Mahan, The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, p. 45).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 09:46:34 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry writes:<BR>
> At 09:20 AM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >Shrug.  The sensor band on the tanks exceeds normal human vision, and <BR>
> >chameleon surfaces simply aren't that effective in GT (they cut typical <BR>
> >spotting distance from 100 yards down to 30, or to 10 if you aren't<BR>
> >moving).  At 'toe to toe' range you're still going to be spotted<BR>
> >reliably. <BR>
> <BR>
> The standard Imperial anti-tank missile is going to be deadly at that<BR>
> range.  At ten yards, a Marine sniper can take out your sensors.<BR>
<BR>
Never claimed that close combat was a bad idea for marines (note that these numbers are for regular vision, the side vision cameras on an Intrepid would have about 3x that typical range.  The primary sensors have spotting ranges of 200-300 yards on infantry).<BR>
<BR>
However, my vision of what 'toe to toe' means involves 'tank, with three guys in battledress in front of it'.  This just means 'three dead guys in battledress', the frontal armor on a heavy tank is not vulnerable to man-portable missiles.<BR>
> <BR>
> >> There is no canonical source for battledress being hideously oversized.<BR>
> <BR>
> >With the exception of the suit in Star Mercs, which is hideously<BR>
> >oversized. <BR>
> <BR>
> And is hideously broken in several other ways.<BR>
<BR>
Well, yes.  I didn't say that the star mercs suit was a good design or anything... ;)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:44:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Strange UWPs, and Tech Level Advancement<BR>
<BR>
<Sam><BR>
Nope. Then it has a TL of 7 at least for artifacts just like Darrian. If<BR>
one world gets its artifact level listed, all do. Standardized data, not<BR>
random choices please. <BR>
</Sam><BR>
<BR>
Not random choices, but 'most salient data'.  Generally speaking, the TL<BR>
is the best the world can produce.  However, if you've got a world with<BR>
'magic tech' lying around, that's far more important to mention.  I think<BR>
you are at once taking the UWPs too specifically and too generally.  If<BR>
you want more detail (a wealth of detail, in fact), use the systems in<BR>
World Builder's Handbook and related products. There they do break down TL<BR>
into a number of sub-values, including (IIRC) artifacts and the like.<BR>
<BR>
On a related point, I like to keep in mind that--under _any_ definition of<BR>
TL--it would be a very difficult task to actually assess it as a surveyor.<BR>
So there may some "art" as well as "science" to the ratings simply because<BR>
the instructions to/from the IGS were hard to follow. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<Sam><BR>
And then promptly died or fled when they world went into runaway hothouse<BR>
mode. Those colonization fleets work both ways.<BR>
</Sam><BR>
<BR>
Not always, perhaps not usually.  By the time your world has gone to seed,<BR>
people have come in behind you and the situation back home has changed.<BR>
And besides, you may have gotten used to your hothouse, slowly developing<BR>
your society and infrastructure to deal with it.  Why would you up and<BR>
leave when life is going so well in the deep, warm caverns of Sulfuria?<BR>
(which is all you've known all your life, etc. etc...)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<Sam><BR>
"Space Control to Beowulf, what are you doing down there?"<BR>
"Beowulf to Space Control, we landed looking to trade. Where is<BR>
everybody?"<BR>
"Space Control to Beowulf, where are we? We are out here in the asteroid<BR>
belt, where do you think we are?"<BR>
"Beowulf to Space Control, well the TAS UPP says you all live on the world<BR>
with the Fluorine atmosphere. What are you doing out there?"<BR>
"Space Control to Beowulf, we mine that stupid planet with remotes. Do you<BR>
think we're crazy enough to try and live down there?"<BR>
"Beowulf to Space Control, but the book says..."<BR>
</Sam><BR>
<BR>
:-).  Yes, well the humor in that is that they're taking the UWP as "all<BR>
the info available on a world", which clearly is not the case.  This is<BR>
akin to landing in northern Manitoba (geographical center of Canada),<BR>
looking around at the endless fields, and saying "Where are the 30 million<BR>
people? The Atlas said there were 30 million people here!"  A little<BR>
checking will reveal better specific areas to look for sales...<BR>
How would you list the world UWP if the population were mostly in orbital<BR>
colonies?  What about half the population? Or a third?  This sort of<BR>
detailing can be done with WBH or (AFAIK) the GURPS:Space system.  The UWP<BR>
is meant to be very general, occasionally picking out highlights of<BR>
importance, such as Darrian's super-Imperial TL artifacts or Imperial<BR>
Depots.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
As for TL spread, well I could--as owner of Microsoft say--fly billions of<BR>
dollars of industrial machinery over to Zimbabwe tomorrow and make their<BR>
country higher tech, but why would I?  What would they give me in return? <BR>
The problem is that you need infrastructure to make infrastructure, so to<BR>
speak.  And even if I sent the stuff to them out the goodness of my heart,<BR>
the desired result is far from certain. <BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:50:22 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: strange UWPs, and Tech level advancement<BR>
<BR>
> >What if whoever lives there isn't human?  There could be Imperial species<BR>
> from Exotic atmosphere worlds more tolerant to conditions on particular<BR>
> kinds of Insidious worlds -- it could be argued the Jgdi are in this<BR>
> category, for example. <<BR>
><BR>
> But the Jgdi are only on gas giants which have a significantly different UPP<BR>
> code.<BR>
<BR>
Right, but the point is that other aliens may also exist which would be<BR>
happy on the "normal" sized worlds with "significantly different" UWPs.<BR>
<BR>
> This is  good concept, only many worlds are listed as being inhabited by<BR>
> humans in one canon or other. In fact, GT has a number of these hell holes<BR>
> described with population living elsewhere and simply doing remote mining.<BR>
<BR>
That's GT.  Many worlds may be inhabited by humans, sure, but many may be<BR>
inhabited by "minor races" as well.  The UWP doesn't distinguish.<BR>
<BR>
Along these lines -- I think DGP's Aslan world gen had minimum tech levels<BR>
based on conditions, mainly atmosphere.  The GDW K'kree book modified the<BR>
population roll for K'kree using an environment-based table.  But both the<BR>
Hiver and K'kree books, if I remember right, had a possibility of a world<BR>
being "Non-Hiver" or "Non-K'kree Subject Race", and those used the standard <BR>
population die roll.<BR>
 <BR>
  -- Steve Bonneville<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:52:42 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
<BR>
Do people think the Imperium is over-populated?  I'm not sure I understand<BR>
why.  Even with very modest growth rates, there's been more than enough<BR>
time to produce the 15 trillion or so people.<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:00:10 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin writes:<BR>
> Do people think the Imperium is over-populated?  I'm not sure I understand<BR>
> why.  Even with very modest growth rates, there's been more than enough<BR>
> time to produce the 15 trillion or so people.<BR>
<BR>
No, its level of population is not clearly unreasonable (its population distribution is pretty dubious, however).  However, from a role-playing point of view it would be useful if the population of the Imperium were lower ;)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:00:00<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 09:46 AM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Never claimed that close combat was a bad idea for marines (note that these <BR>
>numbers are for regular vision, the side vision cameras on an Intrepid would <BR>
>have about 3x that typical range.  The primary sensors have spotting ranges <BR>
>of 200-300 yards on infantry).<BR>
<BR>
Now, put yourself in the tanker's boots.  You'r eplaying cat and mouse with<BR>
enemy tanks.  One slip and you will be eating plasma.  You are also trying<BR>
to keep track of your platoon leader, monitor the situation, and make your<BR>
objective.  You will not be closely examining every bush to see if it has a<BR>
Marine behind it.<BR>
<BR>
Or if you do, I've succeeded in slowing your advance to a crawl, which<BR>
allows me to marshal a counter-attack in force.<BR>
<BR>
>However, my vision of what 'toe to toe' means involves 'tank, with three <BR>
>guys in battledress in front of it'.  This just means 'three dead guys in <BR>
>battledress', the frontal armor on a heavy tank is not vulnerable to <BR>
>man-portable missiles.<BR>
<BR>
Is if you use a nuke.  :)  Hey, they don't give out those SEH medals for<BR>
polishing boots y'know.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:24:37 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Now, put yourself in the tanker's boots.  You'r eplaying cat and mouse with<BR>
> enemy tanks.  One slip and you will be eating plasma.  You are also trying<BR>
> to keep track of your platoon leader, monitor the situation, and make your<BR>
> objective.  You will not be closely examining every bush to see if it has a<BR>
> Marine behind it.<BR>
<BR>
Gr.. my original point had nothing to do with whether infantry can be effective against tankers.  It had to do with the specific imagery involved, which sounded like a bad tactical decision by the troopers (and still does.  'Toe to toe' implies that you're actually facing one another, which means that the tanker has in fact spotted you).<BR>
<BR>
> >battledress', the frontal armor on a heavy tank is not vulnerable to <BR>
> >man-portable missiles.<BR>
> <BR>
> Is if you use a nuke.  :)  Hey, they don't give out those SEH medals for<BR>
> polishing boots y'know.<BR>
<BR>
Heh.  Infantry are usually leery of blowing themselves up along with their target.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:24:31 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
Quick short answer - I will certainly buy some of them. I'll get most of<BR>
them if the quality is top notch. Make them distinctly traveller, there are<BR>
too many quality generic SF miniatures being produced.<BR>
<BR>
- - Starships- <BR>
I want an XBoat! I made my own but it is rather crude. The XBoat Tender<BR>
would be nice.<BR>
Also, I want a Fiery with the external Gig. <BR>
Alien ships would be great. Especially Zhodani<BR>
<BR>
I would like to see some Ramparts fighters.<BR>
<BR>
I have all of the RAFM TNE minis that I want.  I didn't care for their<BR>
Passenger Liner or their SDB so remakes of those would be nice.<BR>
<BR>
ALso, naval fleet scale ships would be good for BattleRider.<BR>
<BR>
- - 25mm "adventurer" type figures - <BR>
<BR>
One word - *ALIENS* Produce good quality Vargr, Aslan, Kkree and Droyne and<BR>
I'll buy them all. <BR>
<BR>
As Humans go, there are lots of top quality SF minis out there. Denizen and<BR>
Geohex  are my favorites. <BR>
<BR>
- - Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm <BR>
I'll buy hatches, cargo containers, and a console.<BR>
<BR>
- - 25mm vehicles <BR>
I'll take an air raft, some grav cycles, and and ATV.<BR>
<BR>
That would be about it. What Grenadier did was great. I have boxed sets of<BR>
marines and adventurers, and I love them. Wish I had the Aliens.<BR>
<BR>
Please check out my Gallery of SF miniatures at<BR>
http://www.icubed.com/~gemyers/.<BR>
A new update should be done in a week or so. I have to get the pictures<BR>
cropped and modify the html and it has been too nice outside to do such<BR>
things.<BR>
<BR>
Glenn<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
<BR>
Glenn E. Myers<BR>
ANSYS Inc.                Email: glenn.myers@ansys.com<BR>
275 Technology Drive      Phone: (724) 514-2913<BR>
Canonsburg, PA 15317      Fax:   (724) 514-3118<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
 <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za02.mx.aol.com (rly-za02.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.98]) by air-za04.mail.aol.com (v75_b1.4) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:25:51 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za02.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:24:58 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id NAA68822;<BR>
	Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:24:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:24:47 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id NAA68778<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:24:47 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:24:47 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007261724.NAA68778@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2814</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/26/00 2:41:24 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Wednesday, July 26 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2814<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
Alien abductions<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
101 Silly Things to do in BD (was: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805)<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
you'll like this...<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: PE PBEM<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
Re: Space Docking<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
Re: What is "moshing"?<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Strange Populations<BR>
Book 2 vs. Book 5<BR>
Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
Re: What is "moshing"?<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:38:56 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
> Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
><BR>
> -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
> skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
> and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages,<BR>
All<BR>
> of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
If there is a reasonable variety, I'll probably buy, as my players have<BR>
informaed me that mini help visualize tactical situations.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with<BR>
GF<BR>
> anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
Probably buy some jsut for yucks.<BR>
><BR>
> Opinions are solicited.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Loren Wiseman<BR>
>      Traveller Line Manager/Traveller Guru-in-Residence<BR>
>      Editor, Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society<BR>
http://jtas.sjgames.com/<BR>
>      SJ Games<BR>
>      lkw@io.com http://www.io.com/~lkw/<BR>
>      (512) 447-7866 VOX<BR>
>      (512) 447-1144 FAX<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 10:41:43 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
> >> For Imperial Marines, certainly.  But what about Imperial Army BD?<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Jesse's cover assignment calls for Marines . . . hmmm, I don't think<BR>
we've<BR>
> >ever specified what color dress BD is for Imperial Army.<BR>
><BR>
> Off the top of my head, black with red highlights.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
How about a nice forest green?  (I say this because I already use black and<BR>
red for my elite Solomani Conditioned Reflex Infantry)<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:50:30 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/26/00 at 06:58 AM,  Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Maybe we could include a thruster plate maximum size by<BR>
>tech level as well. That way high ports, which have little<BR>
>need to maneuver could be over the size limit if they simply used HEPLAR<BR>
>for their rare maneuvers but thruster equipped<BR>
>ships could not.<BR>
<BR>
It does seem reasonable that the maximum size of TPlates (or other<BR>
MDrives) would increase by TL.  Let's try it!  I'll use HG MDrive<BR>
%'s and multiply TL by a flat 10.<BR>
<BR>
                        Maximum Ship Sizes<BR>
        Max. Size   2%      5%      8%      11%     14%     17%<BR>
 TL     of TPlate   1g      2g      3g      4g      5g      6g<BR>
 ===============================================================<BR>
  8        80      4,000   1,600   1,000     727     571     471  <BR>
  9        90      4,500   1,800   1,125     818     643     529    <BR>
 10       100      5,000   2,000   1,250     909     714     588<BR>
 11       110      5,500   2,200   1,375   1,000     786     647<BR>
 12       120      6,000   2,400   1,500   1,091     857     706<BR>
 13       130      6,500   2,600   1,612   1,182     929     765<BR>
 14       140      7,000   2,800   1,750   1,273   1,000     824<BR>
 15       150      7,500   3,000   1,875   1,364   1,071     882<BR>
 16       160      8,000   3,200   2,000   1,455   1,143     942<BR>
 17       170      8,500   3,400   2,125   1,545   1,214   1,000<BR>
<BR>
Well, that certainly does handle the big ship problem.  <g> It works<BR>
a little better if you use TL^2 instead, but I'm not going to<BR>
include that table.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:00:43 -0400<BR>
From: Bob Kovalchick <Kovalchick@wbgh.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
Years back I had both the Grenadier 25mm and the Martian Metals 15mm (still<BR>
do actually) and I always preferred the 15mm. Yes, my eyes were better then,<BR>
but they always seemed more usable with deckplans, etc. With the Martian<BR>
Metals line of Traveller figures, you were pretty much set. Adventurers,<BR>
plus duplicate packs of Zho soldiers and Ruffians, and you had about all you<BR>
need.<BR>
<BR>
Furniture? I think most would say, "Sure I'd buy 25mm furniture cast in<BR>
metal.", but I doubt many would REALLY buy it. Leave that stuff to the<BR>
deckplans and your imagination. (Of course, a friend of mine used to make<BR>
little wooden tables and stuff - interesting and attractive, but too much<BR>
and never enough...)<BR>
<BR>
Ships are a must. I would love to see a line of 800 ton or below ships in<BR>
the same scale. Plus, why not a line of larger warships (close to the same<BR>
scale? Could you keep the scale according to tonnage range?)<BR>
<BR>
With military vehicles, etc. 1:285 (1:300) scale would be great. Maybe I'll<BR>
run a military scenario with the Imperials vs. a TL8-9 army (I could use my<BR>
Soviet Motorized Rifle Division miniature set)<BR>
<BR>
Final thoughts - I would definitely like to see some minis, but I'll<BR>
probably only buy 15mm.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:10:40 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
<Anthony Jackson><BR>
> And troops going to a disco or rave party would hook up the suit to a<BR>
> visualizer like those you get with WinAmp.<BR>
<BR>
Hm...disco in battledress.  Now that's a charming concept.<BR>
<AJ><BR>
<BR>
No, no, no!  MOSHING in battledress, now that's a concept!  A very<BR>
painful, expensive and dangerous concept...  "Bar room brawl nothin', we<BR>
moshed in BD!" said the recently demoted Private Aliikesh from the<BR>
medi-tank. :-)<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 11:21:30 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin writes:<BR>
<BR>
> No, no, no!  MOSHING in battledress, now that's a concept!  A very<BR>
> painful, expensive and dangerous concept...  "Bar room brawl nothin', we<BR>
> moshed in BD!" said the recently demoted Private Aliikesh from the<BR>
> medi-tank. :-)<BR>
<BR>
Actually, it wouldn't be particularly dangerous for the people in battledress;)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:23:44 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
In terms of Minis, I _might_ buy the figures and the ships, but I'm not<BR>
really a Minis kinda guy.  <BR>
<BR>
What I REALLY want are some new-and-improved Traveller Cardboard Heroes,<BR>
including starship interior maps, or at least hatches, consoles and other<BR>
"things on the deck".  <BR>
<BR>
And for ships, I'd love a set of cardboard counters with Jesse's ships on<BR>
them...  <BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:29:23 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin wrote:<BR>
> No, no, no!  MOSHING in battledress, now that's a concept!  A very<BR>
> painful, expensive and dangerous concept...  "Bar room brawl nothin', we<BR>
> moshed in BD!" said the recently demoted Private Aliikesh from the<BR>
> medi-tank. :-)<BR>
<BR>
Er, what is "moshing"?<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:32:58 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Alien abductions<BR>
<BR>
I was sent this:<BR>
<BR>
	Claiming that Virginia has inadequately prepared for <BR>
	extraterrestrial invasions, Larry W. Bryant and two <BR>
	colleagues filed a lawsuit in June in Alexandria, seeking <BR>
	to force Gov. James Gilmore to empanel a grand jury to <BR>
	investigate alien abductions, to train the National Guard <BR>
	to handle attacks from outer space, and to cover <BR>
	abductees under civil rights laws meant for rape victims. <BR>
	Bryant told the APBnews service that he was especially <BR>
	worried about the "dark, silently floating flying triangles" <BR>
	that observers have noticed and that Gilmore has <BR>
	neither explained nor put a stop to.<BR>
<BR>
	ObTrav: The players land on a TL 7 world and are arrested<BR>
	for abducting and performing experiments on local citizens.<BR>
<BR>
;)<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:38:29 +0000 (GMT)<BR>
From: Michel R Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Trevor, Peter wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Charles Collin wrote:<BR>
> > No, no, no!  MOSHING in battledress, now that's a concept!  A very<BR>
> > painful, expensive and dangerous concept...  "Bar room brawl nothin', we<BR>
> > moshed in BD!" said the recently demoted Private Aliikesh from the<BR>
> > medi-tank. :-)<BR>
> <BR>
> Er, what is "moshing"?<BR>
> <BR>
> Regards PLST<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
	A left cross between pogo-ing to punk-rock and rugby.  <weg><BR>
<BR>
	--Michel<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:50:56 -0400<BR>
From: "Mike Demetro" <punkabilly@sprint.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
What really annoys me about RPG miniatures that never happens much with toy<BR>
soldiers is that the 25mm scale means they fit a sculpture into an inch<BR>
square. It doesn't mean they made any effort to make the thing to scale with<BR>
the real thing. Really 1:72 scale is 1" and 25mm figures are nowhere near<BR>
looking like that. If I were playing a WWII game or a Conan game I could<BR>
press 1:72 soldiers into service but if you look at the miniatures that are<BR>
supposedly one with these then there is no relation. I know in a lot of<BR>
games the 25mm scale refers to the diameter of the base, but miniatures have<BR>
random base sizes so they don't relate to this. I would like to see 1:72<BR>
scale plastic miniatures like ESCI or Airfix make and I would like them to<BR>
have 1" around bases and be to scale rather than this 25mm nonsense. I would<BR>
like them to come in packets so I could get a box for several dollars<BR>
instead of paying a buck or two apiece for a pewter sculpture that lacks<BR>
detail and isn't scaled well. If they can do it for soldiers why not Third<BR>
Imperium Star Marines or Goblins or Dragons or Superheroes. If you want to<BR>
know why miniatures don't catch on that has to be one of the two big<BR>
reasons. The other being that it can limit the imagination for some, but<BR>
outside of fantasy as Traveller is this second problem isn't a factor.<BR>
<BR>
Mike Demetro, President, The Guildhall Press, Canada<BR>
www.guildhallpress.com president@guildhallpress.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:57:35 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: 101 Silly Things to do in BD (was: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805)<BR>
<BR>
Frank G. Pitt wrote:<BR>
> Douglas E. Berry wrote :<BR>
> > BD will be either in cammo mode, where it reacts to the local<BR>
> > environment, or in a neutral color.. olive-drab, khaki, gray.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > For certain purposes, other color schemes might be used.  For<BR>
> > example, troops helping in a winter rescue operation might set<BR>
> > their suits to high-visability orange.<BR>
> <BR>
> And troops going to a disco or rave party would hook up the suit<BR>
> to a visualizer like those you get with WinAmp.<BR>
<BR>
How about in a parade: formation moon-walking in BD!<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:11:18 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
From: "Glenn Myers" <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
><BR>
> Please check out my Gallery of SF miniatures at<BR>
> http://www.icubed.com/~gemyers/.<BR>
> A new update should be done in a week or so. I have to get the pictures<BR>
> cropped and modify the html and it has been too nice outside to do such<BR>
> things.<BR>
><BR>
> Glenn<BR>
><BR>
I checked out your miniatures, I am impressed, you do both good photography<BR>
and excellent miniatures. About a century ago I did miniatures and I know<BR>
what a labor of love good ones are.<BR>
<BR>
I'l go back and check again when you get the update done.<BR>
<BR>
If anyone hasn't had a look, I suggest you do, they're good.<BR>
<BR>
Pronto<BR>
AKA Brian Taylor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:07:37 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Kiri Aradia Morgan <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
Subject: you'll like this...<BR>
<BR>
>  Line Of Duty<BR>
>  ------------<BR>
>  Airman Jones was assigned to the induction center, where he<BR>
>  advised new recruits about their government benefits,<BR>
>  especially their GI insurance.<BR>
>  <BR>
>  It wasn't long before Captain Smith noticed that Airman Jones<BR>
>  had almost a 100% record for insurance sales, which had never<BR>
>  happened before.<BR>
>  <BR>
>  Rather than ask about this, the Captain stood in the back of<BR>
>  the room and listened to Jones's sales pitch.<BR>
>  <BR>
>  Jones explained the basics of the GI Insurance to the new<BR>
>  recruits, and then said: "If you have GI Insurance and go into<BR>
>  battle and are killed, the government has to pay $200,000 to<BR>
>  your beneficiaries.  If you don't have GI insurance, and you<BR>
>  go into battle and get killed, the government only has to pay<BR>
>  a maximum of $6000."<BR>
>  <BR>
>  "Now," he concluded, "which bunch do you think they are<BR>
>  going to send into battle first?"<BR>
>  <BR>
Suppose the IISS has something like this?<BR>
<BR>
Kiri  =)<BR>
<BR>
******************************************************************************<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan                                  93!  Thou Art God<BR>
tiamat@tsoft.com<BR>
<BR>
"If time passes, everything turns into beauty<BR>
If the rains stop, tears clean the scars of memory away<BR>
Everything starts wearing fresh colors<BR>
Every sound begins playing a heartfelt melody<BR>
Jealousy embellishes a page of the epic<BR>
Desire is embraced in a dream..."              -- X-JAPAN<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 12:22:54 -0700<BR>
From: "Bari Z Stafford Sr" <whitebear777@netzero.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
> > Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use<BR>
in<BR>
> > skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians,<BR>
merchant<BR>
> > and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages,<BR>
> > of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
> <BR>
> It beats using paper cut-outs from the back of ship deck plans, which is<BR>
all<BR>
> I have at this time.<BR>
<BR>
Bari<BR>
<BR>
____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________<BR>
Download Now     http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html<BR>
Request a CDROM  1-800-333-3633<BR>
___________________________________________________________<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:26:11 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: PE PBEM<BR>
<BR>
> is anyone out there interested in a PBEM Pocket Empire<BR>
> game? I'm tinkering with starting one, but I don't want<BR>
> to do the work if no one wants to play :-)<BR>
<BR>
I'd like to if Pocket Empires is what I think it is. (I don't have the<BR>
rules.) Could you explain a little more of how the game works, and would it<BR>
be possible for me to play without the book?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:37:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
>          ...and gets shot out of the air by point defense 95% of the<BR>
time.<BR>
<BR>
That's a little harsh, maybe. Besides, if they're wasting point defence<BR>
capacity on paint bombs, you're getting value for money.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:39:46 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
<BR>
> Pinkerdoo is proud to announce the release of the first part of the AMWS<BR>
> 1.0, the FGPP-12. The FGPP-12 is a powerful GTL-12 Penguin Portable<BR>
Fusion<BR>
> Gun.<BR>
<BR>
Now the only logical step left is the Portable Penguin Fusion Gun*,<BR>
although how hard you'd have to bang the penguins together's beyond me.<BR>
<BR>
Or possibly the Portable Gun Fusion Penguin, the ultimate area-defence<BR>
guard animal. Just sit it down and watch any guns flash to plasma if<BR>
anyone's stupid enough to bring one nearby...<BR>
<BR>
Time for my pills, I think...<BR>
<BR>
NB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:42:11 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Space Docking<BR>
<BR>
> considered a minor miracle in most religions. Excuse me now, I have to go<BR>
> find my wife....Nothing further to report!<BR>
<BR>
You'll note, gentlemen, that he takes the time to log on and report in<BR>
before going to find his wife.<BR>
<BR>
Now, THAT's dedication.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:59:19 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
> IMTU, not only are the Jesuits running schools, they are running _at<BR>
> least_ one of the most sophisticated non-governmental intelligence<BR>
> services in known space.  Art imitating life....<BR>
<BR>
Have you played Shadowrun?  Don't EVER annoy the Jesuits.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:03:51 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
> Jesse's cover assignment calls for Marines . . . hmmm, I don't think<BR>
we've<BR>
> ever specified what color dress BD is for Imperial Army.<BR>
<BR>
For some reason I always imagined a light beige/grey, with black stencils.<BR>
<BR>
NB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:24:20 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
> Hell, get *really* mean and develop a shell that is a<BR>
> two-parter...  CPR gun lobs it up in the air and a parachute deploys to<BR>
> hang it up there... turn a transmitter on, it pops fins and turns a<BR>
rocket<BR>
> motor on and gives you one hell of a head-ache...<BR>
<BR>
ALARM from a howitzer...<BR>
<BR>
The current RAF antiradiation missile (ALARM) has the capability to zoom to<BR>
a Long Way Up (TM) and deploy a chute. If somebody nasty turns on a radar<BR>
on the ground then the missile pops the chute and coasts in at high speed<BR>
to take out the antenna.<BR>
<BR>
The really good thing is that most of the time the radar operators on the<BR>
ground are fully aware you've just fired an ALARM because well, they're<BR>
watching on radar. So they know it's waiting up there, and nobody wants to<BR>
be the first to turn their radar back on. Maybe you don't hit any antennae,<BR>
but the strike goes sailing past unopposed.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:41:43 +0000 (GMT)<BR>
From: Michel R Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Nick Bradbeer wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >          ...and gets shot out of the air by point defense 95% of the<BR>
> time.<BR>
> <BR>
> That's a little harsh, maybe. Besides, if they're wasting point defence<BR>
> capacity on paint bombs, you're getting value for money.<BR>
> <BR>
> Nick<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
	Cheap point defense ought to be the equiv of two gatling-sets of<BR>
juiced-up laser rifles...  You don't need to blow it up, you need to tear<BR>
abig enough hole in the threat that aerodynamic forces rip it apart.<BR>
Something that will do 10d to an infantryman and fires each "barrel" 20<BR>
times a second  is *cheap*, energy wise.	<BR>
<BR>
	--Michel<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:47:14 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
> Er, what is "moshing"?<BR>
> Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
<waves> Hello, grandad.<BR>
BTW, you *are* coming to GenCon?<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:44:14 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: What is "moshing"?<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/26/00 11:29 AM, Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com issued<BR>
forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Er, what is "moshing"?<BR>
 Egaging in a frenzied chaotic circular "dance", usually in the "pit" in<BR>
front of a stage at a heavy metal/punk/thrash concert.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:55:41 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 8:03 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > Jesse's cover assignment calls for Marines . . . hmmm, I don't think<BR>
> we've<BR>
> > ever specified what color dress BD is for Imperial Army.<BR>
><BR>
> For some reason I always imagined a light beige/grey, with black stencils.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Isn't grey normally associated with the navy?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:08:40 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Strange Populations<BR>
<BR>
In figuring out why there are so many "hellholes" with higher populations<BR>
than nearby rich worlds, perhaps we should resort to economics, or the<BR>
reason many of us don't live in Beverly Hills: you can't afford it.<BR>
<BR>
It may be that Rich worlds have service economies that don't provide for<BR>
unskilled labor. They may also have restrictive "immigration" or "residency"<BR>
laws, or even just high property values.<BR>
<BR>
"Hellholes" on the other hand, may have many more opportunities for<BR>
low-skilled people willing to work hard. In which case, much of the<BR>
population of the hellholes are people working hard so that they can retire<BR>
to a rich world :)<BR>
<BR>
Fred "Century 57" Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:18:01 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Book 2 vs. Book 5<BR>
<BR>
Gentlebeings:<BR>
<BR>
In the spirit of the "way to big ship" thread, I was inspired to pick up<BR>
High Guard and try to design the Book 2 ships using the HG rules. (I've seen<BR>
HG stats for Bk. 2 ships, but I don't know if anyone has ever tried to<BR>
re-engineer them.)<BR>
<BR>
So far, the results have worked out pretty well, so long as I use the 20%<BR>
class discount on the price of the ships. However, the Scout/Courier is a<BR>
total botch--the manuever fuel calcs are radically different (Bk2: 10 tons/G<BR>
of drive; Bk5: 1 ton/EP. This produces a swing of 18 dtons from Bk 2 to Bk 5<BR>
in the case of the scout.)<BR>
<BR>
I have two possible fixes:<BR>
<BR>
1) Handwave the scout by installing 20 tons of "bridge" equipment standing<BR>
for the databanks and survey sensors.<BR>
<BR>
2) Impose a scale efficiency on fuel purifiers for ships of less than 1000<BR>
tons displacement, moving it upward by a factor of 10. (Extrapolation of the<BR>
chart on p. 35 gives us a purifier displacement of 5% per ton of fuel at TL<BR>
8, 4.5% at TL 9, etc.) This will help increase the total fuel-related<BR>
tonnage to a point where the waste space is acceptable.<BR>
<BR>
Anyone have a suggestion on this? If anyone's interested, I will post the<BR>
results as soon as I finish the USPs.<BR>
<BR>
I'm not smart enough to be a gearhead under FF&S. I need a simpler<BR>
machine...so call me<BR>
<BR>
Fred "Pulleyhead" Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:01:04 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
<BR>
I've been enjoying this thread a lot. One the one hand, I too long for the<BR>
days when a Mercenary Cruiser was a kick-butt ship and a 5,000 ton ship was<BR>
a heavy cruiser (at least). But on the other hand, Traveller is space opera.<BR>
Well done, reasonably realistic space opera that takes place in a universe<BR>
almost recognizable as our own, but still space opera. And space opera<BR>
demands at least a few ships that can darken a major continent when they fly<BR>
overhead :)<BR>
<BR>
So let's look at production capabilities. I pulled some data from my sectors<BR>
database. There are 1520 worlds in the Imperium with Starport-A and TL 9+.<BR>
These are your base military shipyards. Now, of those 1234 are TL C+, which<BR>
is the mininum to build 100,000 ton dreadnoughts according to the High Guard<BR>
computer rules.<BR>
<BR>
But now we come to the question: how big does a world's population have to<BR>
be to create a reasonable amount of ship tonnage per year? I have handwaved<BR>
this to be 6+. This drops the number of yards to 634. We can further reduce<BR>
this by making population have to be 8+ for the real big ships of the IN;<BR>
this results in 357 potential worlds, as follows:<BR>
<BR>
TL        Count of Worlds<BR>
<BR>
C        40<BR>
D        47<BR>
E        94<BR>
F      155<BR>
G        48<BR>
<BR>
And of course, jump-4+ requires TL D+.<BR>
<BR>
So anyone with GT: Starports want to give us a reasonable estimate on the<BR>
amount of tonnage these planets could produce per year? This might reduce<BR>
the amount of huge cap ships in the Imperium, even if some of the member<BR>
worlds can pay for them...there simply aren't enough shipyards to produce<BR>
them.<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:38:50 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: What is "moshing"?<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/26/00 1:44 PM, xrp@sierratel.com issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Via electronic medium on 7/26/00 11:29 AM, Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com issued<BR>
> forth:<BR>
> <BR>
>> Er, what is "moshing"?<BR>
> Egaging in a frenzied chaotic circular "dance", usually in the "pit" in<BR>
> front of a stage at a heavy metal/punk/thrash concert.<BR>
<BR>
Engaging, rather.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2814<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd03.mx.aol.com (rly-zd03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.227]) by air-zd05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:41:24 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd03.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:40:28 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id RAA78910;<BR>
	Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:39:42 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:38:55 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id RAA78855<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:38:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:38:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007262138.RAA78855@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2814<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2815</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/26/00 5:57:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Wednesday, July 26 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2815<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Striker armor formula<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
Re: Strange UWPs, and Tech Level Advancement<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
re:  Population "Problems" <BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Looking for German RPG Shop: Fantasy En'Counte<BR>
>Camouflage?  <BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
re:  Space Docking<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
Re: Book 2 vs. Book 5<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:50:36 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
<BR>
VonRammen writes:<BR>
> I've been enjoying this thread a lot.<BR>
*snip*<BR>
> So let's look at production capabilities. I pulled some data from my<BR>
> sectors database. There are 1520 worlds in the Imperium with Starport-A<BR>
> and TL 9+.<BR>
*snip more*<BR>
For practical purposes, the military shipyards can be defined as 'port-A, pop-A, TL-F/G'.  There are 48 such worlds.  Assuming each such world has a population of 30 billion and produces Cr 150 in naval ships per person per year (1% of GWP), we get 216 trillion credits per year.  Tossing in lower population and lower tech worlds, we get around 300 trillion credits per year total (high-pop worlds are hugely dominant in the imperial economy).<BR>
<BR>
In GT, the cost/dT of warships is on the order of 0.5 MCr, so each such world produces on the order of 9 million dtons in warships per year.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 14:58:27 -0700<BR>
From: Thing <gduke@kendaco.telebyte.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
>Isn't grey normally associated with the navy?<BR>
<BR>
I thought that was only with the food.<BR>
<BR>
G.D.D.<BR>
ThingUnderTheStairs.<BR>
=====================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:17:40 EDT<BR>
From: Ludowick@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Striker armor formula<BR>
<BR>
Kaz wants to know:<BR>
<BR>
 >Does anyone have the formula that was used to create the Striker Armor<BR>
 >Table?<BR>
<BR>
Following stuff mostly clipped from the Missouri Archive.  For the full <BR>
story, <BR>
go here:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.mu.org/~joe/traveller/answers/answer2.html<BR>
<BR>
For plates up to one inch thick, Striker uses one formula, for thicker <BR>
plates it uses another.  The thin plate formula is (where T = thickness <BR>
of steel in cm, and A = Striker armor value):<BR>
<BR>
T = 0.25 * A   or   A = T / 0.25<BR>
<BR>
This table ends with A = 10 (T = 1").<BR>
<BR>
For armor over 1", Striker uses an octave binary progression (it doubles the <BR>
thickness of the armor for every 8 Striker armor values).  So 18 = 2", 26 = 4"<BR>
etc.<BR>
<BR>
The formula for such armor is:<BR>
<BR>
T = 2.5cm * 2 ^ ((A - 10) / 8)<BR>
<BR>
The disconnect at 1" is probably to account for small arms vs. personal armor.<BR>
The above are also, of course, the MT armor formulae.<BR>
<BR>
Ludowick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:50:34 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
>At 17:38 -0400 26/7/00, "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
>Charles Collin wrote:<BR>
> > No, no, no!  MOSHING in battledress, now that's a concept!  A very<BR>
> > painful, expensive and dangerous concept...  "Bar room brawl nothin', we<BR>
> > moshed in BD!" said the recently demoted Private Aliikesh from the<BR>
> > medi-tank. :-)<BR>
><BR>
>Er, what is "moshing"?<BR>
<BR>
Pete, sit down and have a 'nice cup of tea and a piece of cake' (TM)....<BR>
<BR>
Manic dancing in the 'pit' at the front of rock/metal concerts, often <BR>
combined with Stage diving into the crowd from the stage, speaker <BR>
stacks etc. In UK terms, last concert I went to with this was Skunk <BR>
Anansie. Travis and Marillion didn't have this ;-0<BR>
<BR>
BTW you at GenCon UK?<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 08:15:49 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Strange UWPs, and Tech Level Advancement<BR>
<BR>
> From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
> Subject: Re: Strange UWPs, and Tech Level Advancement<BR>
> ><BR>
> As for TL spread, well I could--as owner of Microsoft say--fly billions of<BR>
> dollars of industrial machinery over to Zimbabwe tomorrow and make their<BR>
> country higher tech, but why would I?  What would they give me in return?<BR>
> The problem is that you need infrastructure to make infrastructure, so to<BR>
> speak.  And even if I sent the stuff to them out the goodness of my heart,<BR>
> the desired result is far from certain.<BR>
<BR>
Just as a historical note, this theory of development was tried in the 50s,<BR>
60s and 70s, except with the World Bank etc acting as sugar daddies.<BR>
<BR>
It didnt work in a really big way.<BR>
<BR>
The important infrastructure appears to be the 'soft' stuff - social<BR>
structures, efficient credit arrangements, insurance, mass health care etc<BR>
etc. In short, all the things that took Europe a couple of hundred years to<BR>
sort out.<BR>
<BR>
There are examples of successful short cuts through socialisation and<BR>
planning (Russia/Soviet Union, North Korea 1950-1965 or so, South Korea,<BR>
Japan), but also a long list of failures (just about everywhere else I can<BR>
think of).<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
PS Anyone who is thinking about arguing about South Korea and Japan being on<BR>
the 'soialist' list, have a think about the role of MITI and the chaebols.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:28:47 +0100<BR>
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
Danny Moody <DMoody@bridge.com> writes<BR>
>> -----Original Message-----<BR>
>> From: Loren Wiseman [mailto:lkw@io.com]<BR>
>> -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. <BR>
><BR>
>Yes, yes, yes.  Especially if some of the figures shows people just doing their <BR>
>jobs (engineers with spanner and ears, ship's purser with clipboard, doctor with <BR>
>medpouch, etc) and not armoured up and carrying FGMPs.<BR>
<BR>
Hear hear! Though the armour and BFGs is fine for the Ground Forces<BR>
figures ;-).<BR>
<BR>
I'd particularly like to see (a) some sensibly-proportioned human female<BR>
figures and (b) at least one figure for each major race.<BR>
<BR>
>> -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, <BR>
><BR>
>Air/rafts, gravbikes, yes.  Anything bigger than a small automobile, prolly not.  <BR>
>Unless they were consistent in size with the Ground Zero Games' resin vehicles, <BR>
>that is.  Then they could be put to dual use.<BR>
<BR>
Hm, depends on cost and my financial situation at the time. I'd probably<BR>
skip these.<BR>
<BR>
>> -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
><BR>
>Tables, chairs, and generic ship's furniture would be nice, in metal or resin.  <BR>
>Not much is needed here, since a lot of it can be done with cardboard.<BR>
<BR>
Agreed.<BR>
<BR>
>> -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant <BR>
>> Lances, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
>> -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
<BR>
>> -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
>> "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
>> -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
>> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these <BR>
<BR>
No, to all of these.<BR>
<BR>
John<BR>
 <BR>
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom<BR>
IMTU tc+ tm+ tn t4(+) tg+ ru ge 3i+ jt au- st ls+ hi++ so- zh+ pi+ jd++<BR>
Traveller IS Forms, Gal2CC, etc: http://www.elvw.demon.co.uk/Traveller/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:17:03 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Population "Problems" <BR>
<BR>
>From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
>Subject: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
>for Newbies)<BR>
>A number of people have been expressing the opinion that<BR>
>population should be modified based on the "Terran-ness"<BR>
>of a world.  Let me just express the dissenting opinion.  <BR>
<BR>
I concur entirely with your well-stated dissent.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:19:01 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
<BR>
>It more properly should be called an "auto-chronometer" in<BR>
>that it is a high precision time piece but it also <BR>
>performs the neat trick of automaticaly determining the<BR>
>local time, amongst other useful data.<BR>
<BR>
kind of like my mobile phone -- as long as I'm in Sprint's<BR>
PCS network, it tells me the local time<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:22:11 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 21:41:34 -0400<BR>
>From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
<BR>
> In a place like Grant, I doubt the Interdiction force<BR>
>produces anything rather than assuming they make flint knives and bearskin<BR>
>rugs in their spare time. To me, this is quite different from TL 0, even<BR>
>taken as local production level.<BR>
<BR>
1st IGS survey rep:  "So, what's the Tech Level for this planet?"<BR>
2nd IGS rep:  "Well, they have a TL14 patrol cruiser, so I'd say 'E'."<BR>
1st:  "Yes, but they didn't *make* that on the planet, did they?<BR>
What's their actual manufacturing capability?"<BR>
2nd:  "Er... they don't really have one.  Oh, hold on, one of the crew<BR>
has a hobby.  She's a flint knapper;  she makes stone knives and<BR>
jewellery in her off-duty time."<BR>
1st:  "Stone tools?  Let's check the Book... OK, that's TL 0.  Mark it<BR>
down, and let's move on.  Alell's next on the list, isn't it?"<BR>
<BR>
That was 500 years ago, and thanks to Imperial bureaucratic lethargy<BR>
the UWP has never been changed since...<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:26:54 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Looking for German RPG Shop: Fantasy En'Counte<BR>
<BR>
Does anyone (Volker?) have an address/ URL for:<BR>
<BR>
Fantasy En'Counter - Hauptseite<BR>
Thier old one was http://www.mag-net.de/FANEN/index.html<BR>
<BR>
I think they were in Hamburg and they stocked the TAS Alien Encyclopedia.<BR>
<BR>
Cheers,<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:35:22 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: >Camouflage?  <BR>
<BR>
>From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
>>Camouflage?  For what world?<BR>
><BR>
>for what ever world you are on, obviously.<BR>
<BR>
Worlds are big. It's more what ever region of whatever<BR>
world you're on.  Camouflage for interstellar troops will<BR>
never be perfect, but you can and must narrow it down a<BR>
little.  ("Comrade, here is the new camouflage pattern for<BR>
the invasion of Planet Terra."  "But comrade, it's all<BR>
light brown and gray.  When I was on Terra, everything was<BR>
green and dark brown.  Fix it immediately.")<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:20:37 +0100<BR>
From: Stephen Bankhead <bankheas@bankhead.dnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
>Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
><BR>
>-- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
>skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
>and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All<BR>
>of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
><BR>
>-- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, etc.<BR>
>Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
>isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
><BR>
>-- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
>consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
>beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
All the above in 15MM, nothing in 25mm<BR>
<BR>
>-- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
>on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd<BR>
>have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
>starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
>the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
Good Idea!<BR>
<BR>
>-- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
>available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules, or<BR>
>Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
>the like are certainly doable).<BR>
<BR>
Pretty much covered by other companies, maybe a limited range of specials<BR>
like the Rampart?<BR>
<BR>
>-- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
>"Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
Is there money in this sort of thing, and if not what will you be<BR>
subsidising it with?<BR>
<BR>
>-- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
>costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
>anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
And the point is.....?<BR>
<BR>
I think a 15mm range would cover both adventures and Striker, 25mm is too<BR>
big and too expensive.<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:40:36 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Space Docking<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net><BR>
<BR>
Go get 'em, Tiger!<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
(That reminded me of the party at the beginning of Apollo<BR>
13 -- "and when the command module has docked with the<BR>
lunar module, just like this [puts end of beer bottle into<BR>
a glass], well, that's about the most beautiful feeling in<BR>
the world right there".)  <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:53:10 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
>I'm afraid I have to say that this is just plain silly.<BR>
>We're talking _battledress_ here, in other words high-tech<BR>
>_powered_ armour, not combat armour.I'd agree with skirts<BR>
>for combat armour, but not battledress, as it makes no<BR>
>sense.<BR>
>There is absolutely no requirement for 'cod-pieces' <BR>
>(battledress is _not_ skin-tight, and does not have to<BR>
>follow body contours, though I'm sure the people who put<BR>
>nipples on Batman's chest plate would disagree ) and there<BR>
>is also no need for hip mobility, as it's the suit that<BR>
>moves, not the person inside it.<BR>
<BR>
That doesn't comport with canon, and it is inconsistent<BR>
with at least my view on how the armor is directed to move,<BR>
which is by means of internal motion sensors.  As you move<BR>
your arm, for example, it contacts the sensors inside the<BR>
sleeve, which tell the armor arm to move in precisely the<BR>
same manner as your arm.  You are therefore fitting inside<BR>
the armor, your limbs in its limbs, etc.  Therefore the<BR>
hips have to be able to move like human hips.  <BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:01:58 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
I would buy the 25mm people - and some of the 1/1200 ships ( I tend to not<BR>
have really really really big stuff on the map for RPG') ;)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Loren<BR>
Wiseman<BR>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 8:26 AM<BR>
To: traveller@mpgn.com<BR>
Subject: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
More miniatures questions -- mostly brainstorming at this point, we still<BR>
haven't decided yes or no for Traveller stuff, but SJ Games will definitely<BR>
be doing Ogre, so the possibility exists of a Traveller line, and of a more<BR>
general SF line:<BR>
<BR>
Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
<BR>
- -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All<BR>
of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
- -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, etc.<BR>
Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
- -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
- -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd<BR>
have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
- -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules, or<BR>
Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
the like are certainly doable).<BR>
<BR>
- -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
"Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
- -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
Opinions are solicited.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Loren Wiseman<BR>
     Traveller Line Manager/Traveller Guru-in-Residence<BR>
     Editor, Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society<BR>
http://jtas.sjgames.com/<BR>
     SJ Games<BR>
     lkw@io.com http://www.io.com/~lkw/<BR>
     (512) 447-7866 VOX<BR>
     (512) 447-1144 FAX<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:38:54 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
    Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, & they<BR>
want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking at<BR>
Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page.  That<BR>
Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:44:23 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion writes:<BR>
>     Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
> something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, & they<BR>
> want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
> that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking at<BR>
> Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page. <BR>
> That Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
<BR>
Most of the Cthulhu mythos has never shown a great deal of interest in manipulating humans.  Just making them into gibbering madmen.<BR>
<BR>
Not that introducing Hivers and Star Spawn mightn't be interesting.<BR>
<BR>
"Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:47:35 EDT<BR>
From: KenRoney@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
<BR>
    The Imperium is the home of many cultures with varying population growth <BR>
rates.  Just to provide a little food for thought, on Earth there seems to be <BR>
a strong correlation between a nation's technology level (or arguably, its <BR>
wealth) and it's rate of population growth.  As people become more affluent <BR>
and eduacted, they seem to have less desire to produce numerous offspring.  <BR>
Many of the European countries are depopulating with negative growth rates at <BR>
present.  Absent immigration, the US population would be close to zero <BR>
growth.  <BR>
    The same effect is operating worldwide.  The Earth's population passed <BR>
six million last year, having doubled since 1960.  Current projections <BR>
indicate that the growth is slowing, with only a 50% increase expected in the <BR>
next fifty years, with trends indicating a peak of about 10 to 12 million by <BR>
2100 before a rapid drop kicks in.  That is of course, if current trends in <BR>
birth and death rates, life spans, etc follow current trends. The same <BR>
factors will no doubt work in the Imperium.  However, keep in mind that a mid <BR>
to hi tech world with a good size population base  needs only to change it's <BR>
attitude towards family, children, and other aspects relating to polulation <BR>
growth for a generation or two to achieve a quantum leap in population.  And <BR>
I won't even think of what you could do given artificial wombs cranking out <BR>
masses of clones, ala Cherryh's Cyteen.  Yikes.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:23:38<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
At 06:20 PM 7/26/2000 +0100, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>>-- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
>>costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
>>anyway . . .<BR>
><BR>
>And the point is.....?<BR>
<BR>
Some of us like to do costuming, and the can be used as props in the game.<BR>
<BR>
>I think a 15mm range would cover both adventures and Striker, 25mm is too<BR>
>big and too expensive.<BR>
<BR>
I have to disagree, since 15mm is far too small to allow detailed painting.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 17:34:17<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
At 01:55 PM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Isn't grey normally associated with the navy?<BR>
<BR>
On Earth, in the United States, yes.<BR>
<BR>
A lot of people don't know that the official color of the United States<BR>
Infantry is a light blue.  Or that the color of the Army's full-dress<BR>
uniform is blue.<BR>
<BR>
<GF author mode: ON><BR>
<BR>
The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made up of<BR>
thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units, high-level<BR>
command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be fairly neutral.  I<BR>
chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own dress uniforms, which can get<BR>
quite colorful.<BR>
<BR>
So a suit of BD set for "dress" will display the regimental colors.  For<BR>
example, the "Blacklegs" regiment (311th Rapid Interface Infantry, Unified<BR>
Army of Shumisdi) set their suit legs to match the black trousers of the<BR>
regimental dress.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
Embrace Fascism.    The uniforms look cool<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:47:46 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin wrote,<BR>
>The govt 1 type doesn't specifically say "interstellar" corporation, does<BR>
it?  I could certainly see a large monopolizing "Company" taking over a TL<BR>
4 world.  Especially if it's the company/guild/whatever that produces the<BR>
filter masks or other vital supplies...<<BR>
<BR>
And they continue to use TL 4 machinery? I don't see it.<BR>
<BR>
>Well, the TL as production level doesn't have to mean that they _do_<BR>
produce at that level, just that it's the best they _could_ do.  So the<BR>
prison has machine shops and what-not.  The best the prison world could<BR>
produce if it had to would be TL-6.  It obviously imports stuff to keep<BR>
the prison going. <<BR>
<BR>
While I can the rational for limiting them to TL 6 production for security<BR>
reasons, it loses strength when you see that it wrecks efforts at<BR>
rehabilitation training as well as ensuring you need to keep importing<BR>
material to keep a bunch of useless (not worth retraining) prisoners alive.<BR>
<BR>
>However, if you've got a world with 'magic tech' lying around, that's far<BR>
more important to mention.  <<BR>
<BR>
I disagree. I think standardized data with exceptions mentioned later is<BR>
more important.<BR>
<BR>
>And besides, you may have gotten used to your hothouse, slowly developing<BR>
your society and infrastructure to deal with it. <<BR>
<BR>
Not if your TL remains at 6. Then you just melt or dissolve along with<BR>
everything you have built.<BR>
<BR>
>:-).  Yes, well the humor in that is that they're taking the UWP as "all<BR>
the info available on a world", which clearly is not the case.  This is<BR>
akin to landing in northern Manitoba (geographical center of Canada),<BR>
looking around at the endless fields, and saying "Where are the 30 million<BR>
people?<<BR>
<BR>
Yes well, that's Canada. :-P<BR>
Still, the UPP should be direct rather than quirk based I think.<BR>
<BR>
>As for TL spread, well I could--as owner of Microsoft say--fly billions of<BR>
dollars of industrial machinery over to Zimbabwe tomorrow and make their<BR>
country higher tech, but why would I?  <<BR>
<BR>
Probably not. But how long have 99% of the Imperial worlds in the Spinward<BR>
Marches been part of the Imperium? Even the Vilani hardcores on Vanejen are<BR>
being exceptionally resistant if they are still only TL 5 since the 3FW. As<BR>
well, simply importing 1,000,000 new colonists with a higher TL should do<BR>
for most of the small Pop places. The new market created would more than<BR>
cover the costs for Megacorps that must be thinking in terms of quarters of<BR>
centuries rather than years.<BR>
<BR>
Steven Bonneville wrote,<BR>
>Right, but the point is that other aliens may also exist which would be<BR>
happy on the "normal" sized worlds with "significantly different" UWPs.<<BR>
and,<BR>
>That's GT.  Many worlds may be inhabited by humans, sure, but many may be<BR>
inhabited by "minor races" as well.  The UWP doesn't distinguish.<<BR>
<BR>
Well, at the risk of giving Loren a heart attack over accepting something he<BR>
is in charge of as canon in CT, the simple fact is there is no other source<BR>
to use  that can be remotely regarded as such. Therefore I default to GT and<BR>
see no such differentiation made.<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen wrote,<BR>
>It may be that Rich worlds have service economies that don't provide for<BR>
unskilled labor. They may also have restrictive "immigration" or "residency"<BR>
laws, or even just high property values.<BR>
<BR>
"Hellholes" on the other hand, may have many more opportunities for<BR>
low-skilled people willing to work hard. In which case, much of the<BR>
population of the hellholes are people working hard so that they can retire<BR>
to a rich world :)<<BR>
<BR>
Those Rich world still need maid service. Given the normal ratio for the<BR>
extraordinarily wealthy I can see most Rich hitting their Pop max of 8 quite<BR>
quickly.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch wrote,<BR>
>Just as a historical note, this theory of development was tried in the 50s,<BR>
60s and 70s, except with the World Bank etc acting as sugar daddies.<BR>
<BR>
It didnt work in a really big way.<<BR>
<BR>
Agreed. But again, at that point I'd just start a new colony. :)<BR>
<BR>
Stephen Tempest wrote,<BR>
>That was 500 years ago, and thanks to Imperial bureaucratic lethargy<BR>
the UWP has never been changed since...<<BR>
<BR>
Now on that basis I can accept the base data. I would just make a request<BR>
for a more modern update after half a millennium and suggest some of what<BR>
we've been going over as a place to start. Especially with some of those Pop<BR>
A Atmosphere C worlds. "Obviously" the Survey team landed in the local<BR>
equivalent of Hong Kong and simply extrapolated for the whole world rather<BR>
than go wandering across the landscape to confirm the population density<BR>
worldwide.<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:54:44 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Book 2 vs. Book 5<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen wrote,<BR>
>In the spirit of the "way to big ship" thread, I was inspired to pick up<BR>
High Guard and try to design the Book 2 ships using the HG rules. (I've seen<BR>
HG stats for Bk. 2 ships, but I don't know if anyone has ever tried to<BR>
re-engineer them.)<BR>
<BR>
So far, the results have worked out pretty well, so long as I use the 20%<BR>
class discount on the price of the ships. <<BR>
<BR>
And you designed them all at TL 15 I take it?<BR>
Otherwise almost none of those designs are viable because of power plant<BR>
size.<BR>
Also I recall most of them coming in seriously over cost when I did the<BR>
same. While they all save heavily on fuel space under 1000 tons, they pay<BR>
for it in increased maneuver drive space and over pay for it in cost for<BR>
same.<BR>
But I'd like to see your conversion figures. Maybe I glitched somewhere.<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2815<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za05.mx.aol.com (rly-za05.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.101]) by air-za04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:57:58 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:57:32 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id UAA86550;<BR>
	Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:57:28 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:57:18 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id UAA86515<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:57:18 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:57:18 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007270057.UAA86515@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2815<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2816</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/26/00 7:19:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Wednesday, July 26 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2816<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Wanted: URL for IMperial Cultural Information<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
re:  Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Good hobbies to ban on starships<BR>
25mm Traveller Figures<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:58:53 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Legate Legion wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>     Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
> something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, & they<BR>
> want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
> that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking at<BR>
> Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page.  That<BR>
> Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
<BR>
I salute you, sir, for having the originality to compare the Hivers to<BR>
something _other_ than Larry Niven's Puppeteers (which comparison we've<BR>
all heard before).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:07:57 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Loren Wiseman wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
> skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
> and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All<BR>
> of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
I definitely would.<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, etc.<BR>
> Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
> isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
Possibly, but for military vehicles I'd prefer the 1/300 figures below.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
> consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
> beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
I can't see myself buying a miniature chair or bed.  Less generic items,<BR>
maybe.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
> on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd<BR>
> have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
> starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
> the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
Yes!<BR>
<BR>
> -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
> available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules, or<BR>
> Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
> the like are certainly doable).<BR>
<BR>
Yes.  I would love some minis for Striker I or II.<BR>
<BR>
> -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
> "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
I'd rather put crews together myself from the above figures.  More room<BR>
for creativity and all that.<BR>
 <BR>
> -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
> anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
No.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:07:57 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Loren Wiseman wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
> skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
> and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All<BR>
> of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
I definitely would.<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, etc.<BR>
> Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
> isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
Possibly, but for military vehicles I'd prefer the 1/300 figures below.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
> consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
> beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
I can't see myself buying a miniature chair or bed.  Less generic items,<BR>
maybe.<BR>
<BR>
> -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
> on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd<BR>
> have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
> starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
> the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
Yes!<BR>
<BR>
> -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
> available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules, or<BR>
> Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
> the like are certainly doable).<BR>
<BR>
Yes.  I would love some minis for Striker I or II.<BR>
<BR>
> -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
> "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
I'd rather put crews together myself from the above figures.  More room<BR>
for creativity and all that.<BR>
 <BR>
> -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
> anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
No.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:09:30 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Wanted: URL for IMperial Cultural Information<BR>
<BR>
I'm finishing up my research paper for sociology class on the problems<BR>
of maintaining cultural unity in the 3I, and I need at least one<BR>
Internet source for "works cited."<BR>
<BR>
Can anyone suggest any good Web sites?<BR>
<BR>
(BTW, if Jeff Zeitlin is willing, I'd like to have him post my paper on<BR>
Freelance Traveller when he gets a chance to update.)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:13:27 EDT<BR>
From: Irishdoh@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion writes:<BR>
>     Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
> something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, & they<BR>
> want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
> that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking at<BR>
> Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page. <BR>
> That Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
You didn't know?!?!?!???  You fool, now you've made them aware that we know!  But, you can rectify the situation by repeating the following word three times.  Hast.......<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:18:40 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
>From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com><BR>
<BR>
>Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
<BR>
>- -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs,<BR>
>etc. and for use in skirmish actions on deck plans and the<BR>
>like. Soldiers, civilians, merchant and navy ship's crew,<BR>
>terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All <BR>
>of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
Yes!!<BR>
<BR>
>- -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft,<BR>
>Intrepid, Antrim, etc. Resin, perhaps with white metal<BR>
>detail parts, and limited to stuff that isn't too large --<BR>
>25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
Yes!  Don't worry about the big stuff.  Someday I'll have<BR>
space to resume my old hobby of building spaceships from<BR>
found objects.  <BR>
<BR>
>- -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel<BR>
>couches, control consoles, hatches, cargo containers,<BR>
>laser mining drills, chairs, tables, beds, barstools,<BR>
crew->served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
Crew-served weapons, yes, but none of the other stuff is of<BR>
interest to me.  See my comments to the previous item.<BR>
<BR>
>- -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules,<BR>
>Brilliant Lances, and so on. Tentative scale for these<BR>
>would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd have to go<BR>
>1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant<BR>
>scale in starships -- either you end up with a<BR>
football->sized Tigress or Ramparts the size of rice<BR>
grains.)<BR>
<BR>
Yes!  The TNE ships were great, and I look forward to more<BR>
ships, especially if they will only be in two scales (or<BR>
even three -- my only peeve about the TNE ships is that<BR>
each one seemed to be on a unique scale).  <BR>
<BR>
>- -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but<BR>
>with infantry available, intended for use with rules such<BR>
>as David Pulver's AoD rules, or Striker/Striker II. This<BR>
>could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
>the like are certainly doable). <BR>
<BR>
Probably.  There is a lot of good 1/300 stuff out there<BR>
(we're about to play Striker this weekend with mostly GHQ<BR>
miniatures).  Miniatures for which Striker statistics exist<BR>
will be of much greater appeal to me (and that's another<BR>
potential publication -- Striker designs), as I rarely<BR>
design anything anymore.  Maybe you could work out a deal<BR>
with The Adjutant, which published a number of Striker<BR>
designs.  His artwork was not the best, but was not the<BR>
worst, either.  I don't know how sound his designs were,<BR>
but some will be tested this weekend.<BR>
<BR>
>- -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps<BR>
>something like "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader<BR>
>Crew"<BR>
<BR>
No.<BR>
<BR>
>- -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and<BR>
>plated, for use on costumes and the like. We had to work<BR>
>out designs for these for use with GF anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
Yes! and don't forget some Imperial sunbursts, either just<BR>
white metal or plated in service colors -- and I still want<BR>
those embroidered patches!<BR>
<BR>
>Opinions are solicited.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for soliciting our opinions?<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:23:41 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
<BR>
>>     Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
>> something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, &<BR>
they<BR>
>> want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
>> that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking<BR>
at<BR>
>> Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page.<BR>
That<BR>
>> Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
><BR>
>I salute you, sir, for having the originality to compare the Hivers to<BR>
>something _other_ than Larry Niven's Puppeteers (which comparison we've<BR>
>all heard before).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    The Person's Puppeteers have 2 "heads", the Hivers have no heads.  What<BR>
is the problem there?  I mean they look more like something from Cthulu than<BR>
from Known Space.<BR>
    Btw, do you think that the Hivers were an atempt by Loren & Marc to,<BR>
someday in the future, be able to sub-title Traveller, Traveller:  Cthulu in<BR>
Space?<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:25:16 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
<BR>
>>     Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
>> something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, &<BR>
they<BR>
>> want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
>> that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking<BR>
at<BR>
>> Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page.<BR>
>> That Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
><BR>
>Most of the Cthulhu mythos has never shown a great deal of interest in<BR>
manipulating humans.  Just making them into gibbering madmen.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    Which is a form of manipulation in & of itself.  Of course Hivers could<BR>
be manipulating humans into becoming gibbering madmen.  Something to think<BR>
about as we wipe them out.<BR>
<BR>
>Not that introducing Hivers and Star Spawn mightn't be interesting.<BR>
><BR>
>"Ph-nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!"<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    I take it you are one of these gibbering madmen?<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:31:45 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
Gregory Carl Kettler wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Legate Legion wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >     Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
> > something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, & they<BR>
> > want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
> > that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking at<BR>
> > Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page.  That<BR>
> > Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
> <BR>
> I salute you, sir, for having the originality to compare the Hivers to<BR>
> something _other_ than Larry Niven's Puppeteers (which comparison we've<BR>
> all heard before).<BR>
<BR>
Personally, I enjoyed participating in the "Hiver Kung-Fu Theatre"<BR>
thread a couple of months ago (complete with out-of-synch gesturing)....<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:35:05 -0700<BR>
From: Rodney Basler <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
Subject: Good hobbies to ban on starships<BR>
<BR>
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand<BR>
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF76A.E3E0AE50<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
<BR>
>From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
>Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
><BR>
<snip><BR>
>1st IGS survey rep:  "So, what's the Tech Level for this planet?"<BR>
>2nd IGS rep:  "Well, they have a TL14 patrol cruiser, so I'd say 'E'."<BR>
>1st:  "Yes, but they didn't *make* that on the planet, did they?<BR>
>What's their actual manufacturing capability?"<BR>
>2nd:  "Er... they don't really have one.  Oh, hold on, one of the crew<BR>
>has a hobby.  She's a flint knapper;  she makes stone knives and<BR>
>jewellery in her off-duty time."<BR>
>1st:  "Stone tools?  Let's check the Book... OK, that's TL 0.  Mark it<BR>
>down, and let's move on.  Alell's next on the list, isn't it?"<BR>
<BR>
	Ick...I've seen flint knapping actually done in an archaeology class<BR>
- - you end up with a large amount of waste (PILES of the stuff) that consists<BR>
of various-sized flakes of razor-sharp glass.  I'd hate to be in her<BR>
stateroom if the grav ever failed before she vacuumed up her latest project.<BR>
<BR>
	Rod Basler, COFIT<BR>
- ----------------------------------------------<BR>
Disclaimer - I'm at work - don't blame them for my nutty opinions, OK?<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF76A.E3E0AE50<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<HEAD><BR>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =<BR>
charset=3Diso-8859-1"><BR>
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =<BR>
5.5.2651.75"><BR>
<TITLE>Good hobbies to ban on starships</TITLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
&gt;From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen =<BR>
Tempest)<BR>
<BR>
&gt;Subject: Re: Population &quot;Problems&quot; = (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
&gt;<BR>
&lt;snip&gt;<BR>
&gt;1st IGS survey rep:&nbsp; &quot;So, what's the =Tech Level for this planet?&quot;<BR>
&gt;2nd IGS rep:&nbsp; &quot;Well, they have a TL14 =patrol cruiser, so I'd say 'E'.&quot;<BR>
&gt;1st:&nbsp; &quot;Yes, but they didn't *make* =that on the planet, did they?<BR>
&gt;What's their actual manufacturing =capability?&quot;<BR>
&gt;2nd:&nbsp; &quot;Er... they don't really have =one.&nbsp; Oh, hold on, one of the crew<BR>
&gt;has a hobby.&nbsp; She's a flint knapper;&nbsp; =she makes stone knives and<BR>
&gt;jewellery in her off-duty time.&quot;<BR>
&gt;1st:&nbsp; &quot;Stone tools?&nbsp; Let's check =the Book... OK, that's TL 0.&nbsp; Mark it<BR>
&gt;down, and let's move on.&nbsp; Alell's next on = the list, isn't it?&quot;<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Ick...I've =seen flint knapping actually done in an archaeology class - you end up = with a large amount of waste (PILES of the stuff) that consists of = various-sized flakes of razor-sharp glass.&nbsp; I'd hate to be in her =stateroom if the grav ever failed before she vacuumed up her latest =project.<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Rod =Basler, COFIT<BR>
----------------------------------------------<BR>
Disclaimer - I'm at work - don't blame them for my =nutty opinions, OK?<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF76A.E3E0AE50--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:52:01 -0400<BR>
From: peersce@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: 25mm Traveller Figures<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0128_01BFF74B.BA737580<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
I would buy the 25mm figures for Traveller because the larger size could =<BR>
show more detail, be easier to custom detail paint, and I could use 25mm =<BR>
figures from other games with them.  The 25mm vehicles could be made of =<BR>
plastic to reduce cost.  After all, a plastic 25mm Air/Raft or G-carrier =<BR>
can't cost that much more or be that much bigger than a 1/72 scale =<BR>
plastic model.  I'd especially like to see the Major Races represented =<BR>
in figures: A boxed set of Aslan marines or assassins, SolSec commandos, =<BR>
Imperial Marines, Zhodani Nobles, Vargr Corsair Marines.  It would add =<BR>
alot of visual flavor to a gaming session, and some well sculpted =<BR>
figures with some attractive packaging could draw new players towards =<BR>
trying Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, =<BR>
merchant<BR>
and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, =<BR>
All<BR>
of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
- - -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, =<BR>
etc.<BR>
Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0128_01BFF74B.BA737580<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><BR>
<HEAD><BR>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =<BR>
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><BR>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR><BR>
<STYLE></STYLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<DIV>I would buy the 25mm figures for =<BR>
Traveller because=20<BR>
the larger size could show more detail, be easier to custom detail =<BR>
paint, and I=20<BR>
could use 25mm figures from other games with them.&nbsp; The 25mm =<BR>
vehicles could=20<BR>
be made of plastic to reduce cost.&nbsp; After all, a plastic 25mm =<BR>
Air/Raft or=20<BR>
G-carrier can't cost that much more or be that much bigger than a 1/72 =<BR>
scale=20<BR>
plastic model.&nbsp; I'd especially like to see the Major Races =<BR>
represented in=20<BR>
figures: A boxed set of Aslan marines or assassins, SolSec commandos, =<BR>
Imperial=20<BR>
Marines, Zhodani Nobles, Vargr Corsair Marines.&nbsp; It would add alot =<BR>
of=20<BR>
visual flavor to a gaming session, and some well sculpted figures with =<BR>
some=20<BR>
attractive packaging could draw new players towards trying=20<BR>
Traveller.</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>25mm "adventurer" type figures -- =<BR>
suitable for PCs,=20<BR>
etc. and for use in<BR>
skirmish actions on deck plans and the =like.Soldiers,=20civilians, merchant<BR>
and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, =pirates,=20low-tech savages, All<BR>
of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
- =- -- 25mm=20vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, =etc.<BR>
Resin,=20perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff =that<BR>
isn't too=20large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
</DIV><BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0128_01BFF74B.BA737580--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 18:58:06 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
>From: Bob Kovalchick <Kovalchick@wbgh.com><BR>
<BR>
>Years back I had both the Grenadier 25mm and the Martian<BR>
>Metals 15mm (still<BR>
<BR>
I was just looking at an old JTAS and saw a Martian Metals<BR>
advertisement that said "Reinforcements have arrived,"<BR>
superimposed on an extreme close up of a metal grav tank. <BR>
I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
actually produced?  <BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:00:44 -0400<BR>
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com><BR>
Subject: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
I just read the article in the latest SJGames JTAS issue and it strikes me<BR>
that while canon talks about balkanized worlds I don't recall any mention of<BR>
balkanized systems, a situation I consider much more likely. As a matter of<BR>
fact it seems to me that interplanetary matters are very much ignored by<BR>
Traveller. Systems are named after the main world, where the major starport<BR>
is. The PC's, if they have their own ship, typically travel strait there<BR>
from the jump point, and strait to the jump point when they leave. Gas<BR>
giants are refuel points and pirates lurk in the system's dark corners. It's<BR>
no wonder the PC's don't get around to the rest of the systems.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Terry C<BR>
All that is Gold does not glitter<BR>
Not all who travel are lost<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:11:42 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
on 7/26/00 4:19 PM, Glenn Goffin at gmgoffin@yahoo.com wrote:<BR>
>> It more properly should be called an "auto-chronometer" in<BR>
>> that it is a high precision time piece but it also<BR>
>> performs the neat trick of automaticaly determining the<BR>
>> local time, amongst other useful data.<BR>
> <BR>
> kind of like my mobile phone -- as long as I'm in Sprint's<BR>
> PCS network, it tells me the local time<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
If it's a CDMA digital phone, it should work in any CDMA network.  The GPS<BR>
time gets passed to the phone as part of the CDMA data encryption scheme.<BR>
<BR>
Tod "who left Qualcomm before the stock splits and is still kicking himself"<BR>
Glenn<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:16:47 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: AuricTech Shipyards <aurictech@esweeet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
<BR>
As I was catching up on two weeks of TML digests, I saw the following post:<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 13:48:29 -0700<BR>
>From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
>Subject: High TL Planets (was RE: TML landgrab: Esalin)<BR>
><BR>
>Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> I bet they *import* as much TL16 (or even *17*) tech as they can from<BR>
>> the Darrians, and anyplace else they can. Even if the source is<BR>
>> *sectors* away. I seem to recall the pre-Rebellion CT/MT Imperium<BR>
>> having a few TL 16 worlds, and there being a TL 17 *somewhere*.<BR>
><BR>
>According to the statistical summary at<BR>
>http://maps.grandsurvey.com/imperial_summary.html, there are actually 79<BR>
>planets at TL G and 1 planet at TL H in the 3I! Where are these planets?<BR>
>Have they been developed? What about the TL G planet? Where is this guy? I<BR>
>always assumed that GDW handwaved Darrian into "mostly harmless" status to<BR>
>avoid making it the center of too much attention. What about these others?<BR>
><BR>
>Wow. More checking at http://maps.grandsurvey.com/top_summary.html shows<BR>
>that there are 93 TL G and 2 TL H planets in charted space. It looks like<BR>
>there may be some seriously mysterious technology at the Secrets of the<BR>
>Ancients resort and casino.<BR>
><BR>
>The possible availability of extremely high TL stuff is something which I<BR>
>have never really considered. If a world rates TL H, it probably has some<BR>
>industries where it is actually TL I or higher. These extreme TL planets may<BR>
>be the source of many interesting gadgets. I am guessing that the<BR>
>intelligence agencies of the big interstellar empires are also big consumers<BR>
>of this technology. This advanced technology may also be so important to the<BR>
>interstellar governments that these advanced TL places are carefully<BR>
>protected and guarded.<BR>
><BR>
>Imagine the ships that the shipyards at these planets can produce. Maybe the<BR>
>TMLer formerly known as BlackICE can show us?<BR>
><BR>
C'est moi!<BR>
<BR>
My Web site includes a TL-18 design using FF&S2.  If you like, I can post it to the TML.<BR>
<BR>
One observation:  antimatter is _good_! ;-)<BR>
<BR>
==<BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/colverber/travler.html<BR>
<BR>
_____________________________________________________________<BR>
Free eSweeet Mail - http://www.esweeet.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:18:53 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Mike Demetro" <punkabilly@sprint.ca><BR>
<BR>
>What really annoys me about RPG miniatures that never<BR>
>happens much with toy soldiers is that the 25mm scale<BR>
>means they fit a sculpture into an inch square. It doesn't<BR>
>mean they made any effort to make the thing to scale with<BR>
>the real thing. <BR>
<BR>
I rather agree with this comment, although it doesn't stop<BR>
me from buying and using 25mm figures.  I would prefer to<BR>
see what are called 25mm figures referred to instead as<BR>
1:60 scale or whatever they are -- and that they all be the<BR>
same scale.<BR>
<BR>
>I would like to see 1:72scale plastic miniatures like ESCI<BR>
>or Airfix make and I would like them to have 1" around<BR>
>bases and be to scale rather than this 25mm nonsense. <BR>
>I would like them to come in packets so I could get a box<BR>
>for several dollars instead of paying a buck or two apiece<BR>
>for a pewter sculpture that lacks detail and isn't scaled<BR>
>well.  <BR>
<BR>
Me too!!  I have many boxes of plastic figures that have<BR>
been pressed into service in Traveller campaigns.  They<BR>
sometimes work quite well (those round canteens on Afrika<BR>
Korps troops can be connected by a bit of embroidery thread<BR>
to the silver-painted rifle to make fairly convincing laser<BR>
rifles, e.g., but it's quite a pain).  Of course, they<BR>
don't make any combat armor/battle dress/combat environment<BR>
suit figures.  <BR>
<BR>
ESCI/Ertl even did a very good 1:72 scale modern AFV series<BR>
(mine have seen a lot of action in the Imperium).  Why<BR>
couldn't something like those be done for Traveller<BR>
vehicles?  I don't know what your profit situation will<BR>
look like, but as a consumer I would prefer to spend my<BR>
finite dollars on more plastic figures and vehicles rather<BR>
than on more metal figures and vehicles, as long as detail<BR>
and quality were the same.  (The detail, consistency, and<BR>
realism of Airfix, ESCI/Ertl, and Revell 1:72 plastic<BR>
figures meet or exceed anything produced by Ral Partha,<BR>
Games Workshop, GHQ, or any other metal manufacturer I<BR>
know.)<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (rly-yh01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.33]) by air-yh03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:19:46 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:19:08 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA89760;<BR>
	Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:19:06 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:18:56 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA89714<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:18:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:18:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007270218.WAA89714@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2817</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/26/00 9:25:22 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2817<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
Re: Book 2 vs. Book 5<BR>
Re: Readercon (Was RE: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe))<BR>
re:  Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
TL-16 Depots (Catching Up)<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
Re: Scales<BR>
Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
Re: Plastic vs metal<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:23:03 -0700<BR>
From: James DeBenedetti <jdredd@ns.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
>How many of you would buy:<BR>
<BR>
[deleted: a bunch of figure scales]<BR>
<BR>
I'd go with characters, troops, and vehicles in 25mm.  15mm might work<BR>
across the line if you want to focus on a mass combat game, but stick with<BR>
a consistent 25mm if adventurers are your focus.  6mm is just too small to<BR>
interest me anymore.<BR>
<BR>
To echo the others, I'd really like more starships, but only if they're in<BR>
a consistent scale.  I wouldn't really be interested in furniture,<BR>
insignia, or 54mm figures.<BR>
<BR>
James DeBenedetti<BR>
jdredd@ns.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:23:21 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
Beating a dead horse to a worthless pulp...<BR>
:-P<BR>
I was about to suggest that just such a thing would be more likely in some<BR>
of those Hi Pop systems than assuming everyone is squeezing one tiny<BR>
rockball. Why not consider them the full systems population with the first<BR>
three UPP digits representing the largest rockball present?<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:25:18 +1000<BR>
From: Phill Webb <pwebbtrav@yarranet.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
<BR>
KenRoney@aol.com wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> The Earth's population passed six million last year, having doubled<BR>
> since 1960.<BR>
<BR>
I think you mean billion both here and throughout the post, otherwise<BR>
half the world lives here in Melbourne, Australia.<BR>
<BR>
Phill<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:19:58 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Book 2 vs. Book 5<BR>
<BR>
At 09:54 PM 7/26/00, you wrote:<BR>
>And you designed them all at TL 15 I take it?<BR>
>Otherwise almost none of those designs are viable because of power plant<BR>
>size.<BR>
>Also I recall most of them coming in seriously over cost when I did the<BR>
>same. While they all save heavily on fuel space under 1000 tons, they pay<BR>
>for it in increased maneuver drive space and over pay for it in cost for<BR>
>same.<BR>
>But I'd like to see your conversion figures. Maybe I glitched somewhere.<BR>
><BR>
>Sam<BR>
<BR>
         This has been my experience as well when attempting TL9/10 <BR>
variants of the Book2 ships for my TNEC game.  I had to re-write the <BR>
economics rules somewhat to allow for the lower base-line TL of my game or <BR>
stellar trade was impossible.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:51:18 -0400<BR>
From: Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Readercon (Was RE: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe))<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 03:20:17 -0400<BR>
> From: Glenn Grant <neo@total.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: C Not So Absolute After All (Maybe)<BR>
> <BR>
> I don't suppose anyone on this list was at Readercon?  If not you<BR>
> missed a really great convention.  Michael Moorcock was GOH.  Lots of<BR>
> cool people there, like Chip Delany, Gene Wolfe, John Kessel, James<BR>
> Morrow, and lots lots more.  And you haven't lived until you've<BR>
> attended the Kirk Poland Memorial Bad Science Fiction and Fantasy<BR>
> Prose Competition -- asphyxiatingly hilarious.<BR>
> <BR>
> Best,<BR>
> <BR>
> Glenn<BR>
> - --<BR>
<BR>
	I was there, and as part of the con committee. I kept trying to track<BR>
you down, but kept getting sucked into running other things. Sorry to<BR>
have missed you. Kirk Poland was very good. <BR>
	Come next year when the GOH is Michael Swanwick and David Hartwell. <BR>
<BR>
	http://www.readercon.org<BR>
- -- <BR>
    Thomas Jones-Low<BR>
    tjoneslo@together.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:32:01 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
<BR>
>    Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the<BR>
>Hivers look like something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean<BR>
>they are totaly non-human, & they want to manipulate<BR>
>humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
>that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when<BR>
>I was looking at Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis<BR>
>page, then his Horror Minis page.  That Cthulu & the<BR>
>Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
<BR>
You don't sound paranoid; you _are_ paranoid.  You really<BR>
need some professional help, and I know who can give it to<BR>
you.  Just look into the light -- thank you -- and follow<BR>
me.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:49:42 +1000<BR>
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Bob Kovalchick <Kovalchick@wbgh.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 4:00:am<BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Years back I had both the Grenadier 25mm and the Martian Metals 15mm<BR>
(still<BR>
> do actually) and I always preferred the 15mm. Yes, my eyes were better<BR>
then,<BR>
> but they always seemed more usable with deckplans, etc. With the Martian<BR>
> Metals line of Traveller figures, you were pretty much set. Adventurers,<BR>
> plus duplicate packs of Zho soldiers and Ruffians, and you had about all<BR>
you<BR>
> need.<BR>
<BR>
I'd prefer the 15's and have the boxed sets of those myself.  They were<BR>
detailed enough and painted up just fine!  Pity they weren't mooted or I'd<BR>
have jumped up and down saying "Yes!  I'll buy!!"<BR>
<BR>
In Oz, I'd get say 20 15's for about $20 (local) and only 3-4 25's for<BR>
around $18... so the economy and storage-space saving isn't going to be<BR>
there for me.  I'd have to say I wouldn't get them.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Furniture? I think most would say, "Sure I'd buy 25mm furniture cast in<BR>
> metal.", but I doubt many would REALLY buy it. Leave that stuff to the<BR>
> deckplans and your imagination. (Of course, a friend of mine used to make<BR>
> little wooden tables and stuff - interesting and attractive, but too much<BR>
> and never enough...)<BR>
<BR>
I used to use whatever worked... even plastaciene.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Final thoughts - I would definitely like to see some minis, but I'll<BR>
> probably only buy 15mm.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah...<BR>
<BR>
- -- The Roc<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:46:00 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
> <BR>
> >    Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the<BR>
> >Hivers look like something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean<BR>
> >they are totaly non-human, & they want to manipulate<BR>
> >humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
> >that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when<BR>
> >I was looking at Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis<BR>
> >page, then his Horror Minis page.  That Cthulu & the<BR>
> >Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
> <BR>
> You don't sound paranoid; you _are_ paranoid.  You really<BR>
> need some professional help, and I know who can give it to<BR>
> you.  Just look into the light -- thank you -- and follow<BR>
> me.<BR>
<BR>
Do you mean _this_ light:<BR>
<BR>
(*)  <<red flash>><BR>
 ^<BR>
/ \<BR>
| |<BR>
| |<BR>
___<BR>
| |<BR>
| |<BR>
| |<BR>
| |<BR>
| |<BR>
|_|<BR>
  <BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:45:25 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
>From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
>What Grenadier did was great. I have boxed sets of<BR>
>marines and adventurers, and I love them. Wish I had the<BR>
>Aliens.<BR>
<BR>
I have lots of Grenadier Traveller aliens, but no longer<BR>
have the boxes.  What would a set be worth to you?  Where<BR>
are you located (I'm in the San Francisco area, so it might<BR>
be convenient to meet and let you pick and choose)?  <BR>
<BR>
Off the top of my head, I could part with:<BR>
2 Vargr (different poses)<BR>
2 Aslan (different poses)<BR>
1 Hiver<BR>
2 Virushi (I don't know if they're in different poses, but<BR>
I have a lot of them)<BR>
2 K'kree (I think they're in different poses)<BR>
<BR>
I may have some extra Ael Yael.  I don't want to part with<BR>
any Droyne (don't tell my players).  All are unpainted in<BR>
excellent condition.  <BR>
<BR>
Your painting and photography are superb, by the way.  I've<BR>
visited your site before and enjoyed it a great deal.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get Yahoo! Mail - Free email you can access from anywhere!<BR>
http://mail.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:07:20 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: AuricTech Shipyards <aurictech@esweeet.com><BR>
Subject: TL-16 Depots (Catching Up)<BR>
<BR>
Another item from my attempt to catch up on TML digests:<BR>
><BR>
>Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 11:58:42 GMT<BR>
>From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
>Subject: RE: High TL Planets<BR>
><BR>
>>Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 20:08:17 +0100<BR>
>>From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
>>Subject: RE: High TL Planets<BR>
>><BR>
>[me]<BR>
>>> > Persnally I'm a bit doubtful about these TL16 Depot facilities -<BR>
>>> > shouldn't that imply a TL 16 Imperial Navy?<BR>
><BR>
>>There's also the issue of spare parts availability in  the  field<BR>
>>(for both general wear-and-tear and battle damage repairs).  A TL<BR>
>>16 fleet will have a spare parts supply line stretching  all  the<BR>
>>way back to the nearest friendly TL 16 world.  Very  long  supply<BR>
>>lines are not good tactically.<BR>
>><BR>
>That's my point.  The idea of a Depot system is that it's crammed full<BR>
>of repair yards and factories producing spare parts for the Imperial<BR>
>Navy.  If a Depot is TL16, then presumably all the factories there are<BR>
>producing TL16 equipment.  Why bother, when the Navy only uses TL15<BR>
>parts?<BR>
><BR>
>Or are they storing the TL16 equipment they make, ready for when the<BR>
>Emperor declares that the Navy is ready to move up a tech level?<BR>
<BR>
Alternately, they may simply be using TL-16 facilities to produce TL-15 parts more efficiently.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
==<BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/colverber/travler.html<BR>
<BR>
_____________________________________________________________<BR>
Free eSweeet Mail - http://www.esweeet.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:18:38 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
no but chameleon surface clothing would probably sell real well among the<BR>
rave scene...<BR>
<BR>
Other Rob<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Frank G. Pitt writes:<BR>
><BR>
> > And troops going to a disco or rave party would hook up the suit to a<BR>
> > visualizer like those you get with WinAmp.<BR>
><BR>
> Hm...disco in battledress.  Now that's a charming concept.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 04:19:33 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
I would buy them.......all of them. hehehehe.<BR>
Can't wait to learn how to paint.<BR>
<BR>
Michael<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com><BR>
To: <traveller@mpgn.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 4:26 PM<BR>
Subject: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> More miniatures questions -- mostly brainstorming at this point, we still<BR>
> haven't decided yes or no for Traveller stuff, but SJ Games will<BR>
definitely<BR>
> be doing Ogre, so the possibility exists of a Traveller line, and of a<BR>
more<BR>
> general SF line:<BR>
><BR>
> Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
><BR>
> -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
> skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
> and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages,<BR>
All<BR>
> of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
><BR>
> -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim,<BR>
etc.<BR>
> Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
> isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
><BR>
> -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
> consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
> beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
><BR>
> -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
> on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships<BR>
we'd<BR>
> have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
> starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
> the size of rice grains.)<BR>
><BR>
> -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
> available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules,<BR>
or<BR>
> Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
> the like are certainly doable).<BR>
><BR>
> -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
> "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
><BR>
> -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with<BR>
GF<BR>
> anyway . . .<BR>
><BR>
> Opinions are solicited.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Loren Wiseman<BR>
>      Traveller Line Manager/Traveller Guru-in-Residence<BR>
>      Editor, Journal of the Travellers' Aid Society<BR>
http://jtas.sjgames.com/<BR>
>      SJ Games<BR>
>      lkw@io.com http://www.io.com/~lkw/<BR>
>      (512) 447-7866 VOX<BR>
>      (512) 447-1144 FAX<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:32:54 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>writes:<BR>
<BR>
>>For practical purposes, the military shipyards can be defined as 'port-A,<BR>
pop-A, TL-F/G'.  There are 48 such worlds.  Assuming each such world has a<BR>
population of 30 billion and produces Cr 150 in naval ships per person per<BR>
year (1% of GWP), we get 216 trillion credits per year.  Tossing in lower<BR>
population and lower tech worlds, we get around 300 trillion credits per<BR>
year total (high-pop worlds are hugely dominant in the imperial economy).<BR>
<BR>
In GT, the cost/dT of warships is on the order of 0.5 MCr, so each such<BR>
world produces on the order of 9 million dtons in warships per year.<<<BR>
<BR>
OK. I accept the figures for GWP, since I don't have Striker to do the<BR>
calcs. (Is the formula short enough for some one to post it?)<BR>
<BR>
But the real point of my first post was that the small number of worlds<BR>
capable of making 500,000 dton behemoths is a *construction* limitation on<BR>
the number of ships that can be built/maintained. How much dtonnage can a<BR>
world of a given population build in a year? It doesn't matter how much they<BR>
can buy, if the yards can't handle the work.<BR>
<BR>
Also, are those figures for naval budget only for construction, or do they<BR>
include such incidentals as crew salaries, ship overhaul, base construction,<BR>
fuel (peacetime navies shouldn't use frontier refueling, right?), etc. et<BR>
al.<BR>
<BR>
And in any case, isn't 2% of GWP somewhat of an optimax solution? Didn't<BR>
Japan get by with a military budget of only 1% for *all* arms until<BR>
recently. (Yeah, I'm aware that another power essentially paid for Japan's<BR>
defense. Anyone else see the parallel? ;)<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:37:54 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
<BR>
Here's the first draft of Book 2 ships done under High Guard. I've included<BR>
the USPs and my own comments.<BR>
<BR>
HANDWAVES<BR>
<BR>
All ships use reactionless drives. Drive thrust is based on volume. (Who<BR>
knows? Everything we know says reactionless thrusters are impossible, so why<BR>
not base them on volume, like jump drives.) Power plant fuel is good for a<BR>
year, not a month, in light of the revised fuel consumption of FFS.<BR>
<BR>
All designs below take the 20% discount for class designs. The merchant<BR>
ships especially become uneconomic without this discount.<BR>
<BR>
Governing tech level is the mininum necessary.<BR>
<BR>
Non-small craft vehicles still require 130% volume for hangarage.<BR>
<BR>
Crew requirements were lifted from Book 2. Costs for small craft were<BR>
likewise lifted from Book 2.<BR>
<BR>
Going against High Guard rules, I installed hardpoints at one ton each.<BR>
Unless otherwise noted, each ship has the maximum number of hardpoints<BR>
(dtons/100).<BR>
<BR>
Type A 200-ton Free Trader<BR>
<BR>
A-2211111-00000-00000-0 MCr 39.66<BR>
TL: 9 Crew: 4 Fuel: 22 Cargo: 85.8 Pass: 6 Low: 20<BR>
EP: 2 Agility: 1 Vehicles: Air/Raft<BR>
<BR>
The air/raft was included to bring cargo capacity closer to CT canon and<BR>
match the great DGP floorplans from the Starship Owner's Guide; cargo is 91<BR>
tons without it. In all designs, I have used a MegaTraveller Cr 275,000 cost<BR>
for air/rafts.<BR>
<BR>
Type A2 200-ton Far Trader<BR>
<BR>
A2-22212R1-00000-00000-0 MCr 48.3<BR>
TL: 11 Crew: 4 Fuel: 44 Cargo: 68.8 Pass: 6 Low: 4<BR>
EP: 4 Agility: 2 Vehicles: Air/Raft<BR>
<BR>
Without the class discount, the ship is a very uneconomic MCr 60.375, as<BR>
compared to the er...very uneconomic CT MCr 61. Oh, and while we're on the<BR>
subject, the floorplans in "Traders and Gunboats" have an displacement at<BR>
least twice that of the displacement given for the ship. What gives with<BR>
this design?<BR>
<BR>
Type R 400-ton Subsidized Merchant<BR>
<BR>
R-4211111-00000-00000-0 MCr 73.16/91.45<BR>
TL: 9 Crew: 5 Fuel: 44 Cargo: 222.5 Pass: 8 Low: 9<BR>
EP: 4 Agility: 1 Vehicles: Launch<BR>
<BR>
Cost is closer to canon at MCr 91.45 without class discount.<BR>
<BR>
Type T 400-ton Patrol Cruiser<BR>
<BR>
T-4134432-00000-30002-0 MCr 232.48<BR>
 batt. bearing        2      2<BR>
 batteries              2      2<BR>
TL: 12 Crew: 18 Fuel: 136 Cargo: 29.6 Pass: 0 Low: 4<BR>
EP: 10 Agility: 2 Marines: 8 Vehicles: Ship's Boat, GCarrier.<BR>
<BR>
Lasers listed are beam. Batteries can obviously be rearranged.<BR>
<BR>
Type M 600-ton Subsidized Liner<BR>
<BR>
M-6331331-00000-00000-0 MCr 263.44<BR>
TL: 12 Crew: 9 Fuel: 198 Cargo: 130 Pass: 21 Low: 20<BR>
EP: 18 Agility: 3 Vehicles: Launch<BR>
<BR>
Only 3 hardpoints installed. This one came out pretty close to the Book 2<BR>
design!<BR>
<BR>
Type C 800-ton Mercenary Cruiser<BR>
<BR>
C-8533351-00000-00000-0 MCr 374.56<BR>
TL: 12 Crew: 9 Fuel: 312 Cargo: 89 Pass: 0 Low: 0<BR>
EP: 24 Agility: 3 Vehicles: 2 Modular Cutters Marines: up to 32<BR>
<BR>
OK, there *are* 16 available staterooms, but since the ship is not in<BR>
commercial service, I did not give it a passenger rating. Fuel rating<BR>
includes the extra 48 tons that canon reserves for further operations--a two<BR>
year power plant supply?<BR>
<BR>
Type Y 200-ton Yacht<BR>
<BR>
Y-2411111-00000-00000-0 MCr 53.224<BR>
TL: 9 Crew: 4 Fuel: 42 Cargo: 8.8 Pass: 8 Low: 0<BR>
EP: 2 Agility: 1 Vehicles: Ship's Boat, Air/Raft, ATV<BR>
<BR>
Includes enough fuel for two jumps. There are actually 14 staterooms; 4 for<BR>
the crew, 2 for the owner, and 8 left over for guests.<BR>
<BR>
Type S 100-ton Scout/Courier<BR>
<BR>
S-12222R1-00000-00000-0 MCr 33.04<BR>
TL: 11 Crew: 1 Fuel: 22 Cargo: 2 Pass: 3 Low: 0<BR>
EP: 2 Agility: 2 Vehicles: Air/Raft<BR>
<BR>
This one is a total botch. I included a second 20 tons of "bridge" to stand<BR>
in for the survey sensors and data banks. The ship also costs too much. High<BR>
Guard ship design tends to break down at the low tonnages!<BR>
<BR>
Fred "And they only took ten minutes each to design!" Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:51:50 -0700<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
<BR>
>From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
>Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
...<BR>
>I was just looking at an old JTAS and saw a Martian Metals<BR>
>advertisement that said "Reinforcements have arrived,"<BR>
>superimposed on an extreme close up of a metal grav tank. <BR>
>I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
>actually produced?  <BR>
<BR>
  I believe so - I had one that was probably based on the Keith <BR>
illo on the back of the Striker box - big, well-detailed, and<BR>
quite nice, unlike most of the Martian Metals people figs, IMHO.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:57:57 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Scales<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 26-Jul-00 4:41:24 PM Central Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> What really annoys me about RPG miniatures that never happens much with toy<BR>
>  soldiers is that the 25mm scale means they fit a sculpture into an inch<BR>
>  square. It doesn't mean they made any effort to make the thing to scale <BR>
with<BR>
>  the real thing. Really 1:72 scale is 1" and 25mm figures are nowhere near<BR>
>  looking like that.<BR>
<BR>
That's because 25mm is 1:76 (well, it's supposed to be*), not 1:72. 1:72 is a <BR>
model airplane scale, and a few vehicle models are made in plastic in 1:72, <BR>
but almost no metal gaming miniatures. 20mm is closer to 1:86, which is close <BR>
to HO (model railroad scale, 3.5mm=1 ft, or 1:87). <BR>
<BR>
Confusing, isn't it? * It's not helped by the fact that not all manufacturers <BR>
mean the same thing when they say "25mm."<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:04:43 -0700<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
<BR>
>From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
...<BR>
>ESCI/Ertl even did a very good 1:72 scale modern AFV series<BR>
>(mine have seen a lot of action in the Imperium).  Why<BR>
>couldn't something like those be done for Traveller vehicles?<BR>
<BR>
  FWIW, I've been told by people looking into the same sort of <BR>
thing a few years ago that the costs are prohibitive unless you<BR>
plan to run _lots_ of copies - where "lots" = "more than anyone<BR>
who's not an 800-lb gorilla in the industry can sell".<BR>
<BR>
  One possibility is resin: anyone who has seen what Armorcast<BR>
did with their old GW license - or what they're doing now with<BR>
their _Battletech_ licensed models should appreciate what they<BR>
could do for Traveller (or other SF) models in either 15mm, 25mm,<BR>
or even 54mm (or larger!) scales. <BR>
<BR>
  Another possibility is making metal parts to customize easily<BR>
available plastic kits already on the market, but first you need<BR>
a decent SF-looking hull to base it on - a beastie that is not<BR>
obviously in abundance, IMHO :(<BR>
<BR>
        Steven Hudson<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:10:31 -0700<BR>
From: "Thing" <gduke@telebyte.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
It seems to me that battledress is primarily suited to giving the wearer an<BR>
advantage against lesser equiped troops or an even footing with similarly<BR>
equiped troops, but I guess that is true with all filed equipment.  Then<BR>
again I am starting to get a mental picture of two battle dress opponents<BR>
facing each other at the top of a hill.  Standing still like Samurai as<BR>
their passive and active systems start sweeping the specturm looking for a<BR>
weakness and the first one to find a whole kills the other in one stroke.<BR>
<BR>
Sounds like it would require a really well trained trooper inside.<BR>
<BR>
G.D.D.<BR>
Thing under the stairs,<BR>
Minion of Shechemist & GothBunny,<BR>
Grand Master of the Electron Flow.<BR>
===========================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:14:59 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 26-Jul-00 9:19:46 PM Central Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
>  actually produced?  <BR>
<BR>
Yes -- weighed damn near two pounds and cost a fortune.<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:20:36 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic vs metal<BR>
<BR>
>  (The detail, consistency, and<BR>
>  realism of Airfix, ESCI/Ertl, and Revell 1:72 plastic<BR>
>  figures meet or exceed anything produced by Ral Partha,<BR>
>  Games Workshop, GHQ, or any other metal manufacturer I<BR>
>  know.)<BR>
<BR>
Molds for white metal castings can be made of RTV (room-temperature <BR>
vulcanizing) rubber -- it can be done in the average kitchen (I've done it). <BR>
Molds for injection-molded plastic are considerably more expensive (although <BR>
this is changing), and are economic only in production runs that are larger <BR>
than most manufacturers can produce (although Games Workshop makes some <BR>
plastic figs). <BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:28:53 -0400<BR>
From: "Alan M. Nuss" <amnuss@atl.mediaone.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
- - -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All<BR>
of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
The more the better.  Aslan, Vargr, Hiver, Ael Yael, Virushi.  You get the idea.<BR>
How about minis on the variations of Humans (Zho, Vilani, Answerin, Darrian, Jonkeereen)<BR>
<BR>
- ----------<BR>
- - -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, etc.<BR>
Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
Some, maybe not all.  Depends on cost and how much room I have to store them.<BR>
<BR>
- ---------<BR>
- - -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
Some, maybe not all.  Depends on cost and how much room I have to store them.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ---------<BR>
- - -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd<BR>
have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
More ships.  I have many of the ships made by Rafm.  Would like larger classes<BR>
also.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ---------<BR>
- - -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules, or<BR>
Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
the like are certainly doable).<BR>
<BR>
Don't know.  Maybe.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ---------<BR>
- - -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
"Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
I'm not interested.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ---------<BR>
- - -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
Yep. Sounds good.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ---------<BR>
Alan<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2817<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (rly-zd01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.225]) by air-zd03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:25:22 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:25:00 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id AAA94918;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:24:54 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:24:50 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id AAA94873<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:24:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:24:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007270424.AAA94873@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2817<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2818</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 2:25:33 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2818<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
RE: Plastic vs metal<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:47:30 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
On 26 Jul 00, at 18:31, Robert Houghton wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> One problem with the central data net is it is subject to jamming...if you are<BR>
> using radio you are subject to jamming...laser is subject to LOS and<BR>
> tracking...you cant give every grunt a lascomm transceiver...meson is heavy<BR>
> and High tech...<BR>
<BR>
Like I said, you live or die depending on your ECM and ECCM. Even <BR>
without a central data net, its still true.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:48:14 +1000<BR>
From: Graeme_Batho@agd.nsw.gov.au<BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
Sorry I'm so late in jumping on the bandwagon, but I'm still catching up on<BR>
reading<BR>
through the list. If what I'm about to say has already been covered forgive the<BR>
waste<BR>
of bandwidth.<BR>
<BR>
It's just I think you are all going about it all wrong.<BR>
<BR>
The trick to stopping an asteroid from hitting a planet is to take advantage of<BR>
the energies<BR>
involved. You are all trying to deflect the asteroid - which DOES work, but<BR>
takes a long time<BR>
and great energy. The thing is you -don't- have to deflect it at all.<BR>
<BR>
I don't have any reference books here, so I can't give the figures, but this is<BR>
how it works:<BR>
<BR>
What you must realise is that the he planet is orbiting around the sun, so the<BR>
asteroid is<BR>
heading for a MOVING target. You just have to ensure that when the asteroid<BR>
passes<BR>
through the planets' orbit the planet has moved somewhere else. So all you<BR>
really have to<BR>
do is to speed up or slow down the asteroid a little so the planets' orbit will<BR>
have moved it<BR>
out of the way. The asteroid will miss - because it was too early or too late.<BR>
You only have<BR>
to change the velocity by a metre or so per second at a range of about a year.<BR>
<BR>
The actual approach will depend on the specifics of the orbits, but in practice<BR>
it is easier to<BR>
retard the asteroids speed rather than increase it. As someone else posted,<BR>
nukes are the<BR>
best way to go. The asteroid is probably rotating, so surface thrusters would<BR>
only be able to<BR>
fire part of the time. Nukes don't actually touch the surface, so rotation of<BR>
the rock is ignored.<BR>
<BR>
As always speed is essential. The further away you begin to change the<BR>
asteroids' orbit the<BR>
better. In reality, the same total amount of energy is required to retard the<BR>
asteroid as it takes<BR>
to deflect it. However, in practice, you've got some things working for you that<BR>
reduce what<BR>
you need.<BR>
<BR>
For starters, only low tech nukes (and a delivery system) are required. A<BR>
starship is optional,<BR>
but not really required as long as the drives used to send the nukes are as<BR>
efficient as the<BR>
spaceships' drive. The important thing is that the nukes get into position<BR>
quickly.<BR>
<BR>
Next, the nukes don't need complex targeting systems, because you are not trying<BR>
to<BR>
accurately divert the rock. Instead all nukes are to target the centre of the<BR>
rock, and<BR>
detonate at the optimum distance from it (Care would have to be taken that the<BR>
nukes are<BR>
spaced far enough apart to avoid being caught in each others blast).<BR>
<BR>
Now there are several advantages to this approach that make it more efficient<BR>
than merely<BR>
trying to divert the rock (and also reduces the amount of debris). Firstly, the<BR>
nukes only have<BR>
to travel to a point preceeding the asteroid, so they can get into position<BR>
faster (and therefore<BR>
start to effect the orbit sooner). If you were diverting the asteroid the nukes<BR>
would have to<BR>
travel to a point -beside- the asteroid (which would have to be more precisely<BR>
calculated<BR>
and therefore requires more complex nukes/delivery system).<BR>
<BR>
Next comes the efficiency savings. Because the nukes are being boosted directly<BR>
at the<BR>
asteroid, when they explode the explosion is directional, so they also impart<BR>
part of their<BR>
kinetic energy to the rock (not much, but every bit helps). Of more importance,<BR>
though, is<BR>
what happens with the second and subsequent explosions. With each explosion,<BR>
part of<BR>
the surface of the rock is vaporised and debris is ejected from the asteroid.<BR>
The<BR>
debris would normally continue to be a danger to the planet. But instead, it<BR>
gets caught in<BR>
the following explosions, which mainly blasts it back at the asteroid. When it<BR>
impacts on<BR>
the surface, it imparts more kinetic energy to the asteroid and slows it<BR>
further. So the<BR>
explosions will actually sweep much of the debris up and deposit it back on the<BR>
asteroid!<BR>
<BR>
So you can see that a low-tech solution is more energy efficient and would cost<BR>
less to<BR>
implement, and be more effective than diverting the rock.<BR>
<BR>
Graeme Batho<BR>
Lateral thinker at large<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 20:20:01 -0600<BR>
From: "Joseph Kimball" <jekimball@prodigy.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
> Grant/Jewell has a Pop of 20 and a TL of 0. While you could<BR>
> stretch and call that the interdicting force, then why would they have a<BR>
TL<BR>
> of 0?<BR>
<snip><BR>
><BR>
> Sam<BR>
<BR>
The explanation IMTU (assuming that this is an interdiction force) is that<BR>
Tech Levels are primarily an indication of local production capabilities.<BR>
Thus, an interdiction force of 20 people would likely have equipment and<BR>
technical know-how of TTL14-15, but would not have the capability to produce<BR>
any but fairly low level stuff with equipment/resources on hand.<BR>
On the other hand, a population in the millions with a TTL 0 would suggest<BR>
that either the planetary government is deliberately minimizing technical<BR>
development (feudal technocracy anyone?), or perhaps the local culture is<BR>
somewhat anti-technical (think Amish or more likely the original sabot-eurs<BR>
who threw shoes into the machinery to try to halt progress).<BR>
- - Joseph<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 21:03:09 -0600<BR>
From: "Joseph Kimball" <jekimball@prodigy.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
At 9:48 -0400 25/7/00, Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> wrote:<BR>
> >Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
> >to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
> >to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
> >from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
> >would build such monsters.<BR>
<BR>
Integrating from LBB 2 (p22) and 3 (p15) (Starships and Worlds) we get:<BR>
TL 9 allows drives A-D, these can move ships 800 dtons and less.<BR>
TL 10 allows drives E-H, these can move ships 1000 dtons and less.<BR>
TL 11 allows drives J-K, these can move ships 2000 dtons and less.<BR>
TL 12 allows drives L-N, these can move ships 2000 dtons and less.<BR>
TL 13 allows drives P-Q, these can move ships 3000 dtons and less.<BR>
TL 14 allows drives R-U, these can move ships 3000 dtons and less.<BR>
TL 15 allows all drives (to Z), and can move ships 5000 dtons and less.<BR>
<BR>
At least IMTU these 'letter' drives are part of the Imperial Data Package<BR>
that you can pick up for very little almost anywhere in the Imperium.  This<BR>
is the same package that has the designs for the Type S scout, the Type A<BR>
free trader, etc.  These kind of drives are well understood, and have been<BR>
optimized by designers working with TL 15 computer design software and<BR>
real-world tested for 1100+ years.  This is the kind of stuff that is<BR>
mass-produced, as several of the Chevy or Ford V6 and V8 engines were for<BR>
years.  The instructions in the IDP are for the stripped-down, 'basic'<BR>
model, and have been made easy to produce at the specified TL.  The designs<BR>
take advantage of the automation and understandings of someone who is<BR>
trained at the specified TL.  These designs also make heavy use of<BR>
standardized parts and fittings, so the range of tools an engineer working<BR>
on IDP machinery is fairly small (not quite to the wrench, screwdriver,<BR>
rubber mallet, and multimeter level, but in that direction).  This also<BR>
means (from the adventurer's standpoint) that scavenging that crashed Scout<BR>
to fix your Free Trader is not entirely outlandish - you wouldn't be able to<BR>
use all the drive parts, but a good number of the sub-assemblies would work.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, philosophy mode off.  This kind of listing suggests that the IDP ships<BR>
such as the Scout, Free Trader, and Mercenary Cruiser are just fine from the<BR>
commercial starship point of view, and that if you want a fancy (or large -<BR>
beyond 5000 dtons) ship, you are going to be eating a lot more money to<BR>
build them.  Perhaps what we need is not to artificially limit the size of<BR>
the hull, but to make the custom hulls and drives somewhat more expensive.<BR>
- - Joseph<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:07:19 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
on 7/26/00 5:34 PM, Douglas E. Berry at gridlore@pop.mindspring.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 01:55 PM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
>> Isn't grey normally associated with the navy?<BR>
> <BR>
> On Earth, in the United States, yes.<BR>
> <BR>
> A lot of people don't know that the official color of the United States<BR>
> Infantry is a light blue.  Or that the color of the Army's full-dress<BR>
> uniform is blue.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
And the aguilette is worn on the right shoulder, as opposed to every other<BR>
branch.<BR>
<BR>
> <GF author mode: ON><BR>
> <BR>
> The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made up of<BR>
> thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units, high-level<BR>
> command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be fairly neutral.  I<BR>
> chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own dress uniforms, which can get<BR>
> quite colorful.<BR>
<BR>
<just to cause trouble> but what gray? Light, dark?  How about feldgrau<BR>
(sp?)<BR>
> <BR>
> So a suit of BD set for "dress" will display the regimental colors.  For<BR>
> example, the "Blacklegs" regiment (311th Rapid Interface Infantry, Unified<BR>
> Army of Shumisdi) set their suit legs to match the black trousers of the<BR>
> regimental dress.<BR>
<BR>
So the uniforms are on the British regimental model?  Complete with all the<BR>
odd things one sometimes sees?  Does the 652nd light cavalry (Duke of<BR>
Rhylanor's own) still retain their czapkas for formal dress?  Do regiments<BR>
have a proprietary colonel (inhaber) as well as a field commander (colonel)?<BR>
In full dress turnout, will we see busbys, shakos, pelisses and the like.  I<BR>
hope so.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 19:36:04 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
on 7/26/00 5:34 PM, Douglas E. Berry at gridlore@pop.mindspring.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 01:55 PM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
>> Isn't grey normally associated with the navy?<BR>
> <BR>
> On Earth, in the United States, yes.<BR>
> <BR>
> A lot of people don't know that the official color of the United States<BR>
> Infantry is a light blue.  Or that the color of the Army's full-dress<BR>
> uniform is blue.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
And the aguilette is worn on the right shoulder, as opposed to every other<BR>
branch.<BR>
<BR>
> <GF author mode: ON><BR>
> <BR>
> The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made up of<BR>
> thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units, high-level<BR>
> command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be fairly neutral.  I<BR>
> chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own dress uniforms, which can get<BR>
> quite colorful.<BR>
<BR>
<just to cause trouble> but what gray? Light, dark?  How about feldgrau<BR>
(sp?)<BR>
> <BR>
> So a suit of BD set for "dress" will display the regimental colors.  For<BR>
> example, the "Blacklegs" regiment (311th Rapid Interface Infantry, Unified<BR>
> Army of Shumisdi) set their suit legs to match the black trousers of the<BR>
> regimental dress.<BR>
<BR>
So the uniforms are on the British regimental model?  Complete with all the<BR>
odd things one sometimes sees?  Does the 652nd light cavalry (Duke of<BR>
Rhylanor's own) still retain their czapkas for formal dress?  Do regiments<BR>
have a proprietary colonel (inhaber) as well as a field commander (colonel)?<BR>
In full dress turnout, will we see busbys, shakos, pelisses and the like.  I<BR>
hope so.<BR>
<BR>
One of my PCs is a former<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:16:20 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
Greetings all,<BR>
<BR>
I have been working on redoing the big 17x22" Spinward Marches map (that<BR>
came with the boxed deluxe Traveller) an the question occurs.  Would anyone<BR>
else be interested in large format maps of various sectors?  If so, would<BR>
you be willing to pay, and how much?  Have been in contact with Marc about<BR>
doing these up, and could possibly (barring licensing hassles) make these<BR>
available at reasonable cost provided I could get enough orders to justify<BR>
printing setup.<BR>
<BR>
Right now I have most of the Spinward Marches sector map (based on CT<BR>
supplement 3) done, and next will be the Solomani Rim. Comments, questions,<BR>
flames?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:38:46 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
>Right now I have most of the Spinward Marches sector map (based on CT<BR>
supplement 3) done, and next will be the Solomani Rim. Comments, questions,<BR>
flames?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<<BR>
<BR>
Just the maps? With accompanying UPP info? From what year/incarnation?<BR>
(Relevant for both UPPs and borders.) Multi-color like the deluxe map? (I<BR>
have the MT version.)<BR>
<BR>
Maps are hard to price, they generally don't wind up being that  relevant<BR>
without supporting data and I know that kills on cost. If you can bring them<BR>
in around $10 and include 1100-1115 (pre-/post- 5FW, pre-Rebellion) UPPs and<BR>
enough supporting text to define all base and special codes and political<BR>
units I'd spring for one a month until you finished the Imperium. (And go<BR>
for the full 128 original map Sectors until you finish 10+ years from now on<BR>
that monthly schedule. :)) No matter how much you add for other UPPs I<BR>
wouldn't look to go over $15 these days. And naturally, I'd be glad to pay<BR>
less if possible. :)<BR>
<BR>
Generally I am thinking of using the MT Diaspora Sector as a baseline. Heavy<BR>
stock paper instead of the tri-fold is perfectly acceptable. Likewise "raw"<BR>
UPP with just a tad more as I said like in the Spinward Marches Campaign,<BR>
just including names like in the DGP Domain of Deneb update for MT 1120.<BR>
So compare from there and I'll be more specific, but I think the $10 per is<BR>
pretty much the target price I'd consider reasonable.<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:49:04 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
<BR>
I guess it is cheaper to produce models from metal if there is not that much<BR>
in the ways of quatity, required. To produce a tool for making impressions<BR>
in plastic is costly though ok if larger quantities are required. Personally<BR>
I prefer something with a weight.<BR>
<BR>
Michael<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Steven Hudson <shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 5:04 AM<BR>
Subject: Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> >From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
> >Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
> ...<BR>
> >ESCI/Ertl even did a very good 1:72 scale modern AFV series<BR>
> >(mine have seen a lot of action in the Imperium).  Why<BR>
> >couldn't something like those be done for Traveller vehicles?<BR>
><BR>
>   FWIW, I've been told by people looking into the same sort of<BR>
> thing a few years ago that the costs are prohibitive unless you<BR>
> plan to run _lots_ of copies - where "lots" = "more than anyone<BR>
> who's not an 800-lb gorilla in the industry can sell".<BR>
><BR>
>   One possibility is resin: anyone who has seen what Armorcast<BR>
> did with their old GW license - or what they're doing now with<BR>
> their _Battletech_ licensed models should appreciate what they<BR>
> could do for Traveller (or other SF) models in either 15mm, 25mm,<BR>
> or even 54mm (or larger!) scales.<BR>
><BR>
>   Another possibility is making metal parts to customize easily<BR>
> available plastic kits already on the market, but first you need<BR>
> a decent SF-looking hull to base it on - a beastie that is not<BR>
> obviously in abundance, IMHO :(<BR>
><BR>
>         Steven Hudson<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 23:58:39 -0700<BR>
From: "Bari Z Stafford Sr" <whitebear777@netzero.net><BR>
Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
<BR>
Here's a survey of sorts on ship building.<BR>
<BR>
If there's no ore and/or minerals on a world, how can<BR>
anyone build any type of fleet?  Let alone a ship in<BR>
large proportions.<BR>
<BR>
Commerce must play a role in construction.  If you<BR>
have enough freighters supplying material, you'd <BR>
still have a high overhead cost to deal with.  Thus<BR>
putting some ships "out of reach" price wise.<BR>
<BR>
However, if your world had vast quantities of materials,<BR>
wouldn't the construction cost go down, regardless of<BR>
the population size?<BR>
<BR>
Bari<BR>
<BR>
____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________<BR>
Download Now     http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html<BR>
Request a CDROM  1-800-333-3633<BR>
___________________________________________________________<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 03:31:49 EDT<BR>
From: RBasler1@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 7/26/00 7:19:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
 Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
 <BR>
 >From: Bob Kovalchick <Kovalchick@wbgh.com><BR>
 <BR>
 >Years back I had both the Grenadier 25mm and the Martian<BR>
 >Metals 15mm (still<BR>
 <BR>
 I was just looking at an old JTAS and saw a Martian Metals<BR>
 advertisement that said "Reinforcements have arrived,"<BR>
 superimposed on an extreme close up of a metal grav tank. <BR>
 I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
 actually produced?  <BR>
  >><BR>
    Yes, they did..I think I have one, but my wife had rearranged stuff <BR>
around here so often, damned if I can lay my hands on it at the moment.<BR>
<BR>
    Rod Basler, COFIT <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 03:44:08 EDT<BR>
From: RBasler1@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 7/26/00 7:19:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< Subject: re:  Minis Questions<BR>
 <BR>
 >From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com><BR>
 <BR>
 >Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
 <BR>
    Aliens...good aliens.  Males and females. <BR>
 <BR>
 >- -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps<BR>
 >something like "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader<BR>
 >Crew"<BR>
 <BR>
    The general mood is against these, so as the (apparently) sole figure <BR>
painter (...in my copious spare time...  yeah, right), I might be interested <BR>
if the price were right.  I would prefer something more distinctively <BR>
'Traveller', which is tough to do.  With the glut of 'Warhamster 40K', ad <BR>
nauseum, figures that are on the market, just sticking an imperial sunburst <BR>
on a generic hardsuit is not going to cut it.  Aslan (male and female), Vargr <BR>
(ditto), Droyne (ditto x 6?  I don't think so...).  Resin cast them and bump <BR>
the scale up to 75mm.<BR>
    Oooh, scarey thought:  Ditzie and one of her overpowered, psychotic <BR>
creations - the one with the recoil pushing her back a meter.  That is, if <BR>
the 'Elmyra' hairclip won't get you sued by Warner Brother's.<BR>
<BR>
    Rod Basler, COFIT<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:42:41 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Firstly, don't worry Doug, I don't expect you to reflect my opinions in GF,<BR>
I'm really just sounding off here.<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry wrote :<BR>
> There is no canonical source for battledress being hideously oversized.<BR>
<BR>
I agree the majority of what is labelled in Traveller sourcebooks as<BR>
battle-dress is not that large.<BR>
<BR>
However, I don't have to like it.<BR>
<BR>
Of the stuff that is portrayed as battle-dress in things like the RCES<BR>
Equipment guide, only the heavy battle-dress even remotely approaches what<BR>
I'd call battledress, and the Schalli batledress is far more like what I<BR>
consider real battle-dress should look like.<BR>
<BR>
The RCES "Light Battledress" only looks like combat armour, though it<BR>
supposedly has a "powered exoskeleton" there is no sign of it in the<BR>
pictures.<BR>
<BR>
> >Think small (as in under fifteen feet tall) mech, or the original 'Iron<BR>
> >Man'- only with  better fashion sense hopefully.<BR>
><BR>
> OK, how do the Marines do ship boardings in BD that won't fit in an<BR>
> airlock, or down a standard corridor?<BR>
<BR>
They don't wear it !<BR>
<BR>
Battledress is designed for the battlefield, or space combat, not ship<BR>
corridors. That's where you wear combat environment suits, like the stuff<BR>
that storm-troopers in Star Wars wear, or that armour that  the RCES calls<BR>
"light battle-dress". <grin><BR>
<BR>
All my opinion of course.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:20:37 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
> >It more properly should be called an "auto-chronometer" in<BR>
> >that it is a high precision time piece but it also <BR>
> >performs the neat trick of automaticaly determining the<BR>
> >local time, amongst other useful data.<BR>
<BR>
> kind of like my mobile phone -- as long as I'm in Sprint's<BR>
> PCS network, it tells me the local time<BR>
<BR>
Your mobile phone will only do that on planets with a<BR>
comm. network. The canon multichronometer will do that<BR>
on _any_ planet. Therefore the multichronometer has<BR>
to be capable of sensing the length of the day somehow.<BR>
The description of the multichronometer foes not say that<BR>
it only works on worlds with a digital PCs network, nor<BR>
does it say that it only works on planets with a magnetosphere,<BR>
nor does it say that it only works if you are not traveling <BR>
on planet at high speeds. Therefore the canon multichronometer<BR>
must be capable of determining (within one planetary rotation)<BR>
that planets length of day (even if you are traveling a<BR>
thousand kilometers an hour in an ultra high speed maglev train<BR>
across the surface the whole time. Perhaps the multichronometer<BR>
includes some form of miniaturized inertial locator to cancel<BR>
out changes due to your motion and some sort of gyroscope<BR>
that can determine the time required for the planet to rotate<BR>
360 degrees. Nor does the multichronometers description say that<BR>
it does not work on non main world planets. Therefore the <BR>
multichronometer has to be capable of distinguishing between the<BR>
rotation (if any) of the satellite around the planet as well as<BR>
the rotation of the planet around the sun.<BR>
<BR>
I really don't think that this should be possible at TL 9<BR>
in a watch sized object. Is there some solid state way of<BR>
doing all this?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:13:39 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry wrote :<BR>
> >battledress', the frontal armor on a heavy tank is not vulnerable to<BR>
> >man-portable missiles.<BR>
><BR>
> Is if you use a nuke.  :)  Hey, they don't give out those SEH medals for<BR>
> polishing boots y'know.<BR>
<BR>
Grin. This reminds me of the time a certain Traveller character with a<BR>
derangement that made him think he was a superhero, managed to take out a<BR>
grav-tank with an auto-pistol.<BR>
<BR>
He jumped in front of the tank that was menacing his freinds, and fired his<BR>
autopistol, and the tank's turret fell off due to a lucky hit from a<BR>
friendly tank. But he was firmly convinced it was his auto-pistol shot.<BR>
<BR>
Even more fun is my sergeant major character who fired a missile at a grav<BR>
tank on the left flank and had the turret on a tank on the right flank blow<BR>
off. He still hasn't worked it out, but feels it has something to do with<BR>
the Traveller universe he was in being dyslexic.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:40:13 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
BTW, What I've been using for (militaryy) Traveller figures is the<BR>
"Federation Security", "Federation Assault Troops" and "Federation Officers"<BR>
from the old Task Force Games "Star Fleet" miniatures. They look great in<BR>
Imperial Marine crimson.<BR>
<BR>
(They don't look anything like Star Trek, BTW)<BR>
<BR>
My opinion on the miniatures is that I probably won't buy them because<BR>
they'll be too expensive, and I can make good enough figures from cheap<BR>
stuff I aleady have.<BR>
<BR>
Old Paranoia and Top Secret figures from Grenadier are good too, especially<BR>
the "operatives" in leotards with satchel charges and machine-guns. The<BR>
Paranoia "infra-reds" have some great "technicians" amongst them, and<BR>
Paranoia trouble-shooters look sufficently SF and grunty to be starport<BR>
security .<BR>
<BR>
If I ever get a digital camera I'll pop some on my web-site.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:58:03 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Plastic vs metal<BR>
<BR>
GDWGAMES@aol.com wrote :<BR>
><BR>
> Molds for white metal castings can be made of RTV (room-temperature<BR>
> vulcanizing) rubber -- it can be done in the average kitchen<BR>
> (I've done it).<BR>
<BR>
You can do them in Plaster of Paris or similar as well.<BR>
<BR>
RTV (the Dow Corning brand name rubber sealant you buy for sealing<BR>
windscreens and the like) isn't particularly good for molding, it has a<BR>
tendency to crumble. You want real moulding silicone rubber which can be<BR>
bought in similar tubes for use in creating moulds for garden gnomes and the<BR>
like.<BR>
<BR>
I used to do it in lead from a printers shop, melting it on the stove, and<BR>
pouring it over the sink.<BR>
<BR>
> Molds for injection-molded plastic are considerably more<BR>
> expensive (although this is changing), and are economic only<BR>
> in production runs that are larger than most manufacturers can produce<BR>
<BR>
OTOH, centrifugal casting is relatively easy to do (can be done with a power<BR>
drill if neccessary) for either lead or plastic.<BR>
(It's what GW started with back when they were Citadel.)<BR>
<BR>
> (although Games Workshop makes some plastic figs).<BR>
<BR>
Game Workshop makes _mainly_ plastic figures, it's why people can still<BR>
afford a GW army in their approximation to 25mm, but not an Ancients or<BR>
Napoleonics army in that scale any more.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:29:32 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
According to the World Builders Handbook, Survey Equipment,<BR>
"This timepiece sets itself, in one planetary rotation, to local zero<BR>
meridian time, local solar time, and local sidereal time. A setting allows<BR>
for automatic time zone corrections according to world size. It also keeps<BR>
Imperial standard time.<BR>
The sidereal and zero meridian times are of interest mainly to the<BR>
astronomer and navigator, giving them the spin plane of the world, its year<BR>
length, and other information<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
From: "Peter Newman" <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
<BR>
> Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com> wrote<BR>
> <BR>
> > >From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
> > >It more properly should be called an "auto-chronometer" in<BR>
> > >that it is a high precision time piece but it also <BR>
> > >performs the neat trick of automaticaly determining the<BR>
> > >local time, amongst other useful data.<BR>
> <BR>
> > kind of like my mobile phone -- as long as I'm in Sprint's<BR>
> > PCS network, it tells me the local time<BR>
> <BR>
> Your mobile phone will only do that on planets with a<BR>
> comm. network. The canon multichronometer will do that<BR>
> on _any_ planet. Therefore the multichronometer has<BR>
> to be capable of sensing the length of the day somehow.<BR>
> The description of the multichronometer foes not say that<BR>
> it only works on worlds with a digital PCs network, nor<BR>
> does it say that it only works on planets with a magnetosphere,<BR>
> nor does it say that it only works if you are not traveling <BR>
> on planet at high speeds. Therefore the canon multichronometer<BR>
> must be capable of determining (within one planetary rotation)<BR>
> that planets length of day (even if you are traveling a<BR>
> thousand kilometers an hour in an ultra high speed maglev train<BR>
> across the surface the whole time. Perhaps the multichronometer<BR>
> includes some form of miniaturized inertial locator to cancel<BR>
> out changes due to your motion and some sort of gyroscope<BR>
> that can determine the time required for the planet to rotate<BR>
> 360 degrees. Nor does the multichronometers description say that<BR>
> it does not work on non main world planets. Therefore the <BR>
> multichronometer has to be capable of distinguishing between the<BR>
> rotation (if any) of the satellite around the planet as well as<BR>
> the rotation of the planet around the sun.<BR>
> <BR>
> I really don't think that this should be possible at TL 9<BR>
> in a watch sized object. Is there some solid state way of<BR>
> doing all this?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2818<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.34]) by air-yh03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 05:25:33 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 05:25:05 2000<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id FAA05868;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 05:25:03 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 05:24:44 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id FAA05824<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 05:24:43 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 05:24:43 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007270924.FAA05824@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2818<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2819</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 4:07:41 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2819<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: PBI's & AFV's<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: strange UWPs, and Tech level advancement<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Tech and Population "Problems"<BR>
The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 09:37:15 GMT<BR>
From: "Jeff Rowse" <jeffrowse@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: PBI's & AFV's<BR>
<BR>
(Sorry I didn't attach anyone else's comments.  I'm just like that.)<BR>
For what it's worth, very few modern AFV's have weapons systems that are <BR>
effective at point-blank range - you can mount a machine gun in a ball <BR>
socket but it still has a limited traverse.  Unless you cover the hull with <BR>
the little buggers, in which case you cannot carry much else - a load of AP <BR>
ammo would fill the tank.<BR>
<BR>
Shotguns might discourage your average joe in a set of cloth fatigues, but <BR>
ain't BD supposed to be impervious to such things?  You can't make very <BR>
effective armor-piercing birdshot...<BR>
<BR>
As for the Marines, give 'em shaped-charge mines to attach *directly* onto <BR>
the hull, and your AFV is going to have a hole knocked in it with only a few <BR>
'hits', regardless of armor slope, reactive armor or any of the other fancy <BR>
tricks currently employed.  Why else are 'top-attack' missiles so popular?<BR>
<BR>
As for needing a skirt to hide the groin (thereby making it easier to <BR>
illustrate), if they are standing in front of a tank (yes, even a grav <BR>
tank), why not use a slightly oblique view?<BR>
<BR>
Jeff (aka Captain Chicken, Leg-End in his own Lunchbox).<BR>
"Incoming!"<BR>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:38:05 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
on 7/26/00 10:38 PM, Samuel D. Weiss at samwise1@email.msn.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> Right now I have most of the Spinward Marches sector map (based on CT<BR>
> supplement 3) done, and next will be the Solomani Rim. Comments, questions,<BR>
> flames?<BR>
> <BR>
> Tod<<BR>
> <BR>
> Just the maps? With accompanying UPP info? From what year/incarnation?<BR>
> (Relevant for both UPPs and borders.) Multi-color like the deluxe map? (I<BR>
> have the MT version.)<BR>
<BR>
The maps I am working on are pretty much identical to the color deluxe CT<BR>
map.  I am not looking to make anything off these, just recoup printing<BR>
costs if the interest is there.  Like the originals, these maps include only<BR>
basic information (hey, it's a whole sector on 17x22 inches).  Shown systems<BR>
names, gas giant, water, bases and star port type, along with borders and<BR>
x-boat routes.  Right now I'm working of the CT milieu, but if there is<BR>
enough interest to justify printing, I can do any variant.<BR>
<BR>
I can also supply the raw Adobe Illustrator files so you can print your own.<BR>
Be warned, large format, high resolution prints (1200 dpi) are costly ($25+<BR>
here in Portland, OR. YMMV).  I'd like to keep price around $10 or less, but<BR>
it will depend on how many prints are made.<BR>
<BR>
I can probably squeeze in a UPP in place of the hex number, if people think<BR>
that's valuable.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, this is all contingent on Marc's OK.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks, Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:47:51 +0100<BR>
From: Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
I'd buy them.<BR>
<BR>
Ewan<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Greetings all,<BR>
> <BR>
> I have been working on redoing the big 17x22" Spinward Marches map (that<BR>
> came with the boxed deluxe Traveller) an the question occurs.  Would anyone<BR>
> else be interested in large format maps of various sectors?  If so, would<BR>
> you be willing to pay, and how much?  Have been in contact with Marc about<BR>
> doing these up, and could possibly (barring licensing hassles) make these<BR>
> available at reasonable cost provided I could get enough orders to justify<BR>
> printing setup.<BR>
> <BR>
> Right now I have most of the Spinward Marches sector map (based on CT<BR>
> supplement 3) done, and next will be the Solomani Rim. Comments, questions,<BR>
> flames?<BR>
> <BR>
> Tod<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
   Ewan Quibell                       Their's not to make reply,<BR>
   Senior Communications Engineer     Their's not to reason why,<BR>
   Computer Centre                    Their's but to do and die:<BR>
   University of Brighton             Into the valley of Death<BR>
                                      Rode the six hundred.<BR>
   E.D.Quibell@brighton.ac.uk              Alfred, Lord Tennyson<BR>
<BR>
   #include<stddisclaimer.h><BR>
<BR>
   My spelling is entirerly due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic license<BR>
<BR>
   University of Brighton - Sunday Times' University of the Year<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:48:07 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Amber Zone in JTAS<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Rob didn't get the stutter in there though ;)<BR>
><BR>
> BTW Glenn, thanks for doing that Ditzie illo =D  I about died laughing when<BR>
> I heard about it since I hadn't seen it yet at the time.<BR>
><BR>
> "See, she's in the book!  That means she's canon now!  Run for your<BR>
> lives!!!"<BR>
<BR>
I Ditzie's case, I think it *should* be spelled "cannon". :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:51:03 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
> <<snip>><BR>
>> <BR>
>> Are the Jesuits still running schools in the 3I?<BR>
><BR>
> IMTU, not only are the Jesuits running schools, they are running _at<BR>
> least_ one of the most sophisticated non-governmental intelligence<BR>
> services in known space.  Art imitating life....<BR>
<BR>
I'm a bit worried about the Jesuits. But the *Dominicans* scare me. <BR>
<BR>
Richelieu was a Jesuit. The Dominicans ran the Inquisition...<BR>
<BR>
Which would *you* rather deal with?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:55:07 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> IMTU, not only are the Jesuits running schools, they are running _at<BR>
>> least_ one of the most sophisticated non-governmental intelligence<BR>
>> services in known space.  Art imitating life....<BR>
><BR>
> Have you played Shadowrun?  Don't EVER annoy the Jesuits.<BR>
<BR>
I've read some of the novels. But I don't recall anything about the<BR>
Jesuits. <BR>
<BR>
I find the descriptions of Oregon, and especially Portland, to be<BR>
rather interesting, given that I live there. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:59:55 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> no but chameleon surface clothing would probably sell real well among the<BR>
> rave scene...<BR>
<BR>
Here's a lovely thought... A room full of people in clothing set to<BR>
"match backgound" (ie pseudo invisibility) in a typical club<BR>
atmosphere. One big distortion effect.<BR>
<BR>
Now consider that a likely "feature" of such outfits would be a setting<BR>
that gave a fixed random lag between the "show thru" and changes in the<BR>
background. In other words, looking at someone, their outfit would be<BR>
attempting to match what the background had been .2 seconds ago. Or 5<BR>
seconds, or whatever.<BR>
<BR>
Picture a room full of people with that version, all set to different<BR>
delays. Who needs acid?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:05:50 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: strange UWPs, and Tech level advancement<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Tech level advancement: would the Imperial<BR>
> authorities, and corporations, really deisre that all<BR>
> the worlds reach Tech Level 15? And if so, wouldn't it<BR>
> be difficult to go directly from, say, GTL4 to 15 in<BR>
> just a year or two? Maybe Acme Interstellar has been<BR>
> making Jump-6 ships for the past five hundred years,<BR>
> but if it comes across a world where they're still<BR>
> rattling around in carts drawn by servants, they might<BR>
> be better off making biplanes for the locals, which<BR>
> after all, they're more likely to be able to afford<BR>
> (30kCr vs 30MCr)=20<BR>
> Thoughts, anybody?<BR>
<BR>
Given the huge databases showing both sucesses *and* failures at<BR>
upgrading tech levels that are likely to be part of the "standard data<BR>
packets" leaders may be a bit more willing to take things one step at a<BR>
time. <BR>
<BR>
So they'll pick and chose stuff from among the higher TL goodies based<BR>
on available resources, local needs, and potential impact. <BR>
<BR>
Biplanes are fairly low impact if you've got wood and cloth, but not<BR>
huge amounts of metal. And they are both rugged, and easily repaired<BR>
with a few simple tools.<BR>
<BR>
And if the population is scattered without *too* much water or too many<BR>
high mountains in between they'll work just fine for getting around. <BR>
<BR>
Railroads are good too, but require heavier industry, and a *lot* of<BR>
work laying rails. But they are good for moving bulk freight cheaply.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:19:28 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
>> In mail you write:<BR>
>> <BR>
>>> 2)  Life requires ample supplies of hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, and<BR>
>>> carbon  (in the long run, no life support system is leakproof).  Of<BR>
>>> these, only  oxygen is readily available on a rockball.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> What about iceballs? And with traveller tech, comets are *easy* to mine<BR>
>> for volatiles.<BR>
><BR>
> Iceballs are low-metal, which can also be an annoyance (however, they do <BR>
> have all the other materials I mentioned).  While its possible to get your <BR>
> volatiles from elsewhere (typically somewhere in the outer system) that's <BR>
> kind of like getting your water delivered by truck on earth -- you can do <BR>
> it, but it doesn't make for cheap water...<BR>
<BR>
That's a matter of *scale*. If you are grabbing comets and the like,<BR>
it'll be like LA's aqueducts. Expensive to build, but providing *cheap*<BR>
materials for a modest continuing outlay. <BR>
<BR>
Figure out just how *much* water, methane, ammonia etc you can get out<BR>
of a few cubic km of comet...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:25:12 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2000 17:38:35 -0500<BR>
>>From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
>>Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
>><BR>
>>So, far the best solutions I've seen are:<BR>
>><BR>
>>1.  More realistic radiators limiting volume<BR>
>><BR>
>>    This has a lot going for it because it works on boats and ships.<BR>
>>    Unfortunately, it also might work against Up Ports.  <BR>
><BR>
> Fixed facilities like highports can have great gaudy radiator fins that<BR>
> aren't feasible for mobile ships (especially streamlined ones). It doesn't<BR>
> totally solve the problem, but it goes a long way in that direction.<BR>
<BR>
As I said elsewhere, you don't *need* fins if you make the port a<BR>
"thin" (relatively speaking) disk. Think CD or LP...<BR>
<BR>
Or a long thin tube (again, thin is "relative").<BR>
<BR>
Neither is suitable for ships. But besides giving lots of radiator<BR>
area, they give lots of area for grapples or other docking structures.<BR>
 <BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 01:46:27 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> >Personally, I find the 'skirt' rather funny looking.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Sadly, there's no real good way to armor that area (which most people feel<BR>
>> is somewhat vital) and maintain mobility *and* deal with all the...<BR>
>> plumbing required.  Using the usual BD plate would require a codpiece that<BR>
>> would make Dirk Diggler green with envy.  And that would be for the female<BR>
>> Marines.<BR>
><BR>
>> Keeping enough mobility for the hips to allow BD-equipped troopers to move<BR>
>> in a tactical sense just precludes heavy armor around the hips and groin.<BR>
><BR>
> I'm afraid I have to say that this is just plain silly.<BR>
><BR>
> We're talking _battledress_ here, in other words high-tech _powered_ armour,<BR>
> not combat armour.<BR>
><BR>
> I'd agree with skirts for combat armour, but not battledress, as it makes no<BR>
> sense.<BR>
><BR>
> There is absolutely no requirement for 'cod-pieces' (battledress is _not_<BR>
> skin-tight, and does not have to follow body contours, though I'm sure the<BR>
> people who put nipples on Batman's chest plate would disagree ) and there is<BR>
> also no need for hip mobility, as it's the suit that moves, not the person<BR>
> inside it.<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, but the person inside *has* to move, and move with the armor at<BR>
that. After all, it's trying to assist the movements of his arms and<BR>
legs, It's *not* "piloted" the way those stupid giant robots in anime<BR>
are. <BR>
<BR>
So the armor is either human sized, but with much thicker (and<BR>
therefore movement limited) arms and legs, or it has to be more than 12<BR>
feet tall, so that the wearer fits *completely* inside the torso, with<BR>
room to move thru the full range of motion that the suit mimics.<BR>
<BR>
Any intermediate size has the wearers arms and legs *partly* inside the<BR>
arms and legs of the suit, with the resault that things like walking<BR>
will require positions of the wearers legs (or arms) that aren't<BR>
*possible* due to the position of the *suits* legs (or arms) when in<BR>
the same position. <BR>
<BR>
Simple example, picture a person with their right leg bent so that the<BR>
upper leg sticks straight out to the front, and the lower leg points<BR>
straight down (ie 90 degree bends at hip and knee).<BR>
<BR>
Now picture the *suit* with it's legs in the same position. Now try to<BR>
overlay the suit on the person. The only sizes that work are "human<BR>
sized" and "big enough for human in capsul in suit body". All sizes<BR>
in between will be impossible to match the human and the suit.<BR>
<BR>
A 12+ foot suit is a *big* target.<BR>
<BR>
A human sized suit is going to have *real* problems at the joints,<BR>
especially the hips. Because the joints have to move around the *same*<BR>
rotational centers as the joints inside or you'll dislocate or even<BR>
break bones every time you move. <BR>
<BR>
But that means that the sheer *bulk* of the suit (armor, power assist<BR>
systems, etc) is going to require sudbtantial *gaps* at places like the<BR>
back of the knee, the elbows, the armpits, and especially around the hips.<BR>
<BR>
Find a book on plate armor and note all the places they had to leave<BR>
gaps to keep the armor from binding on itself. This is an unavoidable<BR>
problem with human sized armor.<BR>
<BR>
Another thing to check is the hardsuits used for really deep diving.<BR>
Note that since they *can't* have gaps, they have to have those weird<BR>
bulbous joints, as well as the "rotating sleeve" joints in the upper<BR>
and lower arms. <BR>
<BR>
I've worn a partial suit of plate armor that used those sleeve joints<BR>
in the upper arms. You had to learn how to move your arms so as to<BR>
*not* fight the joints. I'm told the deep diving suits are even worse. <BR>
<BR>
You *can* learn. But it takes time and practice. And I don't think that<BR>
sort of joint is practical for power assisted armor. Mostly because if<BR>
you forget and use the wrong "reflexes" you'll *jam* the joints to the<BR>
point where you need to be cut out of it.<BR>
<BR>
Frankly, I don't think "man-sized" BD is *possible*. Not until we have<BR>
the sort of "magic tech" that allows solid metal to bend like rubber<BR>
when the wearer moves and yet still be ultra-rigid against outside<BR>
forces. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:16:40 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
>>I'm afraid I have to say that this is just plain silly.<BR>
>>We're talking _battledress_ here, in other words high-tech<BR>
>>_powered_ armour, not combat armour.I'd agree with skirts<BR>
>>for combat armour, but not battledress, as it makes no<BR>
>>sense.<BR>
>>There is absolutely no requirement for 'cod-pieces' <BR>
>>(battledress is _not_ skin-tight, and does not have to<BR>
>>follow body contours, though I'm sure the people who put<BR>
>>nipples on Batman's chest plate would disagree ) and there<BR>
>>is also no need for hip mobility, as it's the suit that<BR>
>>moves, not the person inside it.<BR>
><BR>
> That doesn't comport with canon, and it is inconsistent<BR>
> with at least my view on how the armor is directed to move,<BR>
> which is by means of internal motion sensors.  As you move<BR>
> your arm, for example, it contacts the sensors inside the<BR>
> sleeve, which tell the armor arm to move in precisely the<BR>
> same manner as your arm.  You are therefore fitting inside<BR>
> the armor, your limbs in its limbs, etc.  Therefore the<BR>
> hips have to be able to move like human hips.  <BR>
<BR>
And as I alluded to (but failed to explicitly state) in another post,<BR>
that *requires* huge gaps in the armor at places like the back of the<BR>
knees. The hips are a nightmare. That's why *real* armor *did* use a<BR>
skirt. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:21:22 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
> anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
I like it, but it'd be nice if "patches" were available as well. Along<BR>
with booklets of sheets giving enough info to allow making "proper"<BR>
uniforms. <BR>
<BR>
Alas, as out of shape as I am, I decided long ago that the only uniform<BR>
I'd look "right" in would be that of an X-boat pilot. For that, being<BR>
out of shape tends to fit. It's not like there's a lot of room for<BR>
excercising in one of those. :-)<BR>
<BR>
And somehow, I doubt that there'd be enough demand for the required<BR>
patches insignia. <sigh><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:26:48 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
>> "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
><BR>
> Probably not, unless the quality was high enough.<BR>
<BR>
It occurs to me that *if* there was enough variety, *maybe* they'd work<BR>
out as a way for players to do their character(s) in a more visible or<BR>
more detailed form. <BR>
<BR>
"What's that?"<BR>
<BR>
"That's Isaak, my Scout character from Traveller..."<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:50:23 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 01:18 PM 7/26/2000 +0000, you wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>       There is a reason that us Navy-types *really*, *really* like EMCON<BR>
>>Policy:  Silent/ Silent.<BR>
><BR>
> *WEG*  All of these things came up during the GF playtest, and it was<BR>
> pointed out that emitting anything would likely bring death unto thoust<BR>
> quickly.<BR>
><BR>
> Even tankers while have to shoot and scoot, using pop-up manuvers and<BR>
> hugging terrain.<BR>
<BR>
And they still have to lie doggo with their CG off so as to avoid<BR>
sticking out like a neon sign on densitometers (or some other<BR>
equivalent sensors).<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:38:04 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> What really annoys me about RPG miniatures that never happens much with toy<BR>
> soldiers is that the 25mm scale means they fit a sculpture into an inch<BR>
> square. It doesn't mean they made any effort to make the thing to scale with<BR>
> the real thing. Really 1:72 scale is 1" and 25mm figures are nowhere near<BR>
> looking like that. If I were playing a WWII game or a Conan game I could<BR>
> press 1:72 soldiers into service but if you look at the miniatures that are<BR>
> supposedly one with these then there is no relation. I know in a lot of<BR>
> games the 25mm scale refers to the diameter of the base, but miniatures have<BR>
> random base sizes so they don't relate to this. I would like to see 1:72<BR>
> scale plastic miniatures like ESCI or Airfix make and I would like them to<BR>
> have 1" around bases and be to scale rather than this 25mm nonsense. I would<BR>
> like them to come in packets so I could get a box for several dollars<BR>
> instead of paying a buck or two apiece for a pewter sculpture that lacks<BR>
> detail and isn't scaled well. If they can do it for soldiers why not Third<BR>
> Imperium Star Marines or Goblins or Dragons or Superheroes. If you want to<BR>
> know why miniatures don't catch on that has to be one of the two big<BR>
> reasons. The other being that it can limit the imagination for some, but<BR>
> outside of fantasy as Traveller is this second problem isn't a factor.<BR>
<BR>
Well, keep in mind that we are a *much* smaller market. And generally<BR>
poorer. The highly detailed historical soldiers get sold to collectors<BR>
and the like. <BR>
<BR>
As for plastic, keep in mind that until you get *huge* production runs<BR>
plastic is *EXPENSIVE*. It costs thousands of dollar just to get the<BR>
*mold* cut (special steel, and finicky machining). And it costs<BR>
something similar just to get the injection molding machine set up for<BR>
the run. So you are out anything from $2k to $10k before you have one<BR>
salable figure.<BR>
<BR>
And you have to contract out both the mold making and the production.<BR>
The mold making tools are expensive. So are the injection molding<BR>
machines. <BR>
<BR>
Airfix already *had* all the people and equipment because they were a<BR>
major maker of plastic models.<BR>
<BR>
To break even with Traveller figures, you need a near guaranteed market<BR>
for multiple *thousands* of figures, in the first year. And it'll cost<BR>
a thousand or more for the next run...<BR>
<BR>
Cast "lead" miniatures can be done at *home* if you have the skills to<BR>
produce a master figure. There's so much less overhead it's not even<BR>
funny. <BR>
<BR>
Constant scale is a matter of having *professionals* doing the<BR>
sculpting. People who are *willing* to be held to rules about scale.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 02:54:59 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Tech and Population "Problems"<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> <Anthony Jackson><BR>
> As such, there should be penalties for each of the following:<BR>
> Non-breatheable atmosphere (requires sealed structures)<BR>
> Zero hydrographics (requires importing hydrogen)<BR>
> Zero atmosphere (requires importing nitrogen).  If size < 3, also will<BR>
> have lost most of its carbon since it can no longer hold on to CO2.<BR>
> </AJ><BR>
<BR>
> Zero hydrographics merely means a lack of open water.  A few trillion-ton<BR>
> aquifers will keep you going for a long while.  If you start to run out,<BR>
> there are any number of easy solutions given Traveller tech.  Also, one<BR>
> might choose rock-balls that happen to have large deposits of carbonaceous<BR>
> rocks (from meteor impacts and so on).  This would be a good explanation<BR>
> for why the majority of rock-balls are not teeming with colonists: They<BR>
> select the particularly useful ones.<BR>
><BR>
> Nitrogen is more difficult.  It might have to be mined from elsewhere in<BR>
> the system, but the cost would not be prohibitive.  Alternatively, if you<BR>
> have a starport, you could take organic wastes "off the hands" of ships<BR>
> coming in.  You could also park a nice big comet in orbit and use that. <BR>
<BR>
The "carbonaceus" materials do have nitrogen (and hydrogen and oxygen).<BR>
That's why they are called CHONdrites (CHON=Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen,<BR>
Nitrogen). <BR>
<BR>
If you've got spaceflight, you can have as much of those elements as<BR>
you want unless you've got a *really* sparse planetary system.<BR>
<BR>
> defining things too much stultifies the imagination.  The point of<BR>
> difficult UPPs IMO is to force the GM to come up with interesting worlds.<BR>
> Without them you risk ending up with an endless series of futuristic<BR>
> Terranoid suburb-planets and Outland-style mining colonies. (oops, I've<BR>
> mentioned Outland, here comes Leonard's rant about explosive decompression<BR>
> of humans :-)<BR>
<BR>
Naw, you've heard it. And the problem was the special effects, *not*<BR>
that part of the story line.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:51:27 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	Several people have repeatedly commented they'd like to see a book of <BR>
Jesse DeGraff's 3D artwork published.  I have been talking with Jesse and <BR>
doing the legwork on a print run of material.<BR>
	<BR>
	There are essentially two options.  One is a professional print house <BR>
job.  Perfect bound, 8.5x14 glossy pages, 15 pages, etc.  Delivered price, <BR>
FOB my front door, would be $~110CAD per copy, presuming a 100-copy run.<BR>
<BR>
	Option two is an "in house" job using personal resources.  8.5x11 pages, <BR>
matte cover, spiral bound, 15 pages.  Delivered price, FOB my front door, <BR>
would be $~20CAD per copy, presuming a 50-copy run.<BR>
<BR>
	So.  The Question:  Which would you prefer...  more quality and the bigger <BR>
price, or is the "in house" job sufficient for your tastes?<BR>
<BR>
	Please reply to me off-list (or at least CC me off-list) and change the <BR>
subject to either:<BR>
<BR>
	TJAB - Pro Job<BR>
	TJAB - In-House<BR>
<BR>
	...so that my software can sort out the count.  I'll need at least 50 <BR>
replies to even bother going ahead with the project to the layout <BR>
phase.  We would then need payment in advance of shipping to ensure that <BR>
Jesse and I don't get stuck with a stack of books we can't get rid of.<BR>
<BR>
	Any ideas or suggestions you might have are also welcome.  Thanks for your <BR>
time.<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	    NET-City Communications....<BR>
	         Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
		http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/net-city<BR>
		sales@atlantic-online.ns.ca<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
	***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***<BR>
	-+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:03:54 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
Dom wrote:<BR>
> > Er, what is "moshing"?<BR>
> <BR>
> Pete, sit down and have a 'nice cup of tea and a piece of <BR>
> cake' (TM)....<BR>
<BR>
Mmm.  Okay.  :-)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Manic dancing in the 'pit' at the front of rock/metal concerts,<BR>
> often combined with Stage diving into the crowd from the stage,<BR>
> speaker stacks etc.<BR>
<BR>
Wouldn't dancing in the pit upset the orchestra?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> In UK terms, last concert I went to with this was Skunk <BR>
> Anansie. Travis and Marillion didn't have this ;-0<BR>
<BR>
I am not really familiar with those composers.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> BTW you at GenCon UK?<BR>
<BR>
As for GenCon I am currently in deep negotiations  with  my  boss<BR>
for the time off.  I  had  made  the  mistake  of  making  myself<BR>
indispensable, so I am now teaching someone else who to do what I<BR>
do so that I am dispensable again.  (Er, is that wise?)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2819<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za02.mx.aol.com (rly-za02.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.98]) by air-za01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:07:40 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:06:32 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id HAA09648;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:06:30 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:06:21 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id HAA09604<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:06:21 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:06:21 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007271106.HAA09604@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2819<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2820</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 7:36:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2820<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
Re: Good hobbies to ban on starships<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
Re: Scales<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
RE: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
Re: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 03:06:16 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> This also perhaps provides an insight into why Imperial fleet operations<BR>
> are predominantly conducted at the subsector and sector level. The Imperial<BR>
> Navy is too impossibly huge to manage as a whole; instead, it is<BR>
> effectively broken up into smaller, more efficient packages, with only<BR>
> token oversight and guidance from above. The same argument applies with<BR>
> equal force to the subsector bureaucracies and the Imperial nobility, and<BR>
> to the organization of megacorporations.<BR>
<BR>
Check "Gray Lensman" by E.E. Smith for an example of trying to deal<BR>
with a monster fleet. <BR>
<BR>
As near as I can recall, only Smith and Poul Anderson have every tried<BR>
to *realistically* deal with a galaxy full of inhabited races at tech<BR>
levels such that most of them could interact. <BR>
<BR>
Anderson did it an an obscure book that had countless numbers of<BR>
governments. They each had spheres of influence covering hudreds or<BR>
thousands of worlds, and had some sort of interaction with other nearby<BR>
polities. But sheer *size* kept them from knowing much of anything<BR>
about the rest of the Galaxy. (Btw, Earth had been *destroyed* by<BR>
someone, and some of the surving humans were trying to figure out who<BR>
had done it).<BR>
<BR>
Oh yeah, Vernor Vinge dealt with it in "A Fire Upon the Deep", also. <BR>
<BR>
Most authors either ignore the size of the Galaxy, or have most of it<BR>
as not interacting with the small area they set their story in. <BR>
<BR>
If a figure I read was corrrect, there are around 100 stars in the<BR>
Galaxy for every *person* on Earth. Which means that the people on the<BR>
list would cover Traveller's "known Space" and then some...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 03:25:07 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Good hobbies to ban on starships<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>         Ick...I've seen flint knapping actually done in an archaeology class<BR>
> - you end up with a large amount of waste (PILES of the stuff) that consists<BR>
> of various-sized flakes of razor-sharp glass.  I'd hate to be in her<BR>
> stateroom if the grav ever failed before she vacuumed up her latest project.<BR>
<BR>
I'd do it over a "vacuum table" just to keep cleanup simple (basicly<BR>
the work surface is a mesh to small to let anything you want to *keep*<BR>
theu, and air is sucked down thru the grid, which pulls scraps to the<BR>
grid or thru it)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 03:29:12 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> As I was catching up on two weeks of TML digests, I saw the following post:<BR>
><BR>
>>Date: Sun, 09 Jul 2000 13:48:29 -0700<BR>
>>From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
>>Subject: High TL Planets (was RE: TML landgrab: Esalin)<BR>
>><BR>
>>Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>><BR>
>>> I bet they *import* as much TL16 (or even *17*) tech as they can from<BR>
>>> the Darrians, and anyplace else they can. Even if the source is<BR>
>>> *sectors* away. I seem to recall the pre-Rebellion CT/MT Imperium<BR>
>>> having a few TL 16 worlds, and there being a TL 17 *somewhere*.<BR>
>><BR>
>>According to the statistical summary at<BR>
>>http://maps.grandsurvey.com/imperial_summary.html, there are actually 79<BR>
>>planets at TL G and 1 planet at TL H in the 3I! Where are these planets?<BR>
>>Have they been developed? What about the TL G planet? Where is this guy? I<BR>
>>always assumed that GDW handwaved Darrian into "mostly harmless" status to<BR>
>>avoid making it the center of too much attention. What about these others?<BR>
>><BR>
>>Wow. More checking at http://maps.grandsurvey.com/top_summary.html shows<BR>
>>that there are 93 TL G and 2 TL H planets in charted space. It looks like<BR>
>>there may be some seriously mysterious technology at the Secrets of the<BR>
>>Ancients resort and casino.<BR>
>><BR>
>>The possible availability of extremely high TL stuff is something which I<BR>
>>have never really considered. If a world rates TL H, it probably has some<BR>
>>industries where it is actually TL I or higher. These extreme TL planets may<BR>
>>be the source of many interesting gadgets. I am guessing that the<BR>
>>intelligence agencies of the big interstellar empires are also big consumers<BR>
>>of this technology. This advanced technology may also be so important to the<BR>
>>interstellar governments that these advanced TL places are carefully<BR>
>>protected and guarded.<BR>
<BR>
If *I* was in charge on such a planet, I'd be *real* selective about<BR>
what was allowed to be sold offworld, just so that the Imperium (and<BR>
anybody else) would have some *real* problems if they ever tried to run<BR>
a black op on *my* planet without my consent.<BR>
<BR>
Picture the 1950s or even 1970s FBI and KGB *trying* to plant bugs in<BR>
place that had current *commercially available* technology. Or trying<BR>
to protect themselves against it. <BR>
<BR>
Fiber optic & laser bugs, some of the hummingbird sized surviellance<BR>
drones you can buy *now* if you have the money, PGP & RSA encryption...<BR>
<BR>
2-3 TLs of tech difference leaves you wide open. <BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, the Soviets went to one-time pads a *long* time ago<BR>
for passing messages from agents. Those are *inherently* unbreakable.<BR>
Just inconvenient.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 03:52:35 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Scales<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> In a message dated 26-Jul-00 4:41:24 PM Central Daylight Time, <BR>
> owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> What really annoys me about RPG miniatures that never happens much with toy<BR>
>>  soldiers is that the 25mm scale means they fit a sculpture into an inch<BR>
>>  square. It doesn't mean they made any effort to make the thing to scale <BR>
> with<BR>
>>  the real thing. Really 1:72 scale is 1" and 25mm figures are nowhere near<BR>
>>  looking like that.<BR>
><BR>
> That's because 25mm is 1:76 (well, it's supposed to be*), not 1:72.<BR>
> 1:72 is a model airplane scale, and a few vehicle models are made in<BR>
> plastic in 1:72, but almost no metal gaming miniatures.<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, but at 1/76 scale, the distance from the base to the top of the<BR>
head of a 6 foot man would be 24 mm. <BR>
<BR>
25 mm miniatures are 25 mm from base to top of head (which is 1/72!) or<BR>
from base to eye level (call that 66") which is 1/66 scale. <BR>
<BR>
> 20mm is<BR>
> closer to 1:86, which is close to HO (model railroad scale, 3.5mm=1<BR>
> ft, or 1:87).<BR>
<BR>
HO is based on an english/english ratio, not a metric/english ratio.<BR>
But it's been too many years since I did railroad stuff (and I did<BR>
mostly S scale then)<BR>
<BR>
> Confusing, isn't it? * It's not helped by the fact that not all <BR>
> manufacturers mean the same thing when they say "25mm."<BR>
<BR>
There oughta be a law...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 04:00:28 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> The trick to stopping an asteroid from hitting a planet is to take<BR>
> advantage of the energies involved. You are all trying to deflect the<BR>
> asteroid - which DOES work, but takes a long time and great energy.<BR>
> The thing is you -don't- have to deflect it at all.<BR>
><BR>
> I don't have any reference books here, so I can't give the figures,<BR>
> but this is how it works:<BR>
><BR>
> What you must realise is that the he planet is orbiting around the<BR>
> sun, so the asteroid is heading for a MOVING target. You just have to<BR>
> ensure that when the asteroid passes through the planets' orbit the<BR>
> planet has moved somewhere else.<BR>
<BR>
Plus be far enough away that the planet's gravity doesn't drag the rock<BR>
in anyway.<BR>
<BR>
> So all you really have to do is to speed up or slow down the asteroid<BR>
> a little so the planets' orbit will have moved it out of the way. The<BR>
> asteroid will miss - because it was too early or too late.  You only<BR>
> have to change the velocity by a metre or so per second at a range of<BR>
> about a year.<BR>
><BR>
> The actual approach will depend on the specifics of the orbits, but<BR>
> in practice it is easier to retard the asteroids speed rather than<BR>
> increase it.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. *Any* change in velocity takes the *same* amount of energy.<BR>
Regardless of direction.<BR>
<BR>
> As someone else posted, nukes are the best way to go. The asteroid is<BR>
> probably rotating, so surface thrusters would only be able to fire<BR>
> part of the time.<BR>
<BR>
Well, if the axis of rotation points in a useful direction *and* the<BR>
rock can handle a thrust along that axis, thrusters work fine. :-)<BR>
<BR>
> Nukes don't actually touch the surface, so rotation of the rock is<BR>
> ignored.<BR>
<BR>
Mostly.<BR>
<BR>
> As always speed is essential. The further away you begin to change<BR>
> the asteroids' orbit the better.<BR>
<BR>
Right.<BR>
<BR>
> In reality, the same total amount of energy is required to retard the<BR>
> asteroid as it takes to deflect it.<BR>
<BR>
Also right.<BR>
<BR>
> However, in practice, you've got some things working for you that<BR>
> reduce what you need.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. You are making invalid assumptions.<BR>
<BR>
> For starters, only low tech nukes (and a delivery system) are<BR>
> required. A starship is optional, but not really required as long as<BR>
> the drives used to send the nukes are as efficient as the spaceships'<BR>
> drive. The important thing is that the nukes get into position<BR>
> quickly.<BR>
<BR>
Right.<BR>
<BR>
> Next, the nukes don't need complex targeting systems, because you are<BR>
> not trying to accurately divert the rock.<BR>
<BR>
*Very* wrong. You *have* to be accurate so as to avoid deflecting the<BR>
asteroid into the planet, or into an orbit where it'll get you on the<BR>
*next* pass.<BR>
<BR>
> Instead all nukes are to target the centre of the rock, and detonate<BR>
> at the optimum distance from it (Care would have to be taken that the<BR>
> nukes are spaced far enough apart to avoid being caught in each<BR>
> others blast).<BR>
<BR>
Nope. You have to target for a very precise location in relation to the<BR>
asteroid and it's path. You need to target for a point *close* (maybe<BR>
as much as 100 meters, likely around 10 or so) and that point has to be<BR>
in the right direction from the center of the asteroid to give a shove<BR>
in the proper direction.<BR>
<BR>
> Now there are several advantages to this approach that make it more<BR>
> efficient than merely trying to divert the rock (and also reduces the<BR>
> amount of debris). Firstly, the nukes only have to travel to a point<BR>
> preceeding the asteroid, so they can get into position faster (and<BR>
> therefore start to effect the orbit sooner). If you were diverting<BR>
> the asteroid the nukes would have to travel to a point -beside- the<BR>
> asteroid (which would have to be more precisely calculated and<BR>
> therefore requires more complex nukes/delivery system).<BR>
<BR>
Since you have to be well within a kilometer of the asteroid, you are<BR>
talking about 1 part in a billion accuracy *regardless*. <BR>
<BR>
> Next comes the efficiency savings. Because the nukes are being<BR>
> boosted directly at the asteroid, when they explode the explosion is<BR>
> directional, so they also impart part of their kinetic energy to the<BR>
> rock (not much, but every bit helps).<BR>
<BR>
Not enough to notice. The deflection is *not* from any sort of "blast<BR>
shock" from the bomb. In space, it doesn't have enough to matter.<BR>
<BR>
The deflection is because in space, 99.9% of the blast energy is<BR>
x-rays, which, if you detonate close enough to the asteroid (and use a<BR>
bomb design that focuses the x-rays in a specific direction) will<BR>
penetrate a few cm and then be absorbed, vaporizing subsurface rock,<BR>
and blasting out the material above. That material and the plasma<BR>
driving it are the force that changes the asteroid's course. And untiul<BR>
you reach a fraction of c, they aren't affected noticably by the<BR>
relative velocity of the bomob and the asteroid.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Of more importance, though, is what happens with the second and<BR>
> subsequent explosions. With each explosion, part of the surface of<BR>
> the rock is vaporised and debris is ejected from the asteroid.<BR>
<BR>
*Not* the surface. Subsurface vaporization takes place and blasts of<BR>
more mass, give a better energy to delta-v conversion than merely<BR>
vaporizing surface layers woul. Also vaporizing surface layers would<BR>
require a nuke designed to optimizing the conversion of x-rays to<BR>
thermal energy *inside* the bomb, which is very hard to do. On earth,<BR>
the atmosphere in the 30-100 meters closest to the bomb does that for<BR>
free. Without an atmosphere, the blast is a *lot* different.<BR>
<BR>
> The debris would normally continue to be a danger to the planet. But<BR>
> instead, it gets caught in the following explosions, which mainly<BR>
> blasts it back at the asteroid.<BR>
<BR>
Nope, it's long gone by the tiome the next blast happens. For one<BR>
thing, the blasts have to be *close* (see above). For another, the<BR>
material will disperse *long* before the next bomb arrives (you need to<BR>
space them thousands of km apart to avoid x-ray damage to each other.<BR>
<BR>
And in any case, that the speeds the debris leaves the asteroid with,<BR>
it'll gone into wildly divergent orbits, most of which *won't* hit the<BR>
planet, and the ones that do will be widely seperated in time. Not even<BR>
enough for a good meteor shower.<BR>
<BR>
> When it impacts on the surface, it imparts more kinetic energy to the<BR>
> asteroid and slows it further. So the explosions will actually sweep<BR>
> much of the debris up and deposit it back on the asteroid!<BR>
<BR>
Nope. But it doesn't need to be swept up either.<BR>
<BR>
> So you can see that a low-tech solution is more energy efficient and<BR>
> would cost less to implement, and be more effective than diverting<BR>
> the rock.<BR>
<BR>
It's *still* diverting the rock, regardless of whether the vector<BR>
change is adding to the velocity, subtracting from it, or adding a<BR>
sideways component. <BR>
<BR>
Which is best will depend on the specific situation (and involve calcs<BR>
I'm not up to :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 03:37:50 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
>>Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
> ...<BR>
>>ESCI/Ertl even did a very good 1:72 scale modern AFV series<BR>
>>(mine have seen a lot of action in the Imperium).  Why<BR>
>>couldn't something like those be done for Traveller vehicles?<BR>
><BR>
>   FWIW, I've been told by people looking into the same sort of <BR>
> thing a few years ago that the costs are prohibitive unless you<BR>
> plan to run _lots_ of copies - where "lots" = "more than anyone<BR>
> who's not an 800-lb gorilla in the industry can sell".<BR>
><BR>
>   One possibility is resin: anyone who has seen what Armorcast<BR>
> did with their old GW license - or what they're doing now with<BR>
> their _Battletech_ licensed models should appreciate what they<BR>
> could do for Traveller (or other SF) models in either 15mm, 25mm,<BR>
> or even 54mm (or larger!) scales. <BR>
><BR>
>   Another possibility is making metal parts to customize easily<BR>
> available plastic kits already on the market, but first you need<BR>
> a decent SF-looking hull to base it on - a beastie that is not<BR>
> obviously in abundance, IMHO :(<BR>
<BR>
I wish I could get some of the old Lindbergh Line models from the 50s<BR>
that they re-released in the late 60s, and then again in the late 70s. <BR>
<BR>
I still have the (badly damaged) wheel-type space station I built in<BR>
the 60s, and the replacement kit I bought in the 70s. The two versions<BR>
of the "Conquest of Space" type booster (one with a satellite under a<BR>
shroud and one with a winged passenger/cargo vehicle) aren't too likely<BR>
to be useful even if they ever *do* try to re-release them. The<BR>
moonship (an earth-orbit rendevous type) would make a good open-frame<BR>
type ship. <BR>
<BR>
Revell also re-released a bunch of space stuff in the late 60s. One of<BR>
them would be ok as a varaint sguttle of some sort. The other two<BR>
aren't very suitable. <BR>
<BR>
And then there's ship that was originally released as the Lief Ericson,<BR>
and then later released as a "ufo ghost ship". I have the later<BR>
incarnation. It'd fit Traveller ok. It's also the inspiration for the<BR>
MacArthur in "The Mote in God's Eye"!<BR>
<BR>
I used to own a "Space Coupe" model (from early 60's Dick Tracy<BR>
strips). It'd make an interesting ship in Traveller. Obviously a<BR>
non-human design, with lots of small "thruster plates" at the end of<BR>
the arms.<BR>
<BR>
And the model for the UFO from "The Invaders" could easily be made into<BR>
a decent ship design. I wonder if I still have that one.<BR>
<BR>
Check some of the stuff sold by the (flying) model rocket companies.<BR>
There was a "Mars <something>" kit I never finished building that would<BR>
make a good alternative design for a Scout. Sort of like a shorter,<BR>
wider DC-X. VTOL of course.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 04:22:24 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> More miniatures questions -- mostly brainstorming at this point, we still<BR>
> haven't decided yes or no for Traveller stuff, but SJ Games will definitely<BR>
> be doing Ogre, so the possibility exists of a Traveller line, and of a more<BR>
> general SF line:<BR>
> <BR>
> Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
<BR>
> - -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures -- suitable for PCs, etc. and for use in<BR>
> skirmish actions on deck plans and the like.Soldiers, civilians, merchant<BR>
> and navy ship's crew, terrorists, hijackers, pirates, low-tech savages, All<BR>
> of these in both Human and alien form.<BR>
<BR>
I really think that you should go with the 28 to 30 mm (GW) scale<BR>
rather than with a true 25 mm scale. By being slightly bigger<BR>
the larger miniatures can look much nicer.<BR>
<BR>
I think that the miniatures should be identifiably Traveller<BR>
miniatures, if we really need 'low tech savages' we can use<BR>
historical or fantasy minis. If we need Vargr or Imperial Navy<BR>
or Vargr Imperial Navy enlisted personnel we have fewer options.<BR>
<BR>
> - -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above -- air/raft, Intrepid, Antrim, etc.<BR>
> Resin, perhaps with white metal detail parts, and limited to stuff that<BR>
> isn't too large -- 25mm shuttles are out.<BR>
<BR>
If they are good enough to be worth buying then they're probably<BR>
too expensive to afford.<BR>
<BR>
> - -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm. Accel couches, control<BR>
> consoles, hatches, cargo containers, laser mining drills, chairs, tables,<BR>
> beds, barstools, crew-served weapons, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
Armorcast already does this sort of thing in resin for<BR>
generic SF dressing. It's not worth copying. Now as<BR>
(inexpensive) Cardboard Hero's it would be good.<BR>
<BR>
> - -- Starships for use with the GT Starships rules, Brilliant Lances, and so<BR>
> on. Tentative scale for these would be 1/1200 but for the larger ships we'd<BR>
> have to go 1/2400 or smaller (There are problems with a constant scale in<BR>
> starships -- either you end up with a football-sized Tigress or Ramparts<BR>
> the size of rice grains.)<BR>
<BR>
If you use two scales please make it clear on the packaging.<BR>
Call one 'Civilian scale' and one 'Navy scale' for instance.<BR>
I would love to see an AHL.<BR>
<BR>
> - -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures, mostly vehicles, but with infantry<BR>
> available, intended for use with rules such as David Pulver's AoD rules, or<BR>
> Striker/Striker II.This could include some COACC stuff (1/300 Ramparts and<BR>
> the like are certainly doable).<BR>
<BR>
No.<BR>
<BR>
> - -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
> "Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
<BR>
How about Emperor Strephon, Archduke Norris, etc. A lot of us <BR>
have a sentimental attachment to these characters and would<BR>
be likely to buy a 54 mm Strephon but not a generic 54mm Free<BR>
trader crew or Marine Ffire team.<BR>
 <BR>
> - -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
> costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
> anyway . . .<BR>
<BR>
I wouldn't buy them but I think you should do them if you can<BR>
do so inexpensively.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 04:31:40 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
<BR>
> Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net> said:<BR>
> >Maybe we could include a thruster plate maximum size by<BR>
> >tech level as well. That way high ports, which have little<BR>
> >need to maneuver could be over the size limit if they simply used HEPLAR<BR>
> >for their rare maneuvers but thruster equipped<BR>
> >ships could not.<BR>
<BR>
> It does seem reasonable that the maximum size of TPlates (or other<BR>
> MDrives) would increase by TL.  Let's try it!  I'll use HG MDrive<BR>
> %'s and multiply TL by a flat 10.<BR>
<BR>
>                         Maximum Ship Sizes<BR>
>         Max. Size   2%      5%      8%      11%     14%     17%<BR>
>  TL     of TPlate   1g      2g      3g      4g      5g      6g<BR>
>  ===============================================================<BR>
>   8        80      4,000   1,600   1,000     727     571     471<BR>
<BR>
I'm not sure if Thruster plates should be allowed at TL 8 at all.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>   9        90      4,500   1,800   1,125     818     643     529<BR>
>  10       100      5,000   2,000   1,250     909     714     588<BR>
>  11       110      5,500   2,200   1,375   1,000     786     647<BR>
>  12       120      6,000   2,400   1,500   1,091     857     706<BR>
>  13       130      6,500   2,600   1,612   1,182     929     765<BR>
>  14       140      7,000   2,800   1,750   1,273   1,000     824<BR>
>  15       150      7,500   3,000   1,875   1,364   1,071     882<BR>
>  16       160      8,000   3,200   2,000   1,455   1,143     942<BR>
>  17       170      8,500   3,400   2,125   1,545   1,214   1,000<BR>
> <BR>
> Well, that certainly does handle the big ship problem.  <g> It works<BR>
> a little better if you use TL^2 instead, but I'm not going to<BR>
> include that table.<BR>
<BR>
These sizes are a little small for me. They do give a Book<BR>
2 feel to things but I want to keep the 60,000 ton 2-G<BR>
Azhanti High Lightning for sentimental reasons. Additionally <BR>
your curve seems a little flat how about TL^4/10 for maximum <BR>
plate size in DT's. This would make the maximum plate size at<BR>
TL 14 3,814.6 tons., this would make the maximum size for<BR>
TL 14 2 g ships 76,832 tons which would allow the AHL.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 08:59:24 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Frank G. Pitt wrote:<BR>
> BTW, What I've been using for (militaryy) Traveller figures is the<BR>
> "Federation Security", "Federation Assault Troops" and "Federation Officers"<BR>
> from the old Task Force Games "Star Fleet" miniatures. They look great in<BR>
> Imperial Marine crimson.<BR>
> <BR>
> (They don't look anything like Star Trek, BTW)<BR>
<BR>
Strange paint can disguise a familiar-looking figure astonishingly well.<BR>
I, for instance, once had several 25mm "1930s American policemen" (I think<BR>
they were created with "Call of Cthulhu" in mind), but I painted them up<BR>
with dark grey tunics and brown pants, and they looked just perfect as<BR>
"generic sinister minions of the local Non-Charismatic Leader."<BR>
<BR>
                                                           - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 05:19:01 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
"Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> Not to sound paranoid or anything, <BR>
<BR>
To: Zeta Reticulan Local High Command, Luna<BR>
From: Researcher Muschla, North American Division,<BR>
R/E: Subject Legion, Legate; feelings of, paranoid<BR>
Solution: Increase thorazine dosage in his drinking water<BR>
by 25% posthaste. Accelerate by three months abduction &<BR>
implantation.<BR>
<BR>
> but don't the Hivers look like something out of Call of Cthulu?  <BR>
<BR>
The Hivers are perfectly normal. It's the Droyne that are<BR>
the problem. See COC ver. 5.5 p 133 for a drawing of a Droyne<BR>
Warrior labeled as a "Byakhee".<BR>
<BR>
"There flapped rhythmically a horde of tame, trained, hybrid<BR>
winged things... not altogether crows, nor moles, nor buzzards,<BR>
nor ants, nor decomposed human beings, but something I cannot<BR>
and must not recall."<BR>
<BR>
Droyne AKA Byakhee:<BR>
This interstellar race often serves Hast, er Yaskodray, the<BR>
Unnamable.<BR>
<BR>
Similarly Deep Ones, Eldar Things, Fire Vampires, Mi-Go,<BR>
Serpent People AKA Hhkahr,  and others can all be recognized<BR>
in their unspeakable horror (and purple prose) throughout<BR>
the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
> I mean they are totaly non-human, & they<BR>
> want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  <BR>
<BR>
By contrast 'real' aliens would probably prefer to simply<BR>
exterminate all life on earth with a near c projectile, see<BR>
the 'fiction' of Charles Pellegrano for details. :)<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> Most of the Cthulhu mythos has never shown a great deal of interest in manipulating humans.  Just making them into gibbering madmen.<BR>
<BR>
"Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
>Which is a form of manipulation in & of itself. <BR>
<BR>
The effects of Hiver pranks and experiments on humans<BR>
can be modeled as:<BR>
<BR>
1/2 Die Transform (minor: transforms normal person to RCES<BR>
Marine) Cumulative (+1/2) affects desolid (+ 1/4 in the TU.),<BR>
3" radius (+1) NND (+1) (Defense Successful EGO roll)<BR>
O End Persistent (+1) Concentrate (1/2 DCV) (- 1/4),<BR>
Gestures (- 1/4) (use voder) OIF Focus (Voder) (- 1/2)<BR>
Reduced by Range (-1/4) Real Cost = 21 points<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:55:35 +0100<BR>
From: Stephen Bankhead <bankheas@bankhead.dnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
At 17:23 26/07/00, you wrote:<BR>
>At 06:20 PM 7/26/2000 +0100, you wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>>-- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
>>>costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF<BR>
>>>anyway . . .<BR>
>><BR>
>>And the point is.....?<BR>
><BR>
>Some of us like to do costuming, and the can be used as props in the game.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, but a bit expensive?  Would they do one - off production runs?<BR>
<BR>
>I have to disagree, since 15mm is far too small to allow detailed painting.<BR>
<BR>
At the distance that even 25mm are viewed normally, detailed paint jobs<BR>
don't matter that much<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:14:20 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
Wait until you see the Elder Race of Yith that I just finished painting.<BR>
That thing looks too weird for Traveller.<BR>
 <BR>
Also, the wee shoggoth that came with its sire looks like a juvenile Hiver,<BR>
except that it has all of those randomly placed eyes.<BR>
<BR>
I have been painting more CoC miniatures than Trav minis, lately. This is in<BR>
part due to the fact that I've painted most of my Trav Stuff.<BR>
<BR>
Going up on my page very soon will be the CT SDB, Modular Cutter, Star<BR>
Frontiers Battleship, and some Privateers. My ISP let my password expire and<BR>
I can't get in to update the pictures. An email has been sent to support...<BR>
<BR>
Later,<BR>
<BR>
Glenn ( No, not that one, another one)<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
<BR>
Glenn E. Myers<BR>
ANSYS Inc.                Email: glenn.myers@ansys.com<BR>
275 Technology Drive      Phone: (724) 514-2913<BR>
Canonsburg, PA 15317      Fax:   (724) 514-3118<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
 <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:18:54 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
<BR>
> Several people have repeatedly commented they'd like to see a book of<BR>
> Jesse DeGraff's 3D artwork published.  I have been talking with Jesse and<BR>
> doing the legwork on a print run of material.<BR>
><BR>
> There are essentially two options.  One is a professional print house<BR>
> job.  Perfect bound, 8.5x14 glossy pages, 15 pages, etc.  Delivered price,<BR>
> FOB my front door, would be $~110CAD per copy, presuming a 100-copy run.<BR>
><BR>
> Option two is an "in house" job using personal resources.  8.5x11 pages,<BR>
> matte cover, spiral bound, 15 pages.  Delivered price, FOB my front door,<BR>
> would be $~20CAD per copy, presuming a 50-copy run.<BR>
><BR>
> So.  The Question:  Which would you prefer...  more quality and the bigger<BR>
> price, or is the "in house" job sufficient for your tastes?<BR>
><BR>
> Please reply to me off-list (or at least CC me off-list) and change the<BR>
> subject to either:<BR>
><BR>
> TJAB - Pro Job<BR>
> TJAB - In-House<BR>
><BR>
> ...so that my software can sort out the count.  I'll need at least 50<BR>
> replies to even bother going ahead with the project to the layout<BR>
> phase.  We would then need payment in advance of shipping to ensure that<BR>
> Jesse and I don't get stuck with a stack of books we can't get rid of.<BR>
><BR>
> Any ideas or suggestions you might have are also welcome.  Thanks for your<BR>
> time.<BR>
<BR>
Would here be any arrangements for something inthe UK, through BITS?<BR>
<BR>
Michael<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 06:34:37 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
<BR>
"Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >Well, the TL as production level doesn't have to mean that they _do_<BR>
> produce at that level, just that it's the best they _could_ do.  So the<BR>
> prison has machine shops and what-not.  The best the prison world could<BR>
> produce if it had to would be TL-6.  It obviously imports stuff to keep<BR>
> the prison going. <<BR>
> <BR>
> While I can the rational for limiting them to TL 6 production for security<BR>
> reasons, it loses strength when you see that it wrecks efforts at<BR>
> rehabilitation training as well as ensuring you need to keep importing<BR>
> material to keep a bunch of useless (not worth retraining) prisoners alive.<BR>
<BR>
Not every society will agree that prisoners will be or can<BR>
be rehabilitated nor is the homeworld necessarily always <BR>
willing to pay return passage to prisoners. The problems of ex<BR>
prisoners, if such even exist, may well be their own problem.<BR>
Another possibility is that the prison system is designed to<BR>
work its population to death or at best is unconcerned if<BR>
its prisoners are worked to death. Their are a lot of canon<BR>
extreme law worlds out there.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2820<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37]) by air-yh03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:36:16 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:35:33 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA16964;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:35:31 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:35:01 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id KAA16918<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:35:00 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:35:00 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007271435.KAA16918@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2820<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2821</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 10:56:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2821<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re:  Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
Re: Scales<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
RE: Sector Maps<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Grizzly Suit (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
Traveller 5 - anything new?<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:38:28 -0700 (MST)<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Another thing to check is the hardsuits used for really deep diving.<BR>
> Note that since they *can't* have gaps, they have to have those weird<BR>
> bulbous joints, as well as the "rotating sleeve" joints in the upper<BR>
> and lower arms. <BR>
> <BR>
> I've worn a partial suit of plate armor that used those sleeve joints<BR>
> in the upper arms. You had to learn how to move your arms so as to<BR>
> *not* fight the joints. I'm told the deep diving suits are even worse. <BR>
> <BR>
> You *can* learn. But it takes time and practice. And I don't think that<BR>
> sort of joint is practical for power assisted armor. Mostly because if<BR>
> you forget and use the wrong "reflexes" you'll *jam* the joints to the<BR>
> point where you need to be cut out of it.<BR>
<BR>
That is simply a matter of programming and training. (the suit and wearer,<BR>
respectively) The key difference between what you're talking about and BD<BR>
is that BD is actively helping the wearer move, and is programmed for<BR>
increasing resistance to movements that will jam it up. You move that way<BR>
and it's really hard, you start moving the way the suit works, and unlike<BR>
the armor or diving suit you're talking about, it's suddenly much easier.<BR>
<BR>
The armor, too, learns about you. Whether troops have their own custom-fit<BR>
armor, or there's a 'armor personality card' that they carry with them and<BR>
stick in the armor their wearing, there will be a lot of information about<BR>
exactly how they move and wear the armor available to the armor itself,<BR>
which will adjust for the wearer.<BR>
<BR>
This is not unlike my Newton 100, the original butt of all of Doonesbury's<BR>
jokes. The thing recognizes my handwriting very well, but it's a<BR>
combination of the Newton learning how I write and me learning how to<BR>
write so that the Newton likes it. If my friend Eric writes on it it's<BR>
horrible, likewise if I write on hi, even with our respective training.<BR>
<BR>
That's what acquiring the BD skill is all about. The suit learning how you<BR>
move and you learning how the suit wants to move, and engraining that in<BR>
muscle memory, so you don't have to think about it. So you can't 'forget'<BR>
and move the wrong way.<BR>
<BR>
I'll bet there's a distinctive gait that BD using troops have because out<BR>
of the armor they likely still move like they were in it. <BR>
<BR>
Remember the progenitor of BD, the MI Powered Armor in Starship Troopers.<BR>
Heinlein realized thatusing something like that was going to require a lot<BR>
of training. Same in Traveller...you need BD skill to use it at all.<BR>
<BR>
It's simply a matter of programming and training. A diver who uses those<BR>
suits day in and day out moves far more easily in them than a newbie, and<BR>
<BR>
I daresay, Leonard, were you to own that suit of plate armor and do an<BR>
hour or two of sword drills each morning, very soon you would a) have worn<BR>
the hinge points of the armor just right to accomodate your movements,<BR>
found the exact places to set all the buckles and straps (likely making<BR>
new holes in the straps in the process) and trained your muscle memory to<BR>
wear that armor like a t-shirt and a pair of comfortable jeans.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 06:41:32 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
<BR>
> I have been working on redoing the big 17x22" Spinward Marches map (that<BR>
> came with the boxed deluxe Traveller) an the question occurs.  Would anyone<BR>
> else be interested in large format maps of various sectors?  <BR>
<BR>
I would like to see the entirety of Atlas of the Imperium<BR>
made into one giant (60" x 60" ?) poster map. I would<BR>
pay a considerable sum for this map especially if it was<BR>
laminated & suitable for use with dry erase pens.<BR>
<BR>
Ideally this product would take all the data from AOI and<BR>
would present it in reverse color with white data and white<BR>
sector dividing lines on a solid black space field. This map<BR>
would also feature all the relevant borders in an appropriate <BR>
color. It would be to the same exact scale as AOI.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 06:46:43 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
"Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> According to the World Builders Handbook, Survey Equipment,<BR>
> "This timepiece sets itself, in one planetary rotation, to local zero<BR>
> meridian time, <BR>
<BR>
How does the timepiece know what local zero meridian time<BR>
is. If a Vilani explorer wearing on of these were to land<BR>
in Antarctica a century ago how would the watch know what GMT<BR>
was? Is the watch telepathic and sentient? <BR>
<BR>
The above description says nothing about how the watch knows<BR>
where the local zero meridian is or what time it is there.<BR>
This sounds more like an Ancient artifact than a TL 9 device.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 08:50:43 -0600<BR>
From: "Eric T. Holmes" <eholmes@lanl.gov><BR>
Subject: Re:  Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
Fellow TMLers and Todd Glenn:<BR>
<BR>
Todd wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<<  I have been working on redoing the big 17x22" Spinward Marches map (that <BR>
came with the boxed deluxe Traveller) an the question occurs. Would anyone <BR>
else be interested in large format maps of various sectors? If so, would <BR>
you be willing to pay, and how much? Have been in contact with Marc about <BR>
doing these up, and could possibly (barring licensing hassles) make these <BR>
available at reasonable cost provided I could get enough orders to justify <BR>
printing setup.  >><BR>
<BR>
My take on this...I've been collecting maps for a long time...topos,<BR>
antique, railroad<BR>
right of way, .....yep, star charts and sector maps, included.<BR>
<BR>
If the map is on plain paper, a fair price is $6 - 8.00 US.  If the map is<BR>
laminated<BR>
with a heavy duty plastic, emphasis on the heavy, a fair price is $10 - 12 US.<BR>
<BR>
So you can judge.... the current price for a USGS Topo is $6.00 in most stores.<BR>
(Barnes and Noble, Hastings, Walden and Borders are examples of big book<BR>
stores.)<BR>
You'll pay about $8.00 for a Michelin map, $10.00 for a topo from Engalnd,<BR>
(I assume there's a duty fee in those prices some where).  These may be in<BR>
folded<BR>
or rolled condition of presentation.  Some laminated city maps are around $10.<BR>
<BR>
Hope this helps.<BR>
<BR>
Eric<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:57:52 -0700<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
...<BR>
>I still have the (badly damaged) wheel-type space station I built in<BR>
>the 60s, and the replacement kit I bought in the 70s. The two versions<BR>
>of the "Conquest of Space" type booster (one with a satellite under a<BR>
>shroud and one with a winged passenger/cargo vehicle) aren't too likely<BR>
>to be useful even if they ever *do* try to re-release them. The<BR>
>moonship (an earth-orbit rendevous type) would make a good open-frame<BR>
>type ship. <BR>
><BR>
>Revell also re-released a bunch of space stuff in the late 60s. One of<BR>
>them would be ok as a varaint sguttle of some sort. The other two<BR>
>aren't very suitable.<BR>
<BR>
  It's perhaps worth looking into a well-stocked model store - from the<BR>
sounds of it, some of these (or fairly similar) models are out there,<BR>
either as re-releases or new (different) products.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 06:57:23 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote<BR>
<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> >> >Personally, I find the 'skirt' rather funny looking.<BR>
<BR>
> >> Sadly, there's no real good way to armor that area (which most people feel<BR>
> >> is somewhat vital) and maintain mobility *and* deal with all the...<BR>
> >> plumbing required.  <BR>
<BR>
> > There is absolutely no requirement for 'cod-pieces' (battledress is _not_<BR>
> > skin-tight, and does not have to follow body contours, though I'm sure the<BR>
> > people who put nipples on Batman's chest plate would disagree )<BR>
<BR>
> Sorry, but the person inside *has* to move, and move with the armor at<BR>
> that. <BR>
> Find a book on plate armor and note all the places they had to leave<BR>
> gaps to keep the armor from binding on itself. This is an unavoidable<BR>
> problem with human sized armor.<BR>
> Frankly, I don't think "man-sized" BD is *possible*. Not until we have<BR>
> the sort of "magic tech" that allows solid metal to bend like rubber<BR>
> when the wearer moves and yet still be ultra-rigid against outside<BR>
> forces. <BR>
<BR>
Does Battle Dress have to consist only of plates? Can these <BR>
plates be made sufficiently small so that the wearer can still <BR>
move? If each plate of battledress is dime sized, layered two <BR>
or three layers deep, and capable of moving (on tracks) across<BR>
the skin of the armor can the armor reactively move the plates<BR>
so that the wearer is always protected?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 07:07:59 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote<BR>
<BR>
> Alas, as out of shape as I am, I decided long ago that the only uniform<BR>
> I'd look "right" in would be that of an X-boat pilot. For that, being<BR>
> out of shape tends to fit. It's not like there's a lot of room for<BR>
> excercising in one of those. :-)<BR>
<BR>
How about a Merchant uniform?<BR>
<BR>
Merchant Captain Alexander Jamison [CT The Traveller Book<BR>
p 30-31, a Dave Deitrick illo] seems to be a rather portly <BR>
guy and he did fine in the Merchants. As they are not a military <BR>
service the weight requirements may be waived.<BR>
<BR>
Wearing a Merchant uniform has an additional advantage:<BR>
since their are oodles of Merchant companies you can pretty<BR>
much make up the uniform as you see fit and don't have to<BR>
worry about matching a canon uniform.<BR>
<BR>
For another less than skinny role models see TTB p 20 for<BR>
a Paul Jaquays illo of an adventurer who somewhat large<BR>
and was apparently dressed by a Vargr.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:31:51 -0400<BR>
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Tech and Population "Problems" <BR>
<BR>
Peter Newman wrote,<BR>
>Not every society will agree that prisoners will be or can<BR>
be rehabilitated nor is the homeworld necessarily always<BR>
willing to pay return passage to prisoners. The problems of ex<BR>
prisoners, if such even exist, may well be their own problem.<BR>
Another possibility is that the prison system is designed to<BR>
work its population to death or at best is unconcerned if<BR>
its prisoners are worked to death. Their are a lot of canon<BR>
extreme law worlds out there.<<BR>
<BR>
Well...*ahem*... of course. But are we going to admit the Imperium is so<BR>
non-PC? :)<BR>
Canon-wise, there are only two other examples to compare this too. T<BR>
The Darrian prison planet of Torment is also an extreme atmosphere with a<BR>
listed TL unable to keep the population alive (according to other sources on<BR>
minimum TL requirements). The stated intent of that is to force<BR>
rehabilitation through the cooperation required to survive because of that.<BR>
Still, I'd think the TL should be just a tad higher.<BR>
The adventure Prison Planet has the Imperial Prison equipped with<BR>
rehabilitation training shops though the administration doesn't really care<BR>
about actually using them and only assigns prisoners when some useless<BR>
do-gooder gets onto the TAS net again.<BR>
Oops, I think I just changed the topic to Punishment in the Imperium (I know<BR>
we did Crime already). But..<BR>
Is the Prison Planet of Mithras a dumping ground for lifers with the<BR>
official understanding being "life means until you die and we see no need to<BR>
do anything to delay that"?<BR>
Which solves one TL problem anyway. :)<BR>
<BR>
Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 09:38:53 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Scales<BR>
<BR>
The problem with minis vs scale model figures is proportion. The<BR>
heads are always too big in minis. They don't scale remotely to<BR>
people.<BR>
<BR>
Part of the problem with minis (metal) is shrinkage. White metal<BR>
shrinks, and more importantly, vulcanized molds that white metal is<BR>
spun into shrinks. Sometimes as much as 10%. Also, because of the<BR>
vulcanization process (pressure/temperature increase--unlike RTV<BR>
rubbers (Room Temperature Vulcanized=RTV)) the shrinkage can me<BR>
asymetrical. All told, it can lead to ugly results. Good (I stress<BR>
the word good here) resin casts have far more fidelity to detail,<BR>
and virtually no shrinkage (<1% resin/mold shrinkage). Also, the<BR>
rubber used for white metal molds is very grainy compared to RTVs,<BR>
it just can't grab the same detail.<BR>
<BR>
- -Merrick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:44:30 -0400<BR>
From: "Alan M. Nuss" <amnuss@atl.mediaone.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
I'm interested.  Would these be on heavy stock paper?  As long as the price is not<BR>
outrageous.<BR>
<BR>
Alan<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------<BR>
I have been working on redoing the big 17x22" Spinward Marches map (that<BR>
came with the boxed deluxe Traveller) an the question occurs.  Would anyone<BR>
else be interested in large format maps of various sectors?  If so, would<BR>
you be willing to pay, and how much?  Have been in contact with Marc about<BR>
doing these up, and could possibly (barring licensing hassles) make these<BR>
available at reasonable cost provided I could get enough orders to justify<BR>
printing setup.<BR>
<BR>
Right now I have most of the Spinward Marches sector map (based on CT<BR>
supplement 3) done, and next will be the Solomani Rim. Comments, questions,<BR>
flames?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- - --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- - --<BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:59:11 -0500<BR>
From: Mark A Nordstrand <markn@visi.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Sector Maps<BR>
<BR>
> I am looking to create a sector map of Corridor Sector using Corridor<BR>
> Sector data.  Does a program exist that takes sector data and creates a<BR>
> sector map which cab be printed out?  I have seen sub-sector map<BR>
> creators, but have not found one that makes sector maps.<BR>
> <BR>
Oh, good.  Time for another shameless plug.  Try<BR>
http://www.visi.com/~markn<BR>
The main caveat is, right now, I only know of it compiling on linux.  It<BR>
has compiled on winder's and Solaris in the past, and could be built on<BR>
the Mac or OS/2 as well.  I suspect anything other than linux would be<BR>
a fairly hefty undertaking right now.<BR>
<BR>
Realize that it is evolving (rather slowly) and uses a cross-platform <BR>
library (http://www.freiburg.linux.de/~wxxt/) which is also evolving<BR>
(much more rapidly).<BR>
<BR>
> I would prefer it to be about the same scale as the Spinward Marches map<BR>
> on the inside cover of the MegaTraveller Players Manual and the sector<BR>
> map of Massilia in Knightfall, but any other scale would be ok.<BR>
> <BR>
One of the main designs.  It will also print subsectors, a 'legend' like<BR>
what is in that manual, or ranges of worlds in a subsector.  A seperate<BR>
program also produces system maps similiar to what was used in the DGP<BR>
adventures (the concentric rings thingee).  Of course, these are all in<BR>
color.  Sample postscript output is on the web page, although I've never<BR>
been very happy with the full sector print out on my old hp.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Mark<BR>
<BR>
"So you want to be a rock and roll star..."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 08:45:12<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
At 05:38 PM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>    Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
>something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, & they<BR>
>want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
>that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking at<BR>
>Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page.  That<BR>
>Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
<BR>
That's it, I do the Templar page *today.*<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 09:02:02<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
At 12:59 AM 7/27/2000 PST, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Here's a lovely thought... A room full of people in clothing set to<BR>
>"match backgound" (ie pseudo invisibility) in a typical club<BR>
>atmosphere. One big distortion effect.<BR>
><BR>
>Now consider that a likely "feature" of such outfits would be a setting<BR>
>that gave a fixed random lag between the "show thru" and changes in the<BR>
>background. In other words, looking at someone, their outfit would be<BR>
>attempting to match what the background had been .2 seconds ago. Or 5<BR>
>seconds, or whatever.<BR>
<BR>
Set the outfit to react not only to the local background, but to the sound<BR>
level as well.  Now you have outfits rippling along with the flow of music,<BR>
conversation, and even the wearer's own bodily sounds.  Add in a reaction<BR>
to the wearer's movements, and you have one wild party.<BR>
<BR>
Clothing like this would be high-tech, and expensive, but would THE thing<BR>
among the hot club set.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
Egotist: a person more interested in himself than in me.<BR>
- -- Ambrose Bierce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 09:05:17<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
At 10:07 PM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> A lot of people don't know that the official color of the United States<BR>
>> Infantry is a light blue.  Or that the color of the Army's full-dress<BR>
>> uniform is blue.<BR>
><BR>
>And the aguilette is worn on the right shoulder, as opposed to every other<BR>
>branch.<BR>
<BR>
I still have mine, and wear it on my leathers.<BR>
<BR>
>> The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made up of<BR>
>> thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units, high-level<BR>
>> command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be fairly neutral.  I<BR>
>> chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own dress uniforms, which can get<BR>
>> quite colorful.<BR>
><BR>
><just to cause trouble> but what gray? Light, dark?  How about feldgrau<BR>
>(sp?)<BR>
<BR>
I believe I specified a dark gray.  <BR>
<BR>
>So the uniforms are on the British regimental model?  Complete with all the<BR>
>odd things one sometimes sees?  Does the 652nd light cavalry (Duke of<BR>
>Rhylanor's own) still retain their czapkas for formal dress?  Do regiments<BR>
>have a proprietary colonel (inhaber) as well as a field commander (colonel)?<BR>
>In full dress turnout, will we see busbys, shakos, pelisses and the like.  I<BR>
>hope so.<BR>
<BR>
I deliberately avoided specifics, except to say that everyone has to use<BR>
the same basic rank insignia.<BR>
<BR>
So you can go to town for your visions of Regimental Dress.<BR>
- --<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
"I created the universe; give ME the gift certificate!!"<BR>
                   - Lisa Simpson, Overachiever<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 09:20:06 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
<BR>
VonRammen writes:<BR>
> <BR>
> OK. I accept the figures for GWP, since I don't have Striker to do the<BR>
> calcs. (Is the formula short enough for some one to post it?)<BR>
> <BR>
> But the real point of my first post was that the small number of worlds<BR>
> capable of making 500,000 dton behemoths is a *construction* limitation on<BR>
> the number of ships that can be built/maintained. How much dtonnage can a<BR>
> world of a given population build in a year? It doesn't matter how much<BR>
> they can buy, if the yards can't handle the work.<BR>
<BR>
A world that can comfortably afford to build the ships can also afford the port capacity to build the ships.<BR>
> <BR>
> Also, are those figures for naval budget only for construction, or do they<BR>
> include such incidentals as crew salaries, ship overhaul, base<BR>
> construction, fuel (peacetime navies shouldn't use frontier refueling,<BR>
> right?), etc. et al.<BR>
<BR>
It includes construction, but the canonical figure is closer to 3% of GWP than to 1% of GWP.<BR>
> <BR>
> And in any case, isn't 2% of GWP somewhat of an optimax solution? Didn't<BR>
> Japan get by with a military budget of only 1% for *all* arms until<BR>
> recently. (Yeah, I'm aware that another power essentially paid for Japan's<BR>
> defense. Anyone else see the parallel? ;)<BR>
<BR>
Typical real-world military budgets are 1-5% (depending on the ambitions and security situation of the world), but can exceed that significantly under certain circumstances.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:18:00 EDT<BR>
From: CardSharks@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 7/27/00 9:43:02 AM Central Daylight Time, pnewman@gci.net <BR>
writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< <BR>
 I would like to see the entirety of Atlas of the Imperium<BR>
 made into one giant (60" x 60" ?) poster map. I would<BR>
 pay a considerable sum for this map especially if it was<BR>
 laminated & suitable for use with dry erase pens.<BR>
  >><BR>
<BR>
The world data exists in file form for all these star systems. It just takes <BR>
some editiing to eliminate the small typos and mistakes. The data will be <BR>
printed in one of the upcoming Reprint series.<BR>
<BR>
60 x 60 inch would be hard to do. I could see it done as a 23 x 35 inch map, <BR>
horizontal format. Maybe even just 1 color for marking up with markers.<BR>
<BR>
Marc<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:27:45 EDT<BR>
From: CardSharks@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
Using the format of one of the maps from the inside cover of MegaTraveller <BR>
(about 8-1/2 x 11) by 300% produces a sheet about 26 by 33. That makes each <BR>
subsector 3/4 inch wide, or each star system dot about 1/10 of an inch.<BR>
<BR>
26 x 33 is on the edges of practical (cost effective) commercial printing.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 09:49:58 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Thing writes:<BR>
> It seems to me that battledress is primarily suited to giving the wearer an<BR>
> advantage against lesser equiped troops or an even footing with similarly<BR>
> equiped troops, but I guess that is true with all filed equipment.  Then<BR>
> again I am starting to get a mental picture of two battle dress opponents<BR>
> facing each other at the top of a hill.  Standing still like Samurai as<BR>
> their passive and active systems start sweeping the specturm looking for a<BR>
> weakness and the first one to find a whole kills the other in one stroke.<BR>
<BR>
Heh.  Nah, the typical weakness of BD is 'if I shoot it with a big weapon, it dies', which doesn't require any special electronics to figure out.  The trick is finding the BD so you can shoot at it.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:13:03 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> I've worn a partial suit of plate armor that used those sleeve joints<BR>
> in the upper arms. You had to learn how to move your arms so as to<BR>
> *not* fight the joints. I'm told the deep diving suits are even worse. <BR>
> <BR>
> You *can* learn. But it takes time and practice. And I don't think that<BR>
> sort of joint is practical for power assisted armor. Mostly because if<BR>
> you forget and use the wrong "reflexes" you'll *jam* the joints to the<BR>
> point where you need to be cut out of it.<BR>
<BR>
No, if you use the wrong reflexes the onboard computer simply locks the joint, and releases it again when you're moving in a manner which _won't_ damage the suit.<BR>
<BR>
Canonical battledress is fully sealed and resistant to high pressures.  The deep diving suits you describe are probably the closest equivalent.<BR>
<BR>
In any case, my objection to the kilt had to do with appearances, not reality;)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:36:17 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Figure out just how *much* water, methane, ammonia etc you can get out<BR>
> of a few cubic km of comet...<BR>
<BR>
Shrug.  A couple billion tons; depending on the efficiency of your recovery mechanisms, sufficient for pop-8 to pop-A for a year.  However, you're going to have to either crash it into the planet or ship it down to the surface; the first is a bad idea if the world is inhabited, the second is equivalent to 'trucking the water in'.  Even so, you're going to need a considerably more expensive infrastructure for water transport than you'd need on world with freshwater reserves of its own.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:27:43 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Grizzly Suit (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!)<BR>
<BR>
> No, if you use the wrong reflexes the onboard computer simply locks the<BR>
joint, and releases it again when you're moving in a manner which _won't_<BR>
damage the suit.<BR>
><BR>
> Canonical battledress is fully sealed and resistant to high pressures.<BR>
The deep diving suits you describe are probably the closest equivalent.<BR>
><BR>
> In any case, my objection to the kilt had to do with appearances, not<BR>
reality;)<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Troy Hurtubise, creator of the Ursus MkVI anti-grizzly suit, has a new<BR>
armored suit in the development stage.  The first generation of battle<BR>
dress? see: http://www.netsurf.com/nsd/misc/troy.html.<BR>
<BR>
Also, Popular Science has a cover article on the future soldier.  It's<BR>
coming, folks...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:44:14 -0400<BR>
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
<BR>
At 01:25 AM 07/27/2000 -0800, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > Fixed facilities like highports can have great gaudy radiator fins that<BR>
> > aren't feasible for mobile ships (especially streamlined ones). It doesn't<BR>
> > totally solve the problem, but it goes a long way in that direction.<BR>
><BR>
>As I said elsewhere, you don't *need* fins if you make the port a<BR>
>"thin" (relatively speaking) disk. Think CD or LP...<BR>
><BR>
>Or a long thin tube (again, thin is "relative").<BR>
><BR>
>Neither is suitable for ships. But besides giving lots of radiator<BR>
>area, they give lots of area for grapples or other docking structures.<BR>
<BR>
The movie plot and script aside, I thought that Starship Troopers handled <BR>
the space station rather well.  The ships could dock to the edge of the <BR>
station as well as land on the upper hull, as many did after getting shot up.<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger<BR>
<BR>
"To our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations,<BR>
    may she always be in the right, but our country, right or wrong!"<BR>
      ~Stephen Decatur<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
mailto:kurt@blazenet.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:50:20 -0400<BR>
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
<BR>
At 07:57 AM 07/27/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> >From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> >Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles (Re: Minis Questions)<BR>
>...<BR>
> >I still have the (badly damaged) wheel-type space station I built in<BR>
> >the 60s, and the replacement kit I bought in the 70s. The two versions<BR>
> >of the "Conquest of Space" type booster (one with a satellite under a<BR>
> >shroud and one with a winged passenger/cargo vehicle) aren't too likely<BR>
> >to be useful even if they ever *do* try to re-release them. The<BR>
> >moonship (an earth-orbit rendevous type) would make a good open-frame<BR>
> >type ship.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Revell also re-released a bunch of space stuff in the late 60s. One of<BR>
> >them would be ok as a varaint sguttle of some sort. The other two<BR>
> >aren't very suitable.<BR>
><BR>
>   It's perhaps worth looking into a well-stocked model store - from the<BR>
>sounds of it, some of these (or fairly similar) models are out there,<BR>
>either as re-releases or new (different) products.<BR>
<BR>
There are two that I dearly want to acquire:<BR>
<BR>
1.  Released by Aurora, the Orbital Interceptor.  From the beginning, I <BR>
have always thought that it would make a cool patrol cruiser.<BR>
<BR>
2.  Also by Aurora (and Airfix, IIRC), the Pan-Am Shuttle from 2001.<BR>
<BR>
I've scoured the net looking for both, but no luck. :-(<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger<BR>
<BR>
"To our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations,<BR>
    may she always be in the right, but our country, right or wrong!"<BR>
      ~Stephen Decatur<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
mailto:kurt@blazenet.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:54:55 GMT<BR>
From: "Boris Cibic" <kafka47@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Traveller 5 - anything new?<BR>
<BR>
   I have been doing too much studying lately, to take an active part on the <BR>
TML list...<BR>
    Has anyone heard if Marc is anywhere near completing Traveller 5?  When <BR>
I last wrote to him, he expected done by last January, but correct me if I <BR>
am wrong there was been nothing released (not even any new playtest files).  <BR>
Has he dropped any further hints or suggestions regarding content?  I guess <BR>
that with SJG franchise and the CT reprints, there isn't any rush.<BR>
   BTW, does anyone have Challenge#68 that they would be willing to part <BR>
with?  And, one more request, could make a scan of the cover of FASA's High <BR>
Passage#1 as I have someone offering to sell but I think he has got it <BR>
confused with High Passage#2.  Send your replies to kafka47@hotmail.com<BR>
Thanks all,<BR>
Boris Cibic<BR>
kafka47@hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2821<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (rly-zd04.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.228]) by air-zd03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:56:11 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (v75.18) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:55:14 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id NAA24491;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:55:09 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:54:59 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id NAA24443<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:54:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:54:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007271754.NAA24443@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2821<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2822</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 1:54:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2822<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
RE: Large Format Maps<BR>
re:  Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
RE: Minis Questions<BR>
Testing, testing, 1 2 3...<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
minis<BR>
Re: minis<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: minis<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 10:56:40 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
> I'm interested.  Would these be on heavy stock paper?  As long as the<BR>
price is not<BR>
> outrageous.<BR>
><BR>
> Alan<BR>
<BR>
Definitely heavy stock (like the originals).  Does 17x22" seem appropriate<BR>
(fold twice to get 8.5x11"), or should I go to a bigger size.  A larger grid<BR>
size mean I could probably include planetary UPP in place of the hex number.<BR>
<BR>
Ideally, I would like to keep these in the $10-15 range (depending on size<BR>
and cost to print).  I could also do a legend free set so that anyone who<BR>
like punishment could join the maps together and make a truly huge map of<BR>
the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
What about domain level maps?  Any interest there?  These would have to be<BR>
huge and have very small hexes.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:48:03 -0700<BR>
From: Thing <gduke@kendaco.telebyte.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
>Definitely heavy stock (like the originals).  Does 17x22" seem appropriate<BR>
>(fold twice to get 8.5x11"), or should I go to a bigger size.  A larger grid<BR>
>size mean I could probably include planetary UPP in place of the hex number.<BR>
<BR>
17 x 22 is a nice size and I believe it is easy to get the cheap plastic <BR>
poster frames for prints in that size.  I would deffinetly be interested in <BR>
more MAPS.<BR>
<BR>
This reminds me that I need to see about getting my marches map from CT framed <BR>
for the gaming room.<BR>
<BR>
G.D.D.<BR>
ThingUnderTheStairs.<BR>
=====================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:49:01 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com><BR>
<BR>
>I just read the article in the latest SJGames JTAS issue<BR>
>and it strikes me that while canon talks about balkanized<BR>
>worlds I don't recall any mention of balkanized systems, a<BR>
>situation I consider much more likely. As a matter of<BR>
>fact it seems to me that interplanetary matters are very<BR>
>much ignored by Traveller. <BR>
<BR>
I have always assumed that the basic unit of administration<BR>
in the Imperium is the star system. The terms "world,"<BR>
"member world," and "member state" refer to the entire<BR>
system unless context requires otherwise.  The UPP refers<BR>
to the primary satellite (or group of asteroids) of that<BR>
star.  The Scout Service determines which satellite is<BR>
primary, basing its decision mostly on population and seat<BR>
of government or seat of real power.  <BR>
<BR>
Most member states above certain tech and pop levels have<BR>
outposts throughout their star systems.  For example, a<BR>
moon of the gas giant may have a facility devoted to<BR>
refining fuel, making basic repairs, and conducting search<BR>
and rescue operations.  <BR>
<BR>
Balkanized star systems present a few issues.  Each<BR>
separate state is a member of the Imperium (or not, as it<BR>
may be).  Each one has its own population, government, law,<BR>
and tech level, but the UPP only reflects the total<BR>
population, the fact of many governments, and an impression<BR>
of the average law and tech level.  <BR>
<BR>
The referee has to decide where to put the borders.  The<BR>
main world may be divided into various countries, like<BR>
present day Terra.  Maybe the surface dwellers are one<BR>
country, the troglodytes another, and the people who live<BR>
in floating cities are a third.  Maybe there are ten<BR>
surface dweller countries, fifty troglodyte countries, and<BR>
two floating cities.  Maybe the main world is one country,<BR>
the people living in the asteroid belt are the second, and<BR>
the outpost at the gas giant is a third.  Maybe the<BR>
asteroid belt has five different countries.  <BR>
<BR>
Whatever it is, it's the referee's decision.  The Grand<BR>
Survey teams just don't have time to capture that much<BR>
detail about 11,000 star systems.  <BR>
<BR>
See also the excellent article Travelling Without a<BR>
Starship in an early JTAS (early meaning on paper media).<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:51:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
> Definitely heavy stock (like the originals).  Does 17x22" seem appropriate<BR>
> (fold twice to get 8.5x11"), or should I go to a bigger size.  A larger<BR>
grid<BR>
> size mean I could probably include planetary UPP in place of the hex<BR>
number.<BR>
><BR>
> Ideally, I would like to keep these in the $10-15 range (depending on size<BR>
> and cost to print).  I could also do a legend free set so that anyone who<BR>
> like punishment could join the maps together and make a truly huge map of<BR>
> the Imperium.<BR>
><BR>
> What about domain level maps?  Any interest there?  These would have to be<BR>
> huge and have very small hexes.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I spoke to the printer and am now thinking in terms of 24x36" (standard<BR>
poster size). My minimum run is 500, and hitting $10 a copy should be easy,<BR>
depending on licensing fees to Marc.<BR>
<BR>
The next question is, what sectors are people interested in?  And what<BR>
milieu?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:04:57 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "Joseph Alberti Jr." <albertijjr@juno.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
I would be very interested in large format maps of various sectors of the<BR>
Imperium.  I would pay up to $15 per map.  The 26x33 size that Marc mentions<BR>
is a reasonable scale to use (bigger would be better, but to this may be <BR>
expensive).  If they were laminated in some way so that you could use<BR>
crayons on , that would be helpful.  One could mark up a sector map as<BR>
needed  for an adventure, then erase it for use another time.<BR>
<BR>
This aspect would be especially useful for MegaTraveller players or Classic<BR>
Traveller players (during the Fifth Frontier War), where the factional front<BR>
lines changes frequently.<BR>
<BR>
For my adventures in Gushemege Sector, making a new sector map for each year<BR>
of the Rebellion was a pain.  First, I used the blank sector map in the<BR>
Rebellion Sourcebook and filled  in the star systems by hand and then placed<BR>
the factional boundaries with a colored pencil.<BR>
<BR>
This is a great idea if it could be done.  I would be willing to help out if<BR>
help is needed.<BR>
<BR>
Joe Alberti<BR>
"Long Live Emperor Dulinor!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:07:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
>From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
<BR>
>>From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
>>What Grenadier did was great. I have boxed sets of<BR>
>>marines and adventurers, and I love them. Wish I had the<BR>
>>Aliens.<BR>
>I have lots of Grenadier Traveller aliens, but no longer<BR>
<BR>
Sorry -- that was supposed to go to private email.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:19:37 -0700<BR>
From: Rodney Basler <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
Subject: Testing, testing, 1 2 3...<BR>
<BR>
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand<BR>
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF7FF.9A8594B0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
<BR>
They just changed my email system at work..is this coming through in the<BR>
evil MIME?<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav:  How much shoehorning must take place for a character's<BR>
communicators and datalinks to work on any given planet?  What if a planet<BR>
has developed a computing system that uses a base-3 (+, 0, -) and really<BR>
doesn't want to change?  And you thought that Microsoft was bad...<BR>
<BR>
	Rod Basler, COFIT<BR>
- ------------------------------------<BR>
Dislaimer - They tell me to think, _what_ I think is my own problem.<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF7FF.9A8594B0<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<HEAD><BR>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =<BR>
charset=3Diso-8859-1"><BR>
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =<BR>
5.5.2651.75"><BR>
<TITLE>Testing, testing, 1 2 3...</TITLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
They just changed my email system at work..is this =<BR>
coming through in the evil MIME?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav:&nbsp; How much shoehorning must take place =<BR>
for a character's communicators and datalinks to work on any given =<BR>
planet?&nbsp; What if a planet has developed a computing system that =<BR>
uses a base-3 (+, 0, -) and really doesn't want to change?&nbsp; And =<BR>
you thought that Microsoft was bad...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Rod =<BR>
Basler, COFIT<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------------<BR>
Dislaimer - They tell me to think, _what_ I think is =my own problem.<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF7FF.9A8594B0--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:13:57 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
> I would be very interested in large format maps of various sectors of the<BR>
> Imperium.  I would pay up to $15 per map.  The 26x33 size that Marc<BR>
mentions<BR>
> is a reasonable scale to use (bigger would be better, but to this may be<BR>
> expensive).  If they were laminated in some way so that you could use<BR>
> crayons on , that would be helpful.  One could mark up a sector map as<BR>
> needed  for an adventure, then erase it for use another time.<BR>
><BR>
> This aspect would be especially useful for MegaTraveller players or<BR>
Classic<BR>
> Traveller players (during the Fifth Frontier War), where the factional<BR>
front<BR>
> lines changes frequently.<BR>
><BR>
> For my adventures in Gushemege Sector, making a new sector map for each<BR>
year<BR>
> of the Rebellion was a pain.  First, I used the blank sector map in the<BR>
> Rebellion Sourcebook and filled  in the star systems by hand and then<BR>
placed<BR>
> the factional boundaries with a colored pencil.<BR>
><BR>
> This is a great idea if it could be done.  I would be willing to help out<BR>
if<BR>
> help is needed.<BR>
<BR>
The big issue here is going to be minimum run size.  I need to make sure<BR>
that I can get rid of 500 copies of each map to make it economically viable.<BR>
Given that CT is being reprinted (and I'm a CT Ref), I've done the first two<BR>
maps using CT supplements 3 and 10 for data, borders, etc.  Standard poster<BR>
size (24x36) means I can probably sell these for something around $10<BR>
(guestimate only, don't hold me to this yet).<BR>
<BR>
I'm also now thinking in terms of doing a "Naval Strategic Map" that would<BR>
be printed on a white background, cover a larger area, and be laminated for<BR>
DryErase of similar markers.  It would include only planetary systems, UPP,<BR>
bases etc, possibly with watermark borders from various milieu.  Thoughts?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 12:26:55 -0700<BR>
From: sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
<BR>
shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> If *I* was in charge on such a planet, I'd be *real* selective about<BR>
> what was allowed to be sold offworld, just so that the Imperium (and<BR>
> anybody else) would have some *real* problems if they ever tried to<BR>
> run a black op on *my* planet without my consent.<BR>
> <BR>
> Picture the 1950s or even 1970s FBI and KGB *trying* to plant bugs in<BR>
> place that had current *commercially available* technology. Or trying<BR>
> to protect themselves against it. <BR>
> <BR>
> Fiber optic & laser bugs, some of the hummingbird sized surviellance<BR>
> drones you can buy *now* if you have the money, PGP & RSA<BR>
> encryption...<BR>
<BR>
Hummingbird sized surveillance drones???  Cool!  Do you have any <BR>
references for these.  The smallest that I'd heard of are about the <BR>
size of a small radio-controlled plane.  <BR>
<BR>
Thanks-<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:42:49 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: minis<BR>
<BR>
I'll join in with 25mm being the most useful.<BR>
<BR>
Some 54mm would just be too cool to pass up though.<BR>
54mm Vargr would be mondo cool.<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
It was blasphemous, it was sacrilegious, and it was a little bit too much fun.<BR>
http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:04:18 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: minis<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Mark Urbin wrote:<BR>
> I'll join in with 25mm being the most useful.<BR>
<BR>
I agree at 25mm would be the best scale, if only because there are <BR>
so many *other* 25mm figures availables which the inventive referee<BR>
could press into service, as necessary.<BR>
                                                       - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:14:00 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Greetings all,<BR>
><BR>
> I have been working on redoing the big 17x22" Spinward Marches map (that<BR>
> came with the boxed deluxe Traveller) an the question occurs.  Would anyone<BR>
> else be interested in large format maps of various sectors?<BR>
<BR>
Yes.<BR>
<BR>
> If so, would you be willing to pay, and how much?<BR>
<BR>
Yes, not sure. Maybe $5?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:14:09 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
<BR>
>From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
<BR>
Have you sent these to the Classic Traveller Starships<BR>
mailing list?<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:20:47 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
<BR>
>From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
>Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
>I had asked,<BR>
>> I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
>>  actually produced?  <BR>
<BR>
You replied:<BR>
>Yes -- weighed damn near two pounds and cost a fortune.<BR>
<BR>
Two pounds?  What was it made of and how big was it?  <BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:35:46 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
At 7:06 -0400 27/7/00, Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com> wrote:<BR>
>I can also supply the raw Adobe Illustrator files so you can print your own.<BR>
>Be warned, large format, high resolution prints (1200 dpi) are costly ($25+<BR>
>here in Portland, OR. YMMV).  I'd like to keep price around $10 or less, but<BR>
>it will depend on how many prints are made.<BR>
<BR>
Which AI version?  I have an A0 printer at work, only 600dpi but....<BR>
<BR>
>I can probably squeeze in a UPP in place of the hex number, if people think<BR>
>that's valuable.<BR>
<BR>
I'd prefer a hex number.<BR>
<BR>
And I'd be interested in seeing buying the Solomani Rim, maybe <BR>
Marches. I wouldn't mind the whole Domain of Deneb either..<BR>
<BR>
But it depends on cost.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:39:59 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2813<BR>
<BR>
At 7:06 -0400 27/7/00, "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com> wrote:<BR>
> > Manic dancing in the 'pit' at the front of rock/metal concerts,<BR>
> > often combined with Stage diving into the crowd from the stage,<BR>
> > speaker stacks etc.<BR>
>Wouldn't dancing in the pit upset the orchestra?<BR>
<BR>
No, they move the orchestra onto the stage to avoid problems. <BR>
Sometimes they have a choral vocalist too, but they have been known <BR>
to join in with the genteel audience.<BR>
<BR>
> > In UK terms, last concert I went to with this was Skunk<BR>
> > Anansie. Travis and Marillion didn't have this ;-0<BR>
>I am not really familiar with those composers.<BR>
<BR>
I could bring some of their works to GenCon...<BR>
<BR>
>As for GenCon I am currently in deep negotiations  with  my  boss<BR>
>for the time off.  I  had  made  the  mistake  of  making  myself<BR>
>indispensable, so I am now teaching someone else who to do what I<BR>
>do so that I am dispensable again.  (Er, is that wise?)<BR>
<BR>
Hmm. Take a mobile with you and make yourself nearly dispensable?<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:35:27 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
On 26 Jul 2000, at 22:07, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> on 7/26/00 5:34 PM, Douglas E. Berry at gridlore@pop.mindspring.com wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > At 01:55 PM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> >> Isn't grey normally associated with the navy?<BR>
> > <BR>
> > On Earth, in the United States, yes.<BR>
> > <BR>
> > A lot of people don't know that the official color of the United States<BR>
> > Infantry is a light blue.  Or that the color of the Army's full-dress<BR>
> > uniform is blue.<BR>
> > <BR>
> <BR>
> And the aguilette is worn on the right shoulder, as opposed to every other<BR>
> branch.<BR>
> <BR>
> > <GF author mode: ON><BR>
> > <BR>
> > The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made up of<BR>
> > thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units, high-level<BR>
> > command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be fairly neutral.  I<BR>
> > chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own dress uniforms, which can get<BR>
> > quite colorful.<BR>
> <BR>
> <just to cause trouble> but what gray? Light, dark?  How about feldgrau<BR>
> (sp?)<BR>
> > <BR>
> > So a suit of BD set for "dress" will display the regimental colors.  For<BR>
> > example, the "Blacklegs" regiment (311th Rapid Interface Infantry, Unified<BR>
> > Army of Shumisdi) set their suit legs to match the black trousers of the<BR>
> > regimental dress.<BR>
> <BR>
> So the uniforms are on the British regimental model?  Complete with all the odd<BR>
> things one sometimes sees?  Does the 652nd light cavalry (Duke of Rhylanor's<BR>
> own) still retain their czapkas for formal dress?  Do regiments have a<BR>
> proprietary colonel (inhaber) as well as a field commander (colonel)? In full<BR>
> dress turnout, will we see busbys, shakos, pelisses and the like.  I hope so.<BR>
<BR>
Here in NZ the Army is based on the British, but we don't have as much uniform <BR>
variation from Regiment to Regiment, in fact the variation here is from corps <BR>
to corps (that would branch to branch in a US style army) and Battalion to <BR>
Battalion in the Infantry. Here the variation is in the collar dogs for dress <BR>
uniforms, the colour of the berets and the corps belts on other uniforms when <BR>
not in the field (aside from my old battalion which was unique in that we had <BR>
collar dogs on all uniforms except when in the field).<BR>
<BR>
BTW the RNZIR (Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment), which is to say all our <BR>
infantry wears a green beret :) And your guys have no idea how to wear one <BR>
properly, either :)<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:42:42 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2805<BR>
<BR>
On 26 Jul 2000, at 8:33, Douglas E. Berry wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 11:05 PM 7/25/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> >1.Camouflaged<BR>
> <BR>
> Woodland? Desert (Brit or American)? Urban?<BR>
> <BR>
> >2.Green<BR>
> <BR>
> That's OD to you.<BR>
<BR>
When you're over here it's green :)<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:42:42 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
On 26 Jul 2000, at 10:00, Douglas E. Berry wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 09:46 AM 7/26/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >Never claimed that close combat was a bad idea for marines (note that these<BR>
> >numbers are for regular vision, the side vision cameras on an Intrepid would<BR>
> >have about 3x that typical range.  The primary sensors have spotting ranges of<BR>
> >200-300 yards on infantry).<BR>
> <BR>
> Now, put yourself in the tanker's boots.  You'r eplaying cat and mouse with<BR>
> enemy tanks.  One slip and you will be eating plasma.  You are also trying to<BR>
> keep track of your platoon leader, monitor the situation, and make your<BR>
> objective.  You will not be closely examining every bush to see if it has a<BR>
> Marine behind it.<BR>
> <BR>
> Or if you do, I've succeeded in slowing your advance to a crawl, which<BR>
> allows me to marshal a counter-attack in force.<BR>
> <BR>
> >However, my vision of what 'toe to toe' means involves 'tank, with three <BR>
> >guys in battledress in front of it'.  This just means 'three dead guys in<BR>
> >battledress', the frontal armor on a heavy tank is not vulnerable to<BR>
> >man-portable missiles.<BR>
> <BR>
> Is if you use a nuke.  :)  Hey, they don't give out those SEH medals for<BR>
> polishing boots y'know.<BR>
<BR>
Besides who siad anything about actually putting anything through the frontal <BR>
armour? How about into the turret/hull junction? Or just blinding the thing?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:42:42 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
On 26 Jul 2000, at 8:32, Douglas E. Berry wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 01:18 PM 7/26/2000 +0000, you wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> >	There is a reason that us Navy-types *really*, *really* like EMCON<BR>
> >Policy:  Silent/ Silent.<BR>
> <BR>
> *WEG*  All of these things came up during the GF playtest, and it was<BR>
> pointed out that emitting anything would likely bring death unto thoust<BR>
> quickly.<BR>
<BR>
Which is why I have doubts about all these ideas on point defence knocking down <BR>
everything that flies through the air. a PD system pretty much has to be <BR>
active, and to my mind that just makes it a great big fat target.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:41:55 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 13:54 -0400 27/7/00, Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU> wrote:<BR>
>That's what acquiring the BD skill is all about. The suit learning how you<BR>
>move and you learning how the suit wants to move, and engraining that in<BR>
>muscle memory, so you don't have to think about it. So you can't 'forget'<BR>
>and move the wrong way.<BR>
<BR>
....<BR>
<BR>
>Remember the progenitor of BD, the MI Powered Armor in Starship Troopers.<BR>
>Heinlein realized thatusing something like that was going to require a lot<BR>
>of training. Same in Traveller...you need BD skill to use it at all.<BR>
><BR>
>It's simply a matter of programming and training. A diver who uses those<BR>
>suits day in and day out moves far more easily in them than a newbie, and<BR>
<BR>
CJ Cherryh's Rimrunners comes to this kind of conclusion when <BR>
describing the difficulties fitting powered armour for the first time <BR>
and adjusting to it. ISTR that one of the characters has to have the <BR>
armour's amplification turned down until they get used o it, and that <BR>
it is individually fitted.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:51:28 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Stephen Bankhead wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> At the distance that even 25mm are viewed normally, detailed paint jobs<BR>
> don't matter that much<BR>
<BR>
Ah, but detailed painting is its own reward.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:54:04 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: minis<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Mark Urbin wrote:<BR>
> > I'll join in with 25mm being the most useful.<BR>
><BR>
> I agree at 25mm would be the best scale, if only because there are<BR>
> so many *other* 25mm figures availables which the inventive referee<BR>
> could press into service, as necessary.<BR>
>                                                        - J. Raynor<BR>
>Yep like I can here a lot of people mumbling, 'Why were they 15mm in the<BR>
first place?"<BR>
All the same an array of sizes would be best. What sort of time scale are we<BR>
looking at before these will be available?<BR>
<BR>
Michael.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:44:01 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
> At 7:06 -0400 27/7/00, Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com> wrote:<BR>
> >I can also supply the raw Adobe Illustrator files so you can print your<BR>
own.<BR>
> >Be warned, large format, high resolution prints (1200 dpi) are costly<BR>
($25+<BR>
> >here in Portland, OR. YMMV).  I'd like to keep price around $10 or less,<BR>
but<BR>
> >it will depend on how many prints are made.<BR>
><BR>
> Which AI version?  I have an A0 printer at work, only 600dpi but....<BR>
<BR>
AI version 8<BR>
><BR>
> >I can probably squeeze in a UPP in place of the hex number, if people<BR>
think<BR>
> >that's valuable.<BR>
><BR>
> I'd prefer a hex number.<BR>
><BR>
> And I'd be interested in seeing buying the Solomani Rim, maybe<BR>
> Marches. I wouldn't mind the whole Domain of Deneb either..<BR>
><BR>
> But it depends on cost.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Marc is checking on printers.  So far it looks like $10 or less for 24x36".<BR>
I've got a couple Solomani Rim sectors done, along with the legend.  It's<BR>
17x22" right now.  I can send you the Illustrator file and fonts if you want<BR>
to see a work in progress.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, I sent email to BITS about the possibility of selling these (don't<BR>
really want to get in the games business myself, not enough time).<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2822<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (rly-yg01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.1]) by air-yg03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:54:42 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:54:02 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA31518;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:53:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:53:43 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA31474<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:53:43 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:53:43 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007272053.QAA31474@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2822<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2823</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 3:43:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2823<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
Optima Font Needed<BR>
Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
RE: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
RE: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:56:46 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
<BR>
> >From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
> >Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
> >I had asked,<BR>
> >> I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
> >>  actually produced?  <BR>
> <BR>
> You replied:<BR>
> >Yes -- weighed damn near two pounds and cost a fortune.<BR>
> <BR>
> Two pounds?  What was it made of and how big was it?  <BR>
> <BR>
> --Glenn<BR>
> <BR>
I bet it was made of lead.<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:02:39 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
I'm interested<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 8:13 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> > I would be very interested in large format maps of various sectors of<BR>
the<BR>
> > Imperium.  I would pay up to $15 per map.  The 26x33 size that Marc<BR>
> mentions<BR>
> > is a reasonable scale to use (bigger would be better, but to this may be<BR>
> > expensive).  If they were laminated in some way so that you could use<BR>
> > crayons on , that would be helpful.  One could mark up a sector map as<BR>
> > needed  for an adventure, then erase it for use another time.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > This aspect would be especially useful for MegaTraveller players or<BR>
> Classic<BR>
> > Traveller players (during the Fifth Frontier War), where the factional<BR>
> front<BR>
> > lines changes frequently.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > For my adventures in Gushemege Sector, making a new sector map for each<BR>
> year<BR>
> > of the Rebellion was a pain.  First, I used the blank sector map in the<BR>
> > Rebellion Sourcebook and filled  in the star systems by hand and then<BR>
> placed<BR>
> > the factional boundaries with a colored pencil.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > This is a great idea if it could be done.  I would be willing to help<BR>
out<BR>
> if<BR>
> > help is needed.<BR>
><BR>
> The big issue here is going to be minimum run size.  I need to make sure<BR>
> that I can get rid of 500 copies of each map to make it economically<BR>
viable.<BR>
> Given that CT is being reprinted (and I'm a CT Ref), I've done the first<BR>
two<BR>
> maps using CT supplements 3 and 10 for data, borders, etc.  Standard<BR>
poster<BR>
> size (24x36) means I can probably sell these for something around $10<BR>
> (guestimate only, don't hold me to this yet).<BR>
><BR>
> I'm also now thinking in terms of doing a "Naval Strategic Map" that would<BR>
> be printed on a white background, cover a larger area, and be laminated<BR>
for<BR>
> DryErase of similar markers.  It would include only planetary systems,<BR>
UPP,<BR>
> bases etc, possibly with watermark borders from various milieu.  Thoughts?<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:19:53 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Using the format of one of the maps from the inside cover of MegaTraveller <BR>
> (about 8-1/2 x 11) by 300% produces a sheet about 26 by 33. That makes each <BR>
> subsector 3/4 inch wide, or each star system dot about 1/10 of an inch.<BR>
><BR>
> 26 x 33 is on the edges of practical (cost effective) commercial printing.<BR>
<BR>
If you can settle for monochrome, you can make an E size (34x44) plot<BR>
and get it duplicated as a *blueprint*. As far as I know, that's not<BR>
overwhelmingly expensive. The master would be black printing on white,<BR>
with the copies being white on blue, which should be close enough to<BR>
white on black for most folks.<BR>
<BR>
As I noted in a post a couple of weeks back, this would be a great<BR>
thing to do with some ship plans. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:27:12 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> For my adventures in Gushemege Sector, making a new sector map for each year<BR>
> of the Rebellion was a pain.  First, I used the blank sector map in the<BR>
> Rebellion Sourcebook and filled  in the star systems by hand and then placed<BR>
> the factional boundaries with a colored pencil.<BR>
<BR>
I'd have made a map *without* the boundaries, and xeroxed off copies.<BR>
*Then* I'd have added the boundaries to the copies.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:06:55 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
<BR>
On 26 Jul 2000, at 23:32, VonRammen wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> But the real point of my first post was that the small number of worlds<BR>
> capable of making 500,000 dton behemoths is a *construction* limitation on<BR>
> the number of ships that can be built/maintained. How much dtonnage can a<BR>
> world of a given population build in a year? It doesn't matter how much they can<BR>
> buy, if the yards can't handle the work.<BR>
<BR>
IIRC TCS gives a total yard constuction limit of 1DT per 1000 population, so a <BR>
world with say 5 billion people on it could build a ship of up to 5,000,000 DT <BR>
if it wanted to.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:02:50 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
> > *WEG*  All of these things came up during the GF playtest, and it was<BR>
> > pointed out that emitting anything would likely bring death unto thoust<BR>
> > quickly.<BR>
><BR>
> Which is why I have doubts about all these ideas on point defence knocking<BR>
down<BR>
> everything that flies through the air. a PD system pretty much has to be<BR>
> active, and to my mind that just makes it a great big fat target.<BR>
><BR>
Doubtless some boffin will create a series of weapons particularly for<BR>
attacking PD weapons.  In the end, I suspect that PD will be required for<BR>
battle field survival, but it won't decrease battlefield vulnerability at<BR>
all in the grand scheme of things.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:16:45 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
<BR>
On 27 Jul 2000, at 3:06, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Anderson did it an an obscure book that had countless numbers of<BR>
> governments. They each had spheres of influence covering hudreds or<BR>
> thousands of worlds, and had some sort of interaction with other nearby<BR>
> polities. But sheer *size* kept them from knowing much of anything<BR>
> about the rest of the Galaxy. (Btw, Earth had been *destroyed* by<BR>
> someone, and some of the surving humans were trying to figure out who<BR>
> had done it).<BR>
<BR>
_After Doomsday_, IIRC. There were two surviving human ships, one with an all <BR>
male crew. the other with an all female crew, and neither knew of the others <BR>
exisitence.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:15:45 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Optima Font Needed<BR>
<BR>
Greetings all,<BR>
<BR>
I am in search of a Mac version of Optima for the Traveller map project.  If<BR>
you have it, or know where I can get it, please let me know.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks, Tod<BR>
- ----<BR>
"Everything I need to know learned by<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains"<BR>
- ----<BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://webmaster.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:28:25 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Here's a survey of sorts on ship building.<BR>
><BR>
> If there's no ore and/or minerals on a world, how can<BR>
> anyone build any type of fleet?  Let alone a ship in<BR>
> large proportions.<BR>
<BR>
A world is a big place. And ore bodies are rather easily formed under a<BR>
*wide* variety of condiditions if water and volcanic activity were<BR>
present for any length of time, even if they are no longer present.<BR>
<BR>
For that matter, if there are planets at all, there's likely to be some<BR>
sort of planetoids. Which will be a *major* source of iron and some<BR>
other metals.<BR>
<BR>
> Commerce must play a role in construction.  If you<BR>
> have enough freighters supplying material, you'd <BR>
> still have a high overhead cost to deal with.  Thus<BR>
> putting some ships "out of reach" price wise.<BR>
<BR>
Well, if you can get them in-system, especially from a planetoid belt,<BR>
you don't *need* freighters. You can just attach cheap radar reflectors<BR>
to huge ingots. An ingot 100 meters on a side is a million cubic<BR>
meters. If it's iron, that'd be about 8 million tonnes.<BR>
<BR>
> However, if your world had vast quantities of materials,<BR>
> wouldn't the construction cost go down, regardless of<BR>
> the population size?<BR>
<BR>
Not necessarily. It's only if there's some quirk that requires<BR>
importing large amounts of *something* from outside the system that<BR>
things get sticky.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:05:10 -0400<BR>
From: "Hunter Gordon" <trav@RPGRealms.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
<BR>
Hi Tod!<BR>
<BR>
Eterna is an appropriate substitute for Optima. If you need a copy of the Eterna font, let me know!<BR>
<BR>
Hunter<BR>
The GRIP Team<BR>
http://www.RPGRealms.com<BR>
<BR>
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********<BR>
<BR>
On 7/27/2000 at 2:15 PM Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Greetings all,<BR>
><BR>
>I am in search of a Mac version of Optima for the Traveller map project.  If<BR>
>you have it, or know where I can get it, please let me know.<BR>
><BR>
>Thanks, Tod<BR>
>----<BR>
>"Everything I need to know learned by<BR>
>killing smart people and eating their brains"<BR>
>----<BR>
>Tod Glenn<BR>
>webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
>http://webmaster.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:14:59 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Your mobile phone will only do that on planets with a<BR>
> comm. network. The canon multichronometer will do that<BR>
> on _any_ planet. Therefore the multichronometer has<BR>
> to be capable of sensing the length of the day somehow.<BR>
> The description of the multichronometer foes not say that<BR>
> it only works on worlds with a digital PCs network, nor<BR>
> does it say that it only works on planets with a magnetosphere,<BR>
> nor does it say that it only works if you are not traveling <BR>
> on planet at high speeds. Therefore the canon multichronometer<BR>
> must be capable of determining (within one planetary rotation)<BR>
> that planets length of day (even if you are traveling a<BR>
> thousand kilometers an hour in an ultra high speed maglev train<BR>
> across the surface the whole time. Perhaps the multichronometer<BR>
> includes some form of miniaturized inertial locator to cancel<BR>
> out changes due to your motion and some sort of gyroscope<BR>
> that can determine the time required for the planet to rotate<BR>
> 360 degrees. Nor does the multichronometers description say that<BR>
> it does not work on non main world planets. Therefore the <BR>
> multichronometer has to be capable of distinguishing between the<BR>
> rotation (if any) of the satellite around the planet as well as<BR>
> the rotation of the planet around the sun.<BR>
<BR>
All of this *can* be done with an advanced "inertial tracker" type<BR>
device, but *not* easily. <BR>
<BR>
And just because the limits aren't set out in the description doesn't<BR>
mean there aren't any. For one thing, as I recall the description (as<BR>
posted here) it sounds to *me* like the unit has to stay in more or<BR>
less the same place for most of a sol (local day) to "set" itself.<BR>
<BR>
> I really don't think that this should be possible at TL 9<BR>
> in a watch sized object. Is there some solid state way of<BR>
> doing all this?<BR>
<BR>
*Some* stuff can be done with lasers. There are ways of measuring<BR>
movement using lasers, but don't ask me for details. I just know that<BR>
the advanced guidance systems use something called "ring laser gyros".<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:38:40 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> According to the World Builders Handbook, Survey Equipment,<BR>
> "This timepiece sets itself, in one planetary rotation, to local zero<BR>
> meridian time, local solar time, and local sidereal time. A setting allows<BR>
> for automatic time zone corrections according to world size. It also keeps<BR>
> Imperial standard time.<BR>
<BR>
Okay, the bit about "local zero-meridian time" *requires* an input.<BR>
Namely, the longitude the device is at (ie the offset from the local<BR>
zero meridian)<BR>
<BR>
And that bit about "in one planetary rotation" makes me suspect that<BR>
the unit needs to be left in place for that long, or at least not moved<BR>
around much.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:48:51 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote<BR>
><BR>
>> Sorry, but the person inside *has* to move, and move with the armor at<BR>
>> that. <BR>
>> Find a book on plate armor and note all the places they had to leave<BR>
>> gaps to keep the armor from binding on itself. This is an unavoidable<BR>
>> problem with human sized armor.<BR>
>> Frankly, I don't think "man-sized" BD is *possible*. Not until we have<BR>
>> the sort of "magic tech" that allows solid metal to bend like rubber<BR>
>> when the wearer moves and yet still be ultra-rigid against outside<BR>
>> forces. <BR>
><BR>
> Does Battle Dress have to consist only of plates? Can these <BR>
> plates be made sufficiently small so that the wearer can still <BR>
> move? If each plate of battledress is dime sized, layered two <BR>
> or three layers deep, and capable of moving (on tracks) across<BR>
> the skin of the armor can the armor reactively move the plates<BR>
> so that the wearer is always protected?<BR>
<BR>
Nope.<BR>
<BR>
Aside from the ability to move around (more on that later), you've just<BR>
described scale mail. And it has two problems, first, the plates have<BR>
to overlap (like shingles) so that a thrust (or bullet) doesn't just<BR>
drive a plate into you. Second, shots (or sword thrusts) that come up<BR>
"under" the overlap can pentetrate without a lot of trouble.<BR>
<BR>
Remember, armor started of as flexible links and moved *to* rigid<BR>
plates. That's because while links protected against cutting (and if<BR>
strong enough, partial protected against penetration) they provided<BR>
*no* protection against "crushing" blows. <BR>
<BR>
So protection needs to be *rigid* plates, with the only flexibility<BR>
being at the joints. And if possible, the joints shouldn't be able to<BR>
move beyond the normal range of motion for the human joint they surrond<BR>
(ie, elbow joints shouldn't be able to move backwards). <BR>
<BR>
Now as to the moving plates on tracks bit. Aside from the plates having<BR>
to be so small they wouldn't be worth the trouble, the *tracks* are<BR>
vulnerable to damage. Either the plate would come loose or it'll jam.<BR>
And that'll happen long before penetrating damage to the plate will<BR>
occur. <BR>
<BR>
My best guess for joints is a combo of high tech "chainmail" with a<BR>
ballistic cloth backing. Maybe even a three layer sandwich: mail,<BR>
cloth, mail. The mail prevents cutting and the cloth stops most stuff<BR>
that gets thru the mail with the final layer of mail stopping fragments<BR>
that pass thru the outer mail and the cloth. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:18:36 -0400<BR>
From: "swordworlder" <swordworlder@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
<BR>
They did several armored vehicles among them three grav tanks and two<BR>
air/rafts.  A listing of all of the Martian Metals minis exists in several<BR>
places, including: http://www.downport.com/ct/biglist.html  Between<BR>
Shadowcat and myself we can confirm the existence of everything listed there<BR>
for MM.<BR>
<BR>
- -Colin<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- > >I was just looking at an old JTAS and saw a<BR>
Martian Metals<BR>
> >advertisement that said "Reinforcements have arrived,"<BR>
> >superimposed on an extreme close up of a metal grav tank.<BR>
> >I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
> >actually produced?<BR>
><BR>
From: "Steven Hudson" <shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca><BR>
>   I believe so - I had one that was probably based on the Keith<BR>
> illo on the back of the Striker box - big, well-detailed, and<BR>
> quite nice, unlike most of the Martian Metals people figs, IMHO.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:53:12 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
This is a project that has to get off the ground.<BR>
<BR>
So I'm electing myself dictator :)<BR>
<BR>
OK, as my first job I am going to start assigning jobs on this project.<BR>
<BR>
If anyone else thinks they can write a better set of design rules than who<BR>
I've asked to do it, please feel free to chip in.<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson :<BR>
<BR>
I got into a blue with you months ago about fuel cells and life support.<BR>
<BR>
I'd like you to fix some design rules.<BR>
<BR>
This is what fuel cells look like now. Could you fix them ? I'd like a TL8+<BR>
<BR>
Fuel : High Grade Hydrocarbon Distallates ( 9.9 t/m3, Cr 1000/m3)<BR>
<BR>
1t/m3 density, KCr 20 per m3, min size 0.01 m3<BR>
<BR>
TL7 : Power 0.5 MW/m3, area 10 m2/MW (divide by 2 in thin, 4 in std, 8 in<BR>
dens atm), fuel 0.3 m3/MW/hr<BR>
<BR>
TL 12 : Power 0.75 MW/m3, area 1 m2/MW (divide by 2 in thin, 4 in std, 8 in<BR>
dens atm), fuel 0.25 m3/MW/hr<BR>
<BR>
TL14 : Power 1.5 MW/m3, area 0.1 m2/MW (divide by 2 in thin, 4 in std, 8 in<BR>
dens atm), fuel 0.2 m3/MW/hr<BR>
<BR>
TL16 : Power 1.75 MW/m3, area 0.02 m2/MW (divide by 2 in thin, 4 in std, 8<BR>
in dens atm), fuel 0.2 m3/MW/hr<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh :<BR>
<BR>
You said something about better combustion lasers recently ... care to tweak<BR>
things ? My guess is the best place to start is the CLC output table<BR>
(TL11-12 1Mj/kilo, TL13-15 2 Mj/kg, TL16-19 3Mj/kg, TL 20+ 4Mj/kg). Possibly<BR>
a radical fall-off for TL7-8 Non-grav efficiency as well (I dont see too<BR>
many effective battlefield lasers right now).<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn :<BR>
<BR>
Could you do small arms ? And maybe light artillery (recoiless rifles and<BR>
such) ?<BR>
<BR>
Anyone :<BR>
<BR>
Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants from<BR>
TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant, that<BR>
basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of plutonium.<BR>
Note that if we keep the 'big' TL9-11 fusion plants, then many Interstellar<BR>
Wars/Long Night/Lo-tech el-cheapo starships are going to run on fission, so<BR>
(say) a better TL10 fission plant will have a big impact. Many belters etc<BR>
would also probably have a small fission plant stashed away, just in case<BR>
something goes wrong with the main power plant.<BR>
<BR>
Fission Plant : 0.1 MCr/m3, 10 m2/MW area ; fuel is Radioactives (19 t/m3,<BR>
KCr 75/m3)<BR>
<BR>
TL6 : 0.3 MW/m3, 10t/m3, 30 m3 min size, 0.75 m3 fuel/MW/year<BR>
TL7 : 0.6 MW/m3, 8t/m3, 20 m3 min size, 0.25 m3 fuel/MW/year<BR>
TL8 : 1.0 MW/m3, 6t/m3, 10 m3 min size, 0.1 m3 fuel/MW/year<BR>
<BR>
Marc Miller :<BR>
<BR>
Long time ago, you indicated that Fusion Plus would be in T5, but it would<BR>
not be the Fusion+ of T4. However, you did say that T5 Fusion Plus would be<BR>
smaller than 'normal' fusion plants. The minimum sizes of fusion plants has<BR>
a big influence on small starships. Can we get a line on your thinking ?<BR>
<BR>
Anyone :<BR>
<BR>
Armour. I dont want to re-type all of table 158 tonight, but could people<BR>
put some thought into hi-tech armours ?<BR>
<BR>
Anyone (maybe also Leonard)<BR>
<BR>
Life Support. I'd like something a bit more differentiated.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
General :<BR>
<BR>
Some thoughts about a 'quality' system. I'm thinking about cost/efficiency<BR>
for reliability tradeoffs. What sort of reliability bonus should you get for<BR>
accepting a 10% performance hit ? I dont want you to squeeze more<BR>
performance out of a given TL, but I think you should be able to trade down<BR>
performance or price for more reliability.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:23:43 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
On 07/27/00 at 11:48 AM,  Thing <gduke@kendaco.telebyte.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>>Definitely heavy stock (like the originals).  Does 17x22" seem appropriate<BR>
>>(fold twice to get 8.5x11"), or should I go to a bigger size.  A larger grid<BR>
>>size mean I could probably include planetary UPP in place of the hex number.<BR>
<BR>
>17 x 22 is a nice size and I believe it is easy to get the cheap plastic <BR>
>poster frames for prints in that size.  I would deffinetly be interested<BR>
>in  more MAPS.<BR>
<BR>
I can get 4 subsectors on an 8.5 x 11 sheet, so a sector should fit<BR>
nicely on a 17 x 22 sheet.  At that scale each hex is roughly 1/2"<BR>
(~13mm for metric fans).  I think this is a good size.<BR>
<BR>
Oh, a point.  I always disliked having a subsector map standing<BR>
alone.  I much prefered to have either 4 or 9 subsectors on a map<BR>
with the PC's operating near the center.  That way larger<BR>
relationships among the worlds became more apparent.  If the PC's<BR>
moved toward an edge of the map, I'd give them another one putting<BR>
them back near the center again. Computers make this a lot easier.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:30:18 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
<BR>
Optima is available from Adobe Systems for $96, if you need the real<BR>
thing right now.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.adobe.com/type/browser/P/P_006.html<BR>
<BR>
There are a number of lookalikes. 'Toronto' is one name I've seen, 'Zaph<BR>
Humanist 601' is how Bitstream sells it on their Bitstream collection<BR>
CD.<BR>
<BR>
Browse some of the shareware sites such as Info-Mac <BR>
http://hyperarchive.lcs.mit.edu/HyperArchive.html <BR>
<BR>
The venerable Wuarchive has a complete mirror of both InfoMac and AMUG<BR>
<BR>
http://wuarchive.wustl.edu/<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Greetings all,<BR>
> <BR>
> I am in search of a Mac version of Optima for the Traveller map project.  If<BR>
> you have it, or know where I can get it, please let me know.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:34:13 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
> I can get 4 subsectors on an 8.5 x 11 sheet, so a sector should fit<BR>
> nicely on a 17 x 22 sheet.  At that scale each hex is roughly 1/2"<BR>
> (~13mm for metric fans).  I think this is a good size.<BR>
<BR>
If you look at my maps at www.grandsurvey.com, they fit a full sector into 8.5 x 11, though it would definately look better expanded to 17x22 (I suspect that resizing could be done from the print menu from acrobat).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:33:15 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Ian Wrote...<BR>
<BR>
> General :<BR>
> <BR>
> Some thoughts about a 'quality' system. I'm thinking about <BR>
> cost/efficiency<BR>
> for reliability tradeoffs. What sort of reliability bonus <BR>
> should you get for<BR>
> accepting a 10% performance hit ? I dont want you to squeeze more<BR>
> performance out of a given TL, but I think you should be able <BR>
> to trade down<BR>
> performance or price for more reliability.<BR>
> <BR>
> Ian Whitchurch<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
You might want to check out a TML thread from over a year ago concerning<BR>
Military designs, Industrial designs, and Consumer designs. I was playing<BR>
with these ideas in my homebrew SFRPG. <BR>
<BR>
As an example, think of the design approach to TL8 Diesel engines. And how<BR>
the 3 designs vary depending on the application. Fusion plants should use a<BR>
similar approach.<BR>
<BR>
Glenn<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
<BR>
Glenn E. Myers<BR>
ANSYS Inc.                Email: glenn.myers@ansys.com<BR>
275 Technology Drive      Phone: (724) 514-2913<BR>
Canonsburg, PA 15317      Fax:   (724) 514-3118<BR>
______________________________________________________<BR>
 <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:38:59 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants from<BR>
> TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant, that<BR>
> basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of<BR>
> plutonium.<BR>
<BR>
Hm...damper-initiated fission (or just damper-assisted RTGs) may be a viable 'fusion+' alternative, though this is higher TL (probably TL 12, same as damper-assist fusion).<BR>
At TL 9, antimatter-catalyzed fission (using extremely small amounts of antimatter) should be viable.  Antimatter power plants may be TL 17, but antimatter production in small quantities is TL 7.<BR>
<BR>
> Anyone :<BR>
> <BR>
> Armour. I dont want to re-type all of table 158 tonight, but could people<BR>
> put some thought into hi-tech armours ?<BR>
<BR>
Towards what goal?  There's various plausible options which might disrupt canon if introduced.  <BR>
> <BR>
> Some thoughts about a 'quality' system. I'm thinking about cost/efficiency<BR>
> for reliability tradeoffs. What sort of reliability bonus should you get<BR>
> for accepting a 10% performance hit ? I dont want you to squeeze more<BR>
> performance out of a given TL, but I think you should be able to trade down<BR>
> performance or price for more reliability.<BR>
<BR>
Why not allow trading down reliability for performance?  Happens in the real world all the time.  Trading cost for performance happens too, but interacts strangely with the tech system.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:41:59 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
<BR>
sneadj@mindspring.com wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > If *I* was in charge on such a planet, I'd be *real* selective about<BR>
> > what was allowed to be sold offworld, just so that the Imperium (and<BR>
> > anybody else) would have some *real* problems if they ever tried to<BR>
> > run a black op on *my* planet without my consent.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Picture the 1950s or even 1970s FBI and KGB *trying* to plant bugs in<BR>
> > place that had current *commercially available* technology. Or trying<BR>
> > to protect themselves against it.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Fiber optic & laser bugs, some of the hummingbird sized surviellance<BR>
> > drones you can buy *now* if you have the money, PGP & RSA<BR>
> > encryption...<BR>
> <BR>
> Hummingbird sized surveillance drones???  Cool!  Do you have any<BR>
> references for these.  The smallest that I'd heard of are about the<BR>
> size of a small radio-controlled plane.<BR>
<BR>
A small radio controlled plane is not much bigger than a humnmingbird,<BR>
these days...<BR>
<BR>
Leonard gets ahead of himself, here, though, I think. Such drones do<BR>
exist, and the designers are working on making them even smaller, but<BR>
you can't just go out and buy them, since they pretty much only exist in<BR>
the lab.<BR>
<BR>
The people desingning them are doing things like fabricating their own<BR>
silicon and suchlike, so it's a mite outside of the average hobbyists<BR>
reach. Since the people working on them are using DOD money, you can bet<BR>
the Gummint gets first crack at any production run.<BR>
<BR>
That said check out:<BR>
<BR>
http://amsl.mit.edu/research/Application/microairplane/microairplane.html<BR>
<BR>
(it wasn't responding last I checked)<BR>
<BR>
There was also a show on one of The Discovery Channel, TLC, perhaps NOVA<BR>
or the History Channel about developent of these tiny aircraft.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2823<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (rly-zc02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.2]) by air-zc04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:43:11 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:42:40 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA36252;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:42:33 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:41:57 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA36201<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:41:57 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:41:57 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007272241.SAA36201@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2823<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2824</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 4:23:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2824<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Jesuits in Shadowrun<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Moving a rock<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" & Industrial worlds<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Scales<BR>
Re: Plastic model vehicles<BR>
Re: Bunch of stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:27:24 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
> Also, the wee shoggoth that came with its sire looks like a juvenile<BR>
Hiver,<BR>
> except that it has all of those randomly placed eyes.<BR>
<BR>
Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. It's so sweet, with its<BR>
little furry tentacles....<BR>
<BR>
We're hoping to mate it with a Furbie (in a surgical procedure) so it flaps<BR>
its wings when you talk to it.<BR>
<BR>
I'll try and persuade him to bring it to GenCon...<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:41:08 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Jesuits in Shadowrun<BR>
<BR>
> > Have you played Shadowrun?  Don't EVER annoy the Jesuits.<BR>
><BR>
> I've read some of the novels. But I don't recall anything about the<BR>
> Jesuits.<BR>
<BR>
They don't figure prominantly, but they run (in addition to schools) the<BR>
Pope's intelligence organisation, which is the best in the world. And the<BR>
Pope has nukes, in the form of four Armageddon class missile submarines in<BR>
case anybody tries anything on with the Vatican.<BR>
<BR>
At least, that's what our GM told us, according to one of the sourcebooks<BR>
that's off limits to us. I can dig out his address and get a reference if<BR>
you *really* want.<BR>
<BR>
The Jesuits were great. Apparently we pissed them off when our twin<BR>
brothers (orc and troll riggers, Henry and Cameron Cunningham-Hastings)<BR>
broke out of Jesuit boarding school in Seattle. Being riggers, they broke<BR>
out through the wall...<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:49:17 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> This is a project that has to get off the ground.<BR>
> <BR>
> So I'm electing myself dictator :)<BR>
<BR>
Ave!  Ave imperator Ian! ;-)<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
<BR>
One area that needs to be addressed is starship combat.  While FF&S3<BR>
shouldn't contain the starship combat rules, the ratings generated by<BR>
the starship and weapon designs sequences should directly support the<BR>
starship combat system, without the need to convert the ratings.  If<BR>
conversions are needed for whatever reason (for instance, if Bruce<BR>
Macintosh's MCS becomes the basis for T5's starship combat system), the<BR>
process should be included in the design sequence, and should be as<BR>
transparent as possible.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, this should also apply to vehicular design sequences.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:11:36 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
<BR>
> From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
> Subject: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
<BR>
> Type A2 200-ton Far Trader<BR>
><BR>
> A2-22212R1-00000-00000-0 MCr 48.3<BR>
> TL: 11 Crew: 4 Fuel: 44 Cargo: 68.8 Pass: 6 Low: 4<BR>
> EP: 4 Agility: 2 Vehicles: Air/Raft<BR>
><BR>
> Without the class discount, the ship is a very uneconomic MCr 60.375, as<BR>
> compared to the er...very uneconomic CT MCr 61. Oh, and while we're on the<BR>
> subject, the floorplans in "Traders and Gunboats" have an displacement at<BR>
> least twice that of the displacement given for the ship. What gives with<BR>
> this design?<BR>
<BR>
The ship is fine. It's the economics rules that are screwy.<BR>
<BR>
If you get paid a flat 'loading fee', plus an amount per parsec, plus a risk<BR>
premium, then you are in business.<BR>
<BR>
Note that this ship is 2 gee, and has lots of power, so it can mount weapons<BR>
that go beyond the rig of many ethically challenged civilians (eg a twin<BR>
fusion turret, to go with the missile and 2 sandcasters in the other<BR>
turret).<BR>
<BR>
The A2 is built to go into the fringes of a system, where one gee ships wont<BR>
go.<BR>
<BR>
It's the A1 that is a ship without a role ;)<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:02:31<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
At 03:51 PM 7/27/2000 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Ah, but detailed painting is its own reward.<BR>
<BR>
So true.. I used to enter painting competitions with my Julie Guthrie<BR>
fantasy figs.<BR>
<BR>
What ever happened to her?  It would be too cool if she sculpted some of<BR>
the pieces.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:06:03<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
At 08:42 AM 7/28/2000 -0000, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> *WEG*  All of these things came up during the GF playtest, and it was<BR>
>> pointed out that emitting anything would likely bring death unto thoust<BR>
>> quickly.<BR>
><BR>
>Which is why I have doubts about all these ideas on point defence knocking<BR>
>down everything that flies through the air. a PD system pretty much has to <BR>
>be active, and to my mind that just makes it a great big fat target.<BR>
<BR>
This is why battlefields are unhealthy.  You can power up the PD system,<BR>
and attrack attention, or leave it off and hope that nothing gets launched<BR>
at you from an angle that you can't make a quick passive detection from.<BR>
<BR>
Choose now.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:08:42<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
At 08:35 AM 7/28/2000 -0000, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>BTW the RNZIR (Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment), which is to say all our <BR>
>infantry wears a green beret :) And your guys have no idea how to wear one <BR>
>properly, either :)<BR>
<BR>
And that green beret confuses the hell out of American troops who equate a<BR>
green beret with the Special Forces.<BR>
<BR>
There were many schemes I could have used, but I chose the British formula<BR>
because I liked the image.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:29:09 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock<BR>
<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
> > Next, the nukes don't need complex targeting systems, because you are<BR>
> > not trying to accurately divert the rock.<BR>
><BR>
> *Very* wrong. You *have* to be accurate so as to avoid deflecting the<BR>
> asteroid into the planet, or into an orbit where it'll get you on the<BR>
> *next* pass.<BR>
<BR>
Umm, I have to disagree there.<BR>
<BR>
Lets say we deflect it, so it misses this time, but will hit on it's next<BR>
pass.<BR>
<BR>
That buys us the time to learn all the lessons from this time, so next time<BR>
it will be better planned, better run and with better gear. All that should<BR>
add up to next time being easier.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:15:08 EDT<BR>
From: Ludowick@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" & Industrial worlds<BR>
<BR>
Samuel Weiss writes:<BR>
<BR>
 >Again note, Poor didn't seem to originally mean "poor in industrial<BR>
 >resources" but "poor piece of real estate to have to call home".<BR>
 >Still, taking this in with what Anthony noted defines "Poor" rather<BR>
 >adeptly.<BR>
<BR>
I didn't mean that Poor worlds were poor in industrial resources, but poor<BR>
(because of their hostile environments) in *biological* resources -- at <BR>
least human compatible biological resources.  The colonists of such a world<BR>
would *have* to exploit non-biotic resources (mining, gathering chemicals<BR>
from the oceans and atmosphere); if the colony thrives & expands they might<BR>
begin manufacturing finished goods rather than just exporting raw materials<BR>
to offworld markets.  Industrial worlds are, IMHO, Poor worlds that "made it<BR>
big" in the only practical way for them.  NB: above definition of "Poor" is<BR>
broader than the official one, but means basically the same thing (or is a <BR>
combination of Non-Agricultural & Poor).<BR>
<BR>
 >Also note, Poor worlds can also be Industrial worlds at the same time.<BR>
 >This<BR>
 >should affect calculations as well.<BR>
<BR>
Taken.  Industrial worlds are apparently viewed by many as bad places to live<BR>
(they can't also be "Rich" worlds).  I guess the "Poor, Industrial" world is<BR>
a real downer (and you thought Bladerunner's L.A. looked bad...welcome to a<BR>
world named Louzy).<BR>
<BR>
From J. Raynor:<BR>
<BR>
 >Here's a proposal:<BR>
 >continue to require a Tainted atmosphere for Tech Level 8 or less <BR>
 >(expensive and/or experimental fusion, no contra-gravity), abolish the<BR>
 >atmosphere requirement for Tech Level 9 or more.<BR>
 >                                                           - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
That would mean all High-Pop worlds are also Industrial if their TL is 9 or<BR>
10+.  This isn't so bad -- all Ice-Capped worlds are also Vacc worlds.  I <BR>
still like the idea that most Industrial worlds were already "polluted" <BR>
before they were ever colonized, and the inhabitants had no choice but <BR>
establishing a mining/manufacturing colony.  I agree that at TL 9+ industry<BR>
would probably not pollute a planet's environment.  <BR>
<BR>
Ludowick<BR>
<BR>
Traveller: a wargame, concealed within an RPG, wrapped up in a space opera.<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:09:30 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> Another thing to check is the hardsuits used for really deep diving.<BR>
>> Note that since they *can't* have gaps, they have to have those weird<BR>
>> bulbous joints, as well as the "rotating sleeve" joints in the upper<BR>
>> and lower arms. <BR>
>> <BR>
>> I've worn a partial suit of plate armor that used those sleeve joints<BR>
>> in the upper arms. You had to learn how to move your arms so as to<BR>
>> *not* fight the joints. I'm told the deep diving suits are even worse. <BR>
>> <BR>
>> You *can* learn. But it takes time and practice. And I don't think that<BR>
>> sort of joint is practical for power assisted armor. Mostly because if<BR>
>> you forget and use the wrong "reflexes" you'll *jam* the joints to the<BR>
>> point where you need to be cut out of it.<BR>
><BR>
> That is simply a matter of programming and training. (the suit and wearer,<BR>
> respectively) The key difference between what you're talking about and BD<BR>
> is that BD is actively helping the wearer move, and is programmed for<BR>
> increasing resistance to movements that will jam it up. You move that way<BR>
> and it's really hard, you start moving the way the suit works, and unlike<BR>
> the armor or diving suit you're talking about, it's suddenly much easier.<BR>
><BR>
> The armor, too, learns about you. Whether troops have their own custom-fit<BR>
> armor, or there's a 'armor personality card' that they carry with them and<BR>
> stick in the armor their wearing, there will be a lot of information about<BR>
> exactly how they move and wear the armor available to the armor itself,<BR>
> which will adjust for the wearer.<BR>
><BR>
> This is not unlike my Newton 100, the original butt of all of Doonesbury's<BR>
> jokes. The thing recognizes my handwriting very well, but it's a<BR>
> combination of the Newton learning how I write and me learning how to<BR>
> write so that the Newton likes it. If my friend Eric writes on it it's<BR>
> horrible, likewise if I write on hi, even with our respective training.<BR>
><BR>
> That's what acquiring the BD skill is all about. The suit learning how you<BR>
> move and you learning how the suit wants to move, and engraining that in<BR>
> muscle memory, so you don't have to think about it. So you can't 'forget'<BR>
> and move the wrong way.<BR>
><BR>
> I'll bet there's a distinctive gait that BD using troops have because out<BR>
> of the armor they likely still move like they were in it. <BR>
><BR>
> Remember the progenitor of BD, the MI Powered Armor in Starship Troopers.<BR>
> Heinlein realized thatusing something like that was going to require a lot<BR>
> of training. Same in Traveller...you need BD skill to use it at all.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, his point was the exact *opposite*. You *didn't* need to<BR>
learn how to *move*, just how to control the extra strength, and to use<BR>
the sensors and the "jump jets". <BR>
<BR>
> I daresay, Leonard, were you to own that suit of plate armor and do an<BR>
> hour or two of sword drills each morning, very soon you would a) have worn<BR>
> the hinge points of the armor just right to accomodate your movements,<BR>
> found the exact places to set all the buckles and straps (likely making<BR>
> new holes in the straps in the process) and trained your muscle memory to<BR>
> wear that armor like a t-shirt and a pair of comfortable jeans.<BR>
<BR>
Sure, but it takes a lot of practice. Something that BD (at least<BR>
Heinlein's version) specificly *doesn't* take. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:28:31 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> Figure out just how *much* water, methane, ammonia etc you can get out<BR>
>> of a few cubic km of comet...<BR>
><BR>
> Shrug.  A couple billion tons; depending on the efficiency of your<BR>
> recovery mechanisms, sufficient for pop-8 to pop-A for a year.<BR>
> However, you're going to have to either crash it into the planet or<BR>
> ship it down to the surface; the first is a bad idea if the world is<BR>
> inhabited, the second is equivalent to 'trucking the water in'.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, you can "hard land" chunks of it away from anyplace<BR>
important. Then depending on local conditions, mine it, melt it, or<BR>
collect the vapor. <BR>
<BR>
Or for that matter, any jump capable ship can haul quite a bit of stuff<BR>
down in its fuel tanks. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:33:36 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits (was Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> The movie plot and script aside, I thought that Starship Troopers handled <BR>
> the space station rather well.  The ships could dock to the edge of the <BR>
> station as well as land on the upper hull, as many did after getting shot up.<BR>
<BR>
Haven't seen it. Not likely to either.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:38:22 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote<BR>
><BR>
>> Alas, as out of shape as I am, I decided long ago that the only uniform<BR>
>> I'd look "right" in would be that of an X-boat pilot. For that, being<BR>
>> out of shape tends to fit. It's not like there's a lot of room for<BR>
>> excercising in one of those. :-)<BR>
><BR>
> How about a Merchant uniform?<BR>
><BR>
> Merchant Captain Alexander Jamison [CT The Traveller Book<BR>
> p 30-31, a Dave Deitrick illo] seems to be a rather portly <BR>
> guy and he did fine in the Merchants. As they are not a military <BR>
> service the weight requirements may be waived.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, but I don't want to be a merchant. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 15:43:34 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Scales<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> The problem with minis vs scale model figures is proportion. The<BR>
> heads are always too big in minis. They don't scale remotely to<BR>
> people.<BR>
><BR>
> Part of the problem with minis (metal) is shrinkage. White metal<BR>
> shrinks, and more importantly, vulcanized molds that white metal is<BR>
> spun into shrinks. Sometimes as much as 10%. Also, because of the<BR>
> vulcanization process (pressure/temperature increase--unlike RTV<BR>
> rubbers (Room Temperature Vulcanized=RTV)) the shrinkage can me<BR>
> asymetrical. All told, it can lead to ugly results. Good (I stress<BR>
> the word good here) resin casts have far more fidelity to detail,<BR>
> and virtually no shrinkage (<1% resin/mold shrinkage). Also, the<BR>
> rubber used for white metal molds is very grainy compared to RTVs,<BR>
> it just can't grab the same detail.<BR>
<BR>
One possibility would be making "plaster" casts of the master, then<BR>
using that to make wax figures, which can then be used for high detail<BR>
lost wax castings.<BR>
<BR>
But this takes extra time and effort. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:03:21 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> There are two that I dearly want to acquire:<BR>
><BR>
> 1.  Released by Aurora, the Orbital Interceptor.  From the beginning, I <BR>
> have always thought that it would make a cool patrol cruiser.<BR>
<BR>
Don't recall it.<BR>
<BR>
> 2.  Also by Aurora (and Airfix, IIRC), the Pan-Am Shuttle from 2001.<BR>
<BR>
I used to have one of those. <sigh><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:43:05 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Traveller-digest" <owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
To: <traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 8:41 AM<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2823<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number<BR>
2823<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> (R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
> All rights reserved.<BR>
><BR>
> The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
><BR>
> Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
> Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
> Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
> Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
> Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
> Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
> Re: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
> Optima Font Needed<BR>
> Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
> Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
> Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
> Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
> Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
> Re: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
> Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
> RE: Large Format Maps<BR>
> Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
> Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
> RE: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
> Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
> Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
><BR>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:56:46 +0100<BR>
> From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
><BR>
> > >From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
> > >Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
> > >I had asked,<BR>
> > >> I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
> > >>  actually produced?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > You replied:<BR>
> > >Yes -- weighed damn near two pounds and cost a fortune.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Two pounds?  What was it made of and how big was it?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > --Glenn<BR>
> ><BR>
> I bet it was made of lead.<BR>
><BR>
> Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
> ICQ#27333894<BR>
><BR>
> "Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:02:39 +0100<BR>
> From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
><BR>
> I'm interested<BR>
><BR>
> Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
> ICQ#27333894<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> - ----- Original Message -----<BR>
> From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
> To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 8:13 PM<BR>
> Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> ><BR>
> > > I would be very interested in large format maps of various sectors of<BR>
> the<BR>
> > > Imperium.  I would pay up to $15 per map.  The 26x33 size that Marc<BR>
> > mentions<BR>
> > > is a reasonable scale to use (bigger would be better, but to this may<BR>
be<BR>
> > > expensive).  If they were laminated in some way so that you could use<BR>
> > > crayons on , that would be helpful.  One could mark up a sector map as<BR>
> > > needed  for an adventure, then erase it for use another time.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > This aspect would be especially useful for MegaTraveller players or<BR>
> > Classic<BR>
> > > Traveller players (during the Fifth Frontier War), where the factional<BR>
> > front<BR>
> > > lines changes frequently.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > For my adventures in Gushemege Sector, making a new sector map for<BR>
each<BR>
> > year<BR>
> > > of the Rebellion was a pain.  First, I used the blank sector map in<BR>
the<BR>
> > > Rebellion Sourcebook and filled  in the star systems by hand and then<BR>
> > placed<BR>
> > > the factional boundaries with a colored pencil.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > This is a great idea if it could be done.  I would be willing to help<BR>
> out<BR>
> > if<BR>
> > > help is needed.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > The big issue here is going to be minimum run size.  I need to make sure<BR>
> > that I can get rid of 500 copies of each map to make it economically<BR>
> viable.<BR>
> > Given that CT is being reprinted (and I'm a CT Ref), I've done the first<BR>
> two<BR>
> > maps using CT supplements 3 and 10 for data, borders, etc.  Standard<BR>
> poster<BR>
> > size (24x36) means I can probably sell these for something around $10<BR>
> > (guestimate only, don't hold me to this yet).<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I'm also now thinking in terms of doing a "Naval Strategic Map" that<BR>
would<BR>
> > be printed on a white background, cover a larger area, and be laminated<BR>
> for<BR>
> > DryErase of similar markers.  It would include only planetary systems,<BR>
> UPP,<BR>
> > bases etc, possibly with watermark borders from various milieu.<BR>
Thoughts?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Tod<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:19:53 PST<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
><BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > Using the format of one of the maps from the inside cover of<BR>
MegaTraveller<BR>
> > (about 8-1/2 x 11) by 300% produces a sheet about 26 by 33. That makes<BR>
each<BR>
> > subsector 3/4 inch wide, or each star system dot about 1/10 of an inch.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > 26 x 33 is on the edges of practical (cost effective) commercial<BR>
printing.<BR>
><BR>
> If you can settle for monochrome, you can make an E size (34x44) plot<BR>
> and get it duplicated as a *blueprint*. As far as I know, that's not<BR>
> overwhelmingly expensive. The master would be black printing on white,<BR>
> with the copies being white on blue, which should be close enough to<BR>
> white on black for most folks.<BR>
><BR>
> As I noted in a post a couple of weeks back, this would be a great<BR>
> thing to do with some ship plans. :-)<BR>
><BR>
> - --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:27:12 PST<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
><BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > For my adventures in Gushemege Sector, making a new sector map for each<BR>
year<BR>
> > of the Rebellion was a pain.  First, I used the blank sector map in the<BR>
> > Rebellion Sourcebook and filled  in the star systems by hand and then<BR>
placed<BR>
> > the factional boundaries with a colored pencil.<BR>
><BR>
> I'd have made a map *without* the boundaries, and xeroxed off copies.<BR>
> *Then* I'd have added the boundaries to the copies.<BR>
><BR>
> - --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:06:55 -0000<BR>
> From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
> Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
><BR>
> On 26 Jul 2000, at 23:32, VonRammen wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > But the real point of my first post was that the small number of worlds<BR>
> > capable of making 500,000 dton behemoths is a *construction* limitation<BR>
on<BR>
> > the number of ships that can be built/maintained. How much dtonnage can<BR>
a<BR>
> > world of a given population build in a year? It doesn't matter how much<BR>
they can<BR>
> > buy, if the yards can't handle the work.<BR>
><BR>
> IIRC TCS gives a total yard constuction limit of 1DT per 1000 population,<BR>
so a<BR>
> world with say 5 billion people on it could build a ship of up to<BR>
5,000,000 DT<BR>
> if it wanted to.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> - --<BR>
> "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
><BR>
> A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:02:50 -0700<BR>
> From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
><BR>
> > > *WEG*  All of these things came up during the GF playtest, and it was<BR>
> > > pointed out that emitting anything would likely bring death unto<BR>
thoust<BR>
> > > quickly.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Which is why I have doubts about all these ideas on point defence<BR>
knocking<BR>
> down<BR>
> > everything that flies through the air. a PD system pretty much has to be<BR>
> > active, and to my mind that just makes it a great big fat target.<BR>
> ><BR>
> Doubtless some boffin will create a series of weapons particularly for<BR>
> attacking PD weapons.  In the end, I suspect that PD will be required for<BR>
> battle field survival, but it won't decrease battlefield vulnerability at<BR>
> all in the grand scheme of things.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:16:45 -0000<BR>
> From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
> Subject: Re: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
><BR>
> On 27 Jul 2000, at 3:06, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > Anderson did it an an obscure book that had countless numbers of<BR>
> > governments. They each had spheres of influence covering hudreds or<BR>
> > thousands of worlds, and had some sort of interaction with other nearby<BR>
> > polities. But sheer *size* kept them from knowing much of anything<BR>
> > about the rest of the Galaxy. (Btw, Earth had been *destroyed* by<BR>
> > someone, and some of the surving humans were trying to figure out who<BR>
> > had done it).<BR>
><BR>
> _After Doomsday_, IIRC. There were two surviving human ships, one with an<BR>
all<BR>
> male crew. the other with an all female crew, and neither knew of the<BR>
others<BR>
> exisitence.<BR>
><BR>
> - --<BR>
> "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
><BR>
> A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:15:45 -0700<BR>
> From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
> Subject: Optima Font Needed<BR>
><BR>
> Greetings all,<BR>
><BR>
> I am in search of a Mac version of Optima for the Traveller map project.<BR>
If<BR>
> you have it, or know where I can get it, please let me know.<BR>
><BR>
> Thanks, Tod<BR>
> - ----<BR>
> "Everything I need to know learned by<BR>
> killing smart people and eating their brains"<BR>
> - ----<BR>
> Tod Glenn<BR>
> webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
> http://webmaster.travellercentral.com<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 13:28:25 PST<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: NOT building the behemoth<BR>
><BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > Here's a survey of sorts on ship building.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > If there's no ore and/or minerals on a world, how can<BR>
> > anyone build any type of fleet?  Let alone a ship in<BR>
> > large proportions.<BR>
><BR>
> A world is a big place. And ore bodies are rather easily formed under a<BR>
> *wide* variety of condiditions if water and volcanic activity were<BR>
> present for any length of time, even if they are no longer present.<BR>
><BR>
> For that matter, if there are planets at all, there's likely to be some<BR>
> sort of planetoids. Which will be a *major* source of iron and some<BR>
> other metals.<BR>
><BR>
> > Commerce must play a role in construction.  If you<BR>
> > have enough freighters supplying material, you'd<BR>
> > still have a high overhead cost to deal with.  Thus<BR>
> > putting some ships "out of reach" price wise.<BR>
><BR>
> Well, if you can get them in-system, especially from a planetoid belt,<BR>
> you don't *need* freighters. You can just attach cheap radar reflectors<BR>
> to huge ingots. An ingot 100 meters on a side is a million cubic<BR>
> meters. If it's iron, that'd be about 8 million tonnes.<BR>
><BR>
> > However, if your world had vast quantities of materials,<BR>
> > wouldn't the construction cost go down, regardless of<BR>
> > the population size?<BR>
><BR>
> Not necessarily. It's only if there's some quirk that requires<BR>
> importing large amounts of *something* from outside the system that<BR>
> things get sticky.<BR>
><BR>
> - --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:05:10 -0400<BR>
> From: "Hunter Gordon" <trav@RPGRealms.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
><BR>
> Hi Tod!<BR>
><BR>
> Eterna is an appropriate substitute for Optima. If you need a copy of the<BR>
Eterna font, let me know!<BR>
><BR>
> Hunter<BR>
> The GRIP Team<BR>
> http://www.RPGRealms.com<BR>
><BR>
> *********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********<BR>
><BR>
> On 7/27/2000 at 2:15 PM Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> >Greetings all,<BR>
> ><BR>
> >I am in search of a Mac version of Optima for the Traveller map project.<BR>
If<BR>
> >you have it, or know where I can get it, please let me know.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Thanks, Tod<BR>
> >----<BR>
> >"Everything I need to know learned by<BR>
> >killing smart people and eating their brains"<BR>
> >----<BR>
> >Tod Glenn<BR>
> >webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
> >http://webmaster.travellercentral.com<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:14:59 PST<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
><BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > Your mobile phone will only do that on planets with a<BR>
> > comm. network. The canon multichronometer will do that<BR>
> > on _any_ planet. Therefore the multichronometer has<BR>
> > to be capable of sensing the length of the day somehow.<BR>
> > The description of the multichronometer foes not say that<BR>
> > it only works on worlds with a digital PCs network, nor<BR>
> > does it say that it only works on planets with a magnetosphere,<BR>
> > nor does it say that it only works if you are not traveling<BR>
> > on planet at high speeds. Therefore the canon multichronometer<BR>
> > must be capable of determining (within one planetary rotation)<BR>
> > that planets length of day (even if you are traveling a<BR>
> > thousand kilometers an hour in an ultra high speed maglev train<BR>
> > across the surface the whole time. Perhaps the multichronometer<BR>
> > includes some form of miniaturized inertial locator to cancel<BR>
> > out changes due to your motion and some sort of gyroscope<BR>
> > that can determine the time required for the planet to rotate<BR>
> > 360 degrees. Nor does the multichronometers description say that<BR>
> > it does not work on non main world planets. Therefore the<BR>
> > multichronometer has to be capable of distinguishing between the<BR>
> > rotation (if any) of the satellite around the planet as well as<BR>
> > the rotation of the planet around the sun.<BR>
><BR>
> All of this *can* be done with an advanced "inertial tracker" type<BR>
> device, but *not* easily.<BR>
><BR>
> And just because the limits aren't set out in the description doesn't<BR>
> mean there aren't any. For one thing, as I recall the description (as<BR>
> posted here) it sounds to *me* like the unit has to stay in more or<BR>
> less the same place for most of a sol (local day) to "set" itself.<BR>
><BR>
> > I really don't think that this should be possible at TL 9<BR>
> > in a watch sized object. Is there some solid state way of<BR>
> > doing all this?<BR>
><BR>
> *Some* stuff can be done with lasers. There are ways of measuring<BR>
> movement using lasers, but don't ask me for details. I just know that<BR>
> the advanced guidance systems use something called "ring laser gyros".<BR>
><BR>
> - --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:38:40 PST<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: TL9 Equipment List<BR>
><BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > According to the World Builders Handbook, Survey Equipment,<BR>
> > "This timepiece sets itself, in one planetary rotation, to local zero<BR>
> > meridian time, local solar time, and local sidereal time. A setting<BR>
allows<BR>
> > for automatic time zone corrections according to world size. It also<BR>
keeps<BR>
> > Imperial standard time.<BR>
><BR>
> Okay, the bit about "local zero-meridian time" *requires* an input.<BR>
> Namely, the longitude the device is at (ie the offset from the local<BR>
> zero meridian)<BR>
><BR>
> And that bit about "in one planetary rotation" makes me suspect that<BR>
> the unit needs to be left in place for that long, or at least not moved<BR>
> around much.<BR>
><BR>
> - --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:48:51 PST<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
><BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote<BR>
> ><BR>
> >> Sorry, but the person inside *has* to move, and move with the armor at<BR>
> >> that.<BR>
> >> Find a book on plate armor and note all the places they had to leave<BR>
> >> gaps to keep the armor from binding on itself. This is an unavoidable<BR>
> >> problem with human sized armor.<BR>
> >> Frankly, I don't think "man-sized" BD is *possible*. Not until we have<BR>
> >> the sort of "magic tech" that allows solid metal to bend like rubber<BR>
> >> when the wearer moves and yet still be ultra-rigid against outside<BR>
> >> forces.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Does Battle Dress have to consist only of plates? Can these<BR>
> > plates be made sufficiently small so that the wearer can still<BR>
> > move? If each plate of battledress is dime sized, layered two<BR>
> > or three layers deep, and capable of moving (on tracks) across<BR>
> > the skin of the armor can the armor reactively move the plates<BR>
> > so that the wearer is always protected?<BR>
><BR>
> Nope.<BR>
><BR>
> Aside from the ability to move around (more on that later), you've just<BR>
> described scale mail. And it has two problems, first, the plates have<BR>
> to overlap (like shingles) so that a thrust (or bullet) doesn't just<BR>
> drive a plate into you. Second, shots (or sword thrusts) that come up<BR>
> "under" the overlap can pentetrate without a lot of trouble.<BR>
><BR>
> Remember, armor started of as flexible links and moved *to* rigid<BR>
> plates. That's because while links protected against cutting (and if<BR>
> strong enough, partial protected against penetration) they provided<BR>
> *no* protection against "crushing" blows.<BR>
><BR>
> So protection needs to be *rigid* plates, with the only flexibility<BR>
> being at the joints. And if possible, the joints shouldn't be able to<BR>
> move beyond the normal range of motion for the human joint they surrond<BR>
> (ie, elbow joints shouldn't be able to move backwards).<BR>
><BR>
> Now as to the moving plates on tracks bit. Aside from the plates having<BR>
> to be so small they wouldn't be worth the trouble, the *tracks* are<BR>
> vulnerable to damage. Either the plate would come loose or it'll jam.<BR>
> And that'll happen long before penetrating damage to the plate will<BR>
> occur.<BR>
><BR>
> My best guess for joints is a combo of high tech "chainmail" with a<BR>
> ballistic cloth backing. Maybe even a three layer sandwich: mail,<BR>
> cloth, mail. The mail prevents cutting and the cloth stops most stuff<BR>
> that gets thru the mail with the final layer of mail stopping fragments<BR>
> that pass thru the outer mail and the cloth.<BR>
><BR>
> - --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:18:36 -0400<BR>
> From: "swordworlder" <swordworlder@yahoo.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
><BR>
> They did several armored vehicles among them three grav tanks and two<BR>
> air/rafts.  A listing of all of the Martian Metals minis exists in several<BR>
> places, including: http://www.downport.com/ct/biglist.html  Between<BR>
> Shadowcat and myself we can confirm the existence of everything listed<BR>
there<BR>
> for MM.<BR>
><BR>
> - -Colin<BR>
><BR>
> - ----- Original Message ----- > >I was just looking at an old JTAS and<BR>
saw a<BR>
> Martian Metals<BR>
> > >advertisement that said "Reinforcements have arrived,"<BR>
> > >superimposed on an extreme close up of a metal grav tank.<BR>
> > >I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
> > >actually produced?<BR>
> ><BR>
> From: "Steven Hudson" <shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca><BR>
> >   I believe so - I had one that was probably based on the Keith<BR>
> > illo on the back of the Striker box - big, well-detailed, and<BR>
> > quite nice, unlike most of the Martian Metals people figs, IMHO.<BR>
><BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:53:12 +1000<BR>
> From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
> Subject: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
><BR>
> This is a project that has to get off the ground.<BR>
><BR>
> So I'm electing myself dictator :)<BR>
><BR>
> OK, as my first job I am going to start assigning jobs on this project.<BR>
><BR>
> If anyone else thinks they can write a better set of design rules than who<BR>
> I've asked to do it, please feel free to chip in.<BR>
><BR>
> Leonard Erickson :<BR>
> > From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
><BR>
> Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
><BR>
> > Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants<BR>
from<BR>
> > TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant,<BR>
that<BR>
> > basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of<BR>
> > plutonium.<BR>
><BR>
> Hm...damper-initiated fission (or just damper-assisted RTGs) may be a<BR>
viable 'fusion+' alternative, though this is higher TL (probably TL 12, same<BR>
as damper-assist fusion).<BR>
> At TL 9, antimatter-catalyzed fission (using extremely small amounts of<BR>
antimatter) should be viable.  Antimatter power plants may be TL 17, but<BR>
antimatter production in small quantities is TL 7.<BR>
<BR>
Could you please chuck together some numbers so we can play with them ?<BR>
<BR>
Basically, I'd like to see what a better fission plant does for things like<BR>
TL10 Seekers, TL11 Far Traders and so on.<BR>
<BR>
My theory for this project is to fix things a sub-system at a time, with<BR>
testing all the way through. release early, release often ... that kinda<BR>
theory.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> > Anyone :<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Armour. I dont want to re-type all of table 158 tonight, but could<BR>
people<BR>
> > put some thought into hi-tech armours ?<BR>
><BR>
> Towards what goal?  There's various plausible options which might disrupt<BR>
canon if introduced.<BR>
<BR>
Towards viable battledress that can stop a TL6-8 Anti-Tank Rifle. Once we<BR>
get that, then we tweak the other rules.<BR>
<BR>
Although my feeling is that armour efficiency could be scaled up quite a<BR>
bit. Big PAWs and meson guns still chew through lots of armour, so I think<BR>
even an order of magnitude wouldnt be too bad.<BR>
<BR>
I think there will be 'islands of defense', where only nukes get thru<BR>
'buffered planetoid' designs, but this isnt neccessarily a bad thing, and is<BR>
solved by Meson Guns, anyway.<BR>
<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Some thoughts about a 'quality' system. I'm thinking about<BR>
cost/efficiency<BR>
> > for reliability tradeoffs. What sort of reliability bonus should you get<BR>
> > for accepting a 10% performance hit ? I dont want you to squeeze more<BR>
> > performance out of a given TL, but I think you should be able to trade<BR>
down<BR>
> > performance or price for more reliability.<BR>
><BR>
> Why not allow trading down reliability for performance?  Happens in the<BR>
real world all the time.  Trading cost for performance happens too, but<BR>
interacts strangely with the tech system.<BR>
<BR>
I'm kinda assuming that the 'vanilla' rules already have that tradeoff.<BR>
Being part of Famile Spofulam (cue jokes about poachers and gamekeepers, or<BR>
the lunatics running the asylum), I dont want to create more opportunities<BR>
for rules-compliant abominations.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2824<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (rly-yh01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.33]) by air-yh03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:23:53 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:23:30 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id TAA38376;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:23:28 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:23:25 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id TAA38331<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:23:25 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:23:25 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007272323.TAA38331@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2824<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2825</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 7:21:43 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2825<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Moving a rock<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
RE: Testing, testing, 1 2 3...<BR>
RE: Grizzly Suit (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!)<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Invader Class grav tank<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
RE: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps YES!<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
[Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 00:26:50 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock<BR>
<BR>
> > From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> > Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
> > > Next, the nukes don't need complex targeting systems, because you are<BR>
> > > not trying to accurately divert the rock.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > *Very* wrong. You *have* to be accurate so as to avoid deflecting the<BR>
> > asteroid into the planet, or into an orbit where it'll get you on the<BR>
> > *next* pass.<BR>
><BR>
> Umm, I have to disagree there.<BR>
><BR>
> Lets say we deflect it, so it misses this time, but will hit on it's next<BR>
> pass.<BR>
><BR>
> That buys us the time to learn all the lessons from this time, so next<BR>
time<BR>
> it will be better planned, better run and with better gear. All that<BR>
should<BR>
> add up to next time being easier.<BR>
><BR>
> Ian Whitchurch<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
What happens if a regression in Tech level occurs whilst the Rock makes it<BR>
way round the loop?<BR>
<BR>
 It is better to sort the problem out there and then and be settled, than<BR>
allow it to fester. No wasted energy and all that.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:17:46 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
> Tod Glenn :<BR>
><BR>
> Could you do small arms ? And maybe light artillery (recoiless rifles and<BR>
> such) ?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I'm working on this even as we speak.  Mostly, I'm working on CPR guns, and<BR>
trying to back-engineer some formulae based on real items.  I'm hoping to<BR>
have some test excel sheets in the next couple of weeks or so for people to<BR>
play with.  I've been pretty absorbed with the map project lately.<BR>
<BR>
My current thoughts for cpr guns:<BR>
<BR>
Case capacity based on powder volume required for a given energy.  My texts<BR>
indicate a grain of propellant generates an average of 200 ft-lbs of energy,<BR>
of which about 35% is transferred to the projectile.  I'm doing some<BR>
regression studies to see if I can get some reasonable powder density<BR>
values.<BR>
<BR>
Damage. I'm trying to take sectional density and projectile retardation into<BR>
account to get some valid damage values that track to real world<BR>
performance.<BR>
<BR>
Gun mass.  I'm looking at case size and relative pressure to make sure<BR>
weights for big bore or really small bore guns don't get horribly skewed.<BR>
I'll use recoil energy to calculate recoil, but I need a T4 expert to<BR>
explain recoil as it relates to game play to fully tweak this.  I'm<BR>
including things like muzzle brakes and 'soft-recoil' systems.<BR>
<BR>
Ballistic performance.  I'm trying to create a systems for calculating hit<BR>
probabilities and retained energy at various ranges.  I'll probably base<BR>
this on ballistic arc and retained energy.  I'm not sure yet.<BR>
<BR>
I plan on adding Electrothermal systems (as opposed to etc) and will look at<BR>
differentiating coil and rail guns if it seems logical.  I haven't even<BR>
looked at lasers (not my area of expertise, and there's not a lot of data<BR>
with regard to the performance of lasers on tissue).  I also plan on taking<BR>
a look at non-conventional projectiles (yes, this means SCMITR, for those of<BR>
you who read my posts).  I also plan on reviewing recent construction<BR>
materials to get masses that are consistent with modern manufacturing.<BR>
<BR>
I'm doing all this, and trying to avoid resorting to calculus (not easy).  I<BR>
suspect that we can get pretty close with simple formulae and 'fudge-factor'<BR>
charts.  Hopefully, we can avoid the 10kg bipod, or the 18kg .45 caliber<BR>
rifle.<BR>
<BR>
Naturally, all this will be nicely metricized.<BR>
<BR>
Thoughts?<BR>
<BR>
I can take a swing at arty.<BR>
<BR>
BTW,Someone really needs to look at body armor, IMHO.<BR>
<BR>
Stay tuned.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 00:31:25 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Stephen Bankhead wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> > At the distance that even 25mm are viewed normally, detailed paint jobs<BR>
> > don't matter that much<BR>
> <BR>
> Ah, but detailed painting is its own reward.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
The first thing they teach you in the forces is attention to detail.<BR>
<BR>
Michael<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:05:03 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Actually, you can "hard land" chunks of it away from anyplace<BR>
> important. Then depending on local conditions, mine it, melt it, or<BR>
> collect the vapor. <BR>
<BR>
Collect the vapor.  If you don't have enough heavy lift, it will land at terminal velocity<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:21:35 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> The referee has to decide where to put the borders.  The<BR>
> main world may be divided into various countries, like<BR>
> present day Terra.  Maybe the surface dwellers are one<BR>
> country, the troglodytes another, and the people who live<BR>
> in floating cities are a third.  Maybe there are ten<BR>
> surface dweller countries, fifty troglodyte countries, and<BR>
> two floating cities.  Maybe the main world is one country,<BR>
> the people living in the asteroid belt are the second, and<BR>
> the outpost at the gas giant is a third.  Maybe the<BR>
> asteroid belt has five different countries.  <BR>
<BR>
Just keep in mind that asteroids move *relative to each other*. Except<BR>
for asteroids that are actually orbiting each other, they'll all have<BR>
different orbits, which means that your neighbors this month (if you<BR>
can call something tens to hundreds of thousands of km away a<BR>
"neighbor" will be *millilions* of km away next month. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:01:47 -0400<BR>
From: Joseph J Alberti Jr <albertijjr@juno.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
Tod,<BR>
<BR>
Standard poster size of 24x36 is a good idea and will keep costs down.  I<BR>
would like to see the hex number instead of the UPP on the map.<BR>
<BR>
I also like the "Naval Strategic Map" idea very much:<BR>
<BR>
"I'm also now thinking in terms of doing a "Naval Strategic Map" that<BR>
would<BR>
be printed on a white background, cover a larger area, and be laminated<BR>
for<BR>
DryErase of similar markers.  It would include only planetary systems,<BR>
UPP,<BR>
bases etc, possibly with watermark borders from various milieu. <BR>
Thoughts?"<BR>
<BR>
Even though I would prefer MegaTraveller sectors, CT era maps are just<BR>
fine with me and would probably have more acceptance and sales.  Besides,<BR>
I can always put it under glass and write on the glass with a crayon to<BR>
make factional boundaries.<BR>
<BR>
Sectors I would like to see:  Spinward Marches, Corridor, Deneb, Vland,<BR>
and Gvurrdon (probably a long shot).<BR>
<BR>
Joe Alberti<BR>
"Long Live Emperor Dulinor!" <BR>
<BR>
________________________________________________________________<BR>
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!<BR>
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!<BR>
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:<BR>
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:09:21 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Testing, testing, 1 2 3...<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_004E_01BFF7ED.68D088B0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
<BR>
Testing, testing, 1 2 3...IMTU there is only one OS - and it really does not<BR>
change to much. Programmers will submit coding changes to the<BR>
SubsectorCOMPOSCoordinator, who submits them to Sector and on up. When a<BR>
change is made, at the ships or boats next annual maintance, all updates<BR>
avalible on that system are loaded and tested (after several backups are<BR>
made)<BR>
<BR>
Honestly, who wants to have to reboot their starship's mainframe while doing<BR>
jump calcs?<BR>
<BR>
"What do you mean the system just froze?"<BR>
"well, sir, I did tell you to get SP 3421 for Windows 1100 with the 43,123<BR>
hotfixes.. but you just wanted to update to windows 1110 and..."<BR>
<sound of gun cocking><BR>
  -----Original Message-----<BR>
  From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Rodney Basler<BR>
  Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 12:20 PM<BR>
  To: 'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
  Subject: Testing, testing, 1 2 3...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
  They just changed my email system at work..is this coming through in the<BR>
evil MIME?<BR>
<BR>
  ObTrav:  How much shoehorning must take place for a character's<BR>
communicators and datalinks to work on any given planet?  What if a planet<BR>
has developed a computing system that uses a base-3 (+, 0, -) and really<BR>
doesn't want to change?  And you thought that Microsoft was bad...<BR>
<BR>
          Rod Basler, COFIT<BR>
  ------------------------------------<BR>
  Dislaimer - They tell me to think, _what_ I think is my own problem.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_004E_01BFF7ED.68D088B0<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><HEAD><BR>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =<BR>
charset=3Diso-8859-1"><BR>
<TITLE>Testing, testing, 1 2 3...</TITLE><BR>
<BR>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.3018.900" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<DIV><SPAN =<BR>
class=3D160400400-28072000>IMTU=20<BR>
there is only one OS - and it really does not change to much. =<BR>
Programmers will=20<BR>
submit coding changes to the SubsectorCOMPOSCoordinator, who submits =<BR>
them to=20<BR>
Sector and on up. When a change is made, at the&nbsp;ships or&nbsp;boats =<BR>
next=20<BR>
annual maintance, all updates avalible on that system are loaded and =<BR>
tested=20<BR>
(after several backups are made)</SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV><SPAN=20<BR>
class=3D160400400-28072000></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV><SPAN=20<BR>
class=3D160400400-28072000>Honestly, who wants to have to reboot their =<BR>
starship's=20<BR>
mainframe while doing jump calcs?</SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV><SPAN=20<BR>
class=3D160400400-28072000></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV><SPAN =<BR>
class=3D160400400-28072000>"What=20<BR>
do you mean the system just froze?"</SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV><SPAN =<BR>
class=3D160400400-28072000>"well,=20<BR>
sir, I did tell you to get SP 3421 for Windows 1100 with the 43,123 =<BR>
hotfixes..=20<BR>
but you just wanted to update to windows 1110 =<BR>
and..."</SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV><SPAN=20<BR>
class=3D160400400-28072000>&lt;sound of gun =<BR>
cocking&gt;</SPAN></DIV><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style=3D"MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"><BR>
  <DIV align=3Dleft class=3DOutlookMessageHeader dir=3Dltr>-----Original Message-----<BR>
<B>From:</B>=20  owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com=20  [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]<B>On Behalf Of =</B>Rodney=20  Basler<BR>
<B>Sent:</B> Thursday, July 27, 2000 12:20 PM<BR>
<B>To:</B>=20  'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
<B>Subject:</B> Testing, =testing, 1 2=20  3...<BR>
<BR>
</DIV>  <BR>
They just changed my email system at work..is this = coming=20   through in the evil MIME?   <BR>
ObTrav:&nbsp; How much shoehorning must take place = for a=20   character's communicators and datalinks to work on any given = planet?&nbsp;=20   What if a planet has developed a computing system that uses a base-3 = (+, 0, -)=20   and really doesn't want to change?&nbsp; And you thought that =Microsoft was=20  bad...  <BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Rod =Basler,=20  COFIT <BR>
------------------------------------=20  <BR>
Dislaimer - They tell me to think, _what_ I think =is my own=20  problem. </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_004E_01BFF7ED.68D088B0--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:01:39 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Grizzly Suit (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!)<BR>
<BR>
That PopSci article was really cool - but I wonder about the EM leakage from<BR>
the wireless LAN they were talking about - sounds to me like a few radio<BR>
homing RAM grenades might make short work of them..<BR>
<BR>
but it is coming ;) Here is more....<BR>
<BR>
SJ Games News: Force Fields!<BR>
<BR>
   Okay, we're now technically in early TL8. But it's getting later all<BR>
   the time. Now they're working on force fields. See the Yahoo story.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Related Links:<BR>
<BR>
  1.<BR>
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/space/20000725/sc/force_fields_and_plasma_shiel<BR>
ds_get_closer_to_reality_1.html<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Tod Glenn<BR>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 10:28 AM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Grizzly Suit (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> No, if you use the wrong reflexes the onboard computer simply locks the<BR>
joint, and releases it again when you're moving in a manner which _won't_<BR>
damage the suit.<BR>
><BR>
> Canonical battledress is fully sealed and resistant to high pressures.<BR>
The deep diving suits you describe are probably the closest equivalent.<BR>
><BR>
> In any case, my objection to the kilt had to do with appearances, not<BR>
reality;)<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Troy Hurtubise, creator of the Ursus MkVI anti-grizzly suit, has a new<BR>
armored suit in the development stage.  The first generation of battle<BR>
dress? see: http://www.netsurf.com/nsd/misc/troy.html.<BR>
<BR>
Also, Popular Science has a cover article on the future soldier.  It's<BR>
coming, folks...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:58:44 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
From: Douglas E. Berry <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
<BR>
>That's it, I do the Templar page *today.*<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    Good idea Doug.  Good idea Doug.<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:57:42 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
<BR>
>Do you mean _this_ light:<BR>
><BR>
>(*)  <<red flash>><BR>
> ^<BR>
>/ \<BR>
>| |<BR>
>| |<BR>
>___<BR>
>| |<BR>
>| |<BR>
>| |<BR>
>| |<BR>
>| |<BR>
>|_|<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    John, get that flashy-lighty thing out of my eyes.  Ye gods man, what<BR>
are you trying to do, give me brain cancer or something?<BR>
    < LL says as he adjusts his sunglasses. ><BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:56:15 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
<BR>
>You don't sound paranoid; you _are_ paranoid.  You really<BR>
>need some professional help, and I know who can give it to<BR>
>you.  Just look into the light -- thank you -- and follow<BR>
>me.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    Oh, good, so my pointing this 10-Gauge Sawed-off Shotgun at you is Cool.<BR>
    <Blam-Blam.><BR>
    Sorry, Glenn, I didn't know it was loaded.<BR>
    <Cha-Chunk><BR>
    {LL reloads his shotgun again, ala Ash in Evil Dead.]<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:39:25 -0700<BR>
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: Invader Class grav tank<BR>
<BR>
Was this tank ever done as a mini?  If so, I'd be MUCH obliged if someone<BR>
could send me pics from multiple angles.  While I've already started work on<BR>
it for the GF cover, it's not too late to consolodate :)<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
Jesse<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:54:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
From: Irishdoh@aol.com <Irishdoh@aol.com><BR>
<BR>
>>     Not to sound paranoid or anything, but don't the Hivers look like<BR>
>> something out of Call of Cthulu?  I mean they are totaly non-human, &<BR>
they<BR>
>> want to manipulate humans for their own ends.  They look like a something<BR>
>> that Cthulu would have called 'brother'.  This hit me when I was looking<BR>
at<BR>
>> Glen Myers Traveller Character Minis page, then his Horror Minis page.<BR>
>> That Cthulu & the Hivers could be long lost brothers.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>You didn't know?!?!?!???  You fool, now you've made them aware that we<BR>
know!  But, you can rectify the situation by repeating the following word<BR>
three times.  Hast.......<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    I think you have either played CoC one to many times, or you have been<BR>
on AOHell too long.  Relax man, relax.  And, don't worry about what is right<BR>
behind you.  I'm not.<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:08:05 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
<BR>
At 11:18 AM 7/27/00, you wrote:<BR>
> > Any ideas or suggestions you might have are also welcome.  Thanks for your<BR>
> > time.<BR>
><BR>
>Would here be any arrangements for something inthe UK, through BITS?<BR>
><BR>
>Michael<BR>
<BR>
         Hi, Michael!<BR>
         I hadn't thought about it.  I'll be shipping FedEX, so as long as <BR>
you are on Terra, I can get it to you...  the issue is the shipping costs <BR>
for you.  If BITS wants to do something closer to your home, then Jesse, <BR>
myself and the BITS team would have to all make sure we were on the same <BR>
page so that look and quality were the same no matter where it came from.<BR>
         Not that it can't be done, I just hadn't thought of it.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:49:16 -0400<BR>
From: "Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
>>> My old Jesuit profs would be shocked.  No philosophy? no literature?<BR>
Just<BR>
>>> crank out tons of technicians with no foundation in the humanities, no<BR>
>>> ethics? I hate to think that the Imperium has gone down that road. IMTU,<BR>
I<BR>
>>> favor the idea of the gentlebeing scholar.<BR>
>><BR>
>> I would certainly include subjects like philosophy, literature, law and<BR>
>> ethics in the same group as history and business. I simply meant that<BR>
>> scientific and technical subjects would be treated different.<BR>
>><BR>
><BR>
>I guess I should have mentioned I was a double major in Chemistry and<BR>
>Mathematics.  Are these technical subjects?  I still had to take<BR>
literature,<BR>
>philosophy, religion, ethics, history and all that liberal arts stuff.  I<BR>
am<BR>
>constantly astounded by my technical coworkers' lack of liberal arts<BR>
>education. A serious failing of the American public university, IMHO.  As I<BR>
>said, I hope the 3I does a better job.<BR>
><BR>
>Are the Jesuits still running schools in the 3I?<BR>
<BR>
As a graduate of a Jesuit education I certainly hope so.<BR>
<BR>
Terry C<BR>
All that is Gold does not glitter<BR>
Not all who travel are lost<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:52:56 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
<BR>
Due to the ever increasing threat of Evil Monkeys, Pinkerdoo is proud to<BR>
announce the full release of the AMWS 1.0.<BR>
<BR>
Please note: Issues related to the AMWS's fire control system have been<BR>
resolved. The 40mm .001KT grenade launcher will no longer accidentally fire<BR>
when the penguin flaps his right wing three times. Pinkerdoo would like to<BR>
take this opportunity to apologize to the families of the test subjects.<BR>
<BR>
Pinkerdoo - Odd designs for odd jobs.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Nick<BR>
Bradbeer<BR>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 7:40 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Scale Economy (was Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2797)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Pinkerdoo is proud to announce the release of the first part of the AMWS<BR>
> 1.0, the FGPP-12. The FGPP-12 is a powerful GTL-12 Penguin Portable<BR>
Fusion<BR>
> Gun.<BR>
<BR>
Now the only logical step left is the Portable Penguin Fusion Gun*,<BR>
although how hard you'd have to bang the penguins together's beyond me.<BR>
<BR>
Or possibly the Portable Gun Fusion Penguin, the ultimate area-defence<BR>
guard animal. Just sit it down and watch any guns flash to plasma if<BR>
anyone's stupid enough to bring one nearby...<BR>
<BR>
Time for my pills, I think...<BR>
<BR>
NB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:53:37 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps YES!<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/26/00 10:16 PM, webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> I have been working on redoing the big 17x22" Spinward Marches map (that<BR>
> came with the boxed deluxe Traveller) an the question occurs.  Would anyone<BR>
> else be interested in large format maps of various sectors?  If so, would<BR>
> you be willing to pay, and how much?<BR>
<BR>
I would definitely buy the Spinward Marches map for $20-$30, (and likely buy<BR>
the Solomani Rim, Vland and Core.) I might buy others. I assume we are<BR>
talking /color/ maps with at least the same colors used on the original<BR>
17"x22" Spinward map, and all the X-boat routes, etc.?<BR>
<BR>
If it would cost too much to make it for a $30 price tag, I may consider<BR>
buying it anyway -- though most likely only the Spinward Marches for higher<BR>
than $35. If it's more around the $20-$25 range, I'd have no problem<BR>
dropping a C-note for four or five large-format color maps of other sectors,<BR>
as well.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:52:55 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Oh, a point.  I always disliked having a subsector map standing<BR>
> alone.  I much prefered to have either 4 or 9 subsectors on a map<BR>
> with the PC's operating near the center.  That way larger<BR>
> relationships among the worlds became more apparent.  If the PC's<BR>
> moved toward an edge of the map, I'd give them another one putting<BR>
> them back near the center again. Computers make this a lot easier.<BR>
<BR>
Just "mount" subsector maps on stiff backing (cardboard or plastic),<BR>
and trim the edges so they mate properly. Then they can be laid out<BR>
(in a "frame" if necessary) however you wish.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:21:32 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
- --------------D9A373D1B9C26F3456ED6A81<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
<BR>
I had a bit of fun this evening, running the numbers on an alleged<BR>
non-rocket Lunar trip (using an "electrogravity" drive) to demonstrate<BR>
the absurdity of a claim on alt.conspiracy.  I don't expect to convince<BR>
anyone on alt.conspiracy, but it still seemed a worthwhile endeavor at<BR>
the time.<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav:  I used the equations from LBB2 to run the numbers.<BR>
<BR>
Other ObTrav:  Extremely high-efficiency thruster plates (12+ G with<BR>
current power sources) at TL-8, anyone?<BR>
<BR>
Third ObTrav:  Are there any loons in the late 21st century that believe<BR>
that the US-sponsored jump to Barnard's Star in 2096 is a hoax?  If so,<BR>
how long do they persist in their beliefs?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
- --------------D9A373D1B9C26F3456ED6A81<BR>
Content-Type: message/rfc822<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
Content-Disposition: inline<BR>
<BR>
Path: news6.giganews.com!nntp3.giganews.com!news5.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail<BR>
Message-ID: <3980D8DF.3A72CEC0@WONTWORKpremier.net><BR>
From: John Groth <wombatINVALID@WONTWORKpremier.net><BR>
Organization: Task Force Smith Reenactment Society<BR>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; U)<BR>
X-Accept-Language: en<BR>
MIME-Version: 1.0<BR>
Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.area51,alt.conspiracy<BR>
Subject: Re: Man on the moon... a FAKE?<BR>
References: <8kve28$f5$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8lkgh9$s52$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <397ef471.10427158@news2.ripco.com> <8lmu6i$gp2$1@newstoo.ericsson.se> <397f6ca0.6857504@news2.ripco.com> <8lp12i$osr$1@newstoo.ericsson.se> <398040d7.6942614@news2.ripco.com> <msk0osctncee3vadg8tj4gpfc3slgun9o1@4ax.com><BR>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:49:53 CDT<BR>
X-Trace: sv2-8O3SYPiIqJEEyh8Ceyb2GOpg9qSj6uQHKfZdZby9tP9hPt/2gxYvNnq/NlCw85aE4pXWWkqY4q4BngY!OHiqOcme+DIraV/nzv4qGcOjbBw=<BR>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@GigaNews.Com<BR>
X-Abuse-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers<BR>
X-Abuse-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:50:39 -0500<BR>
Xref: nntp3.giganews.com alt.conspiracy.area51:41659 alt.conspiracy:441385<BR>
<BR>
Doug Berry wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Freedom@Liberty.com, in a burst of mad inspiration, sat down on<BR>
> Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:12:17 GMT to write:<BR>
> <BR>
> >The contention is NOT that man has NEVER gone to the Moon...he may<BR>
> >very well have, although I have NO WAY to determine whether or not he<BR>
> >in Fact has...but rather that the SCAM known as the APOLLO PROJECT was<BR>
> >a Total Hoax. Most certainly the technology exists...an Electrogravity<BR>
> >powered spacecraft can make the trip to the Moon in mere MINUTES,<BR>
> >rather than DAYS required with the ancient, inefficient, and Dangerous<BR>
> >mode of rocket propuslion. Compared to efficiency of Electrogravity<BR>
> >propulsion, rocket propulsion is not much different than using a giant<BR>
> >slingshot.<BR>
> <BR>
> *blink*<BR>
> <BR>
> OK, Freedom has just crossed over into fantasy land...<BR>
<BR>
I took the liberty of determining just what kind of acceleration this<BR>
"electrogravity" drive would need to reach the Moon "in mere MINUTES."<BR>
<BR>
Assumptions:<BR>
<BR>
1.  The Moon is about 392,000 kilometers from Earth (see:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.sciencenet.org.uk/database/Physics/SolarSystem/p01001c.html<BR>
<BR>
for exact figures).<BR>
<BR>
2.  The flight profile is as follows: constant boost to midpoint, then<BR>
the ship "flips over" and decelerates at the same thrust, arriving at<BR>
the Moon at near zero velocity.  Without this deceleration maneuver, the<BR>
ship would simply sail past the Moon, "to Infinity and Beyond." ;-)<BR>
<BR>
3.  One G of acceleration equals 9.8 meters/second.<BR>
<BR>
4.  "Mere minutes" means no more than one hour. <BR>
<BR>
The equation is: A = 4 * D / T^2 where<BR>
<BR>
A = Acceleration in meters per second^2<BR>
D = Distance in meters<BR>
T = Time in seconds<BR>
<BR>
Plugging my values in, I get:<BR>
<BR>
A = 4 * 392,000,000 / (3600)^2<BR>
<BR>
A = 1,568,000,000 / 12,960,000<BR>
<BR>
A = 120.99 meters/second^2<BR>
<BR>
A / 9.8 = 12.35 Gs acceleration<BR>
<BR>
In other words, "Freedom" expects us to believe that, with current<BR>
technology, we can build spaceships capable of maintaining acceleration<BR>
of over 12 times the force of Earth's gravity for at least an hour of<BR>
continuous operation, without killing, or at least incapacitating, the<BR>
crew.<BR>
<BR>
That would come close to "snapping my disbelief suspenders" in a<BR>
science-fiction setting, let alone at current tech levels.<BR>
<BR>
- --------------D9A373D1B9C26F3456ED6A81--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2825<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.34]) by air-yh01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:21:43 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:21:02 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA45486;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:20:53 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:20:48 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA45452<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:20:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:20:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007280220.WAA45452@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2825<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2826</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/27/00 8:18:32 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, July 27 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2826<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
Re: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps YES!<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps YES!<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Testing, testing, 1 2 3...<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:23:26 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> notes:<BR>
<BR>
(In reference to a glaring mistake of mine)<BR>
<BR>
>>The ship is fine. It's the economics rules that are screwy.<BR>
<BR>
[rearrange]<BR>
<BR>
The A2 is built to go into the fringes of a system, where one gee ships wont<BR>
go.<BR>
<BR>
It's the A1 that is a ship without a role ;)<<<BR>
<BR>
Aggh! My apologies, Ian.<BR>
<BR>
I was referring to the A1 Far Trader, not the A2 Fast Trader.<BR>
<BR>
Here's the corrected entry:<BR>
<BR>
> Type A1 200-ton Far Trader<BR>
><BR>
> A1-22212R1-00000-00000-0 MCr 48.3<BR>
> TL: 11 Crew: 4 Fuel: 44 Cargo: 68.8 Pass: 6 Low: 4<BR>
> EP: 4 Agility: 2 Vehicles: Air/Raft<BR>
><BR>
> Without the class discount, the ship is a very uneconomic MCr 60.375, as<BR>
> compared to the er...very uneconomic CT MCr 61. Oh, and while we're on the<BR>
> subject, the floorplans in "Traders and Gunboats" have an displacement at<BR>
> least twice that of the displacement given for the ship. What gives with<BR>
> this design?<BR>
<BR>
Ian again:<BR>
<BR>
>>If you get paid a flat 'loading fee', plus an amount per parsec, plus a<BR>
risk<BR>
premium, then you are in business.<<<BR>
<BR>
Yah, you were talking about this a while ago. Did you have a system for<BR>
this? Would you mind reposting it, if you have already? I'd be interested in<BR>
seeing something like this.<BR>
<BR>
>>Note that this ship is 2 gee, [actually, jump-2, but it works out the<BR>
same--FR]  and has lots of power, so it can mount weapons<BR>
that go beyond the rig of many ethically challenged civilians (eg a twin<BR>
fusion turret, to go with the missile and 2 sandcasters in the other<BR>
turret).<<<BR>
<BR>
One of the nice things about doing these designs as High Guard is it gives<BR>
you a quick and dirty way to see how you can add weapons to your ship,<BR>
without having to add a second fusion generator in the cargo bay like I had<BR>
to in MegaTraveller :)<BR>
<BR>
Fred "Rule Imperia!" Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:27:54 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com> inquires:<BR>
<BR>
>>Have you sent these to the Classic Traveller Starships<BR>
mailing list?<<<BR>
<BR>
<embarrassment><BR>
I didn't remember that there was one.<BR>
</embarrassment><BR>
<BR>
How do you subscribe? I'll post them over there, though I can't believe<BR>
nobody's tried this loony stunt before.<BR>
<BR>
Personally, though, I thought it would be worthwhile, if for no other reason<BR>
than to have one integrated system for CT starships and combat.<BR>
<BR>
Fred "System Builder" Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:32:29 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
on 7/27/00 6:49 PM, Terry Carlino at carlino@home.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> Are the Jesuits still running schools in the 3I?<BR>
> <BR>
> As a graduate of a Jesuit education I certainly hope so.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Cool.  Another disciple of darkness<BR>
<BR>
Tod "Gonzaga U class of 1984" Glenn<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:35:28 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps YES!<BR>
<BR>
on 7/27/00 6:53 PM, Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella at xrp@sierratel.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I would definitely buy the Spinward Marches map for $20-$30, (and likely buy<BR>
> the Solomani Rim, Vland and Core.) I might buy others. I assume we are<BR>
> talking /color/ maps with at least the same colors used on the original<BR>
> 17"x22" Spinward map, and all the X-boat routes, etc.?<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
We're talking $10-15 max, and the maps will have the same general<BR>
color/layout as the original Spinward Marches map.  We may do the maps in<BR>
24x36" rather than 17x22.<BR>
<BR>
Stay tuned.<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:39:17 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps YES!<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/27/00 6:53 PM, xrp@sierratel.com issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Via electronic medium on 7/26/00 10:16 PM, webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
> issued forth:<BR>
> <BR>
>> I have been working on redoing the big 17x22" Spinward Marches map (that<BR>
>> came with the boxed deluxe Traveller) an the question occurs.  Would anyone<BR>
>> else be interested in large format maps of various sectors?  If so, would<BR>
>> you be willing to pay, and how much?<BR>
> <BR>
> I would definitely buy the Spinward Marches map for $20-$30, (and likely buy<BR>
> the Solomani Rim, Vland and Core.) I might buy others. I assume we are<BR>
> talking /color/ maps with at least the same colors used on the original<BR>
> 17"x22" Spinward map, and all the X-boat routes, etc.?<BR>
> <BR>
> If it would cost too much to make it for a $30 price tag, I may consider<BR>
> buying it anyway -- though most likely only the Spinward Marches for higher<BR>
> than $35. If it's more around the $20-$25 range, I'd have no problem<BR>
> dropping a C-note for four or five large-format color maps of other sectors,<BR>
> as well.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
OK, just to be clear, I say I am willing to pay that much, *personally,*<BR>
because I REALLY want this stuff. Obviously, others may not want to pay so<BR>
much. The less price it is, the more I'll buy, that simple.<BR>
<BR>
Preferred time-frame: CT<BR>
<BR>
Sectors I would be interested in aside from those mentioned above: Deneb,<BR>
Zholak, Pendric Bundles, Trojan Reach, Diaspora, Fornast, Delphi, Old<BR>
Expanses, Spica, Hrexal, Tailing Isles, Zhodane.<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps you could offer a map (in the larger standard poster size) that<BR>
included a 'border' of the subsectors immediately adjacent to the main<BR>
sector, for the purposes of knowing what is out there when you're playing at<BR>
the border of a sector. (Multiple maps would overlap this 'border' were they<BR>
adjacent sectors. A great place to put a legend, as it would be hidden if<BR>
desired.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:47:04 +1000<BR>
From: Graeme_Batho@agd.nsw.gov.au<BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) commented:<BR>
<BR>
>> The actual approach will depend on the specifics of the orbits, but<BR>
>> in practice it is easier to retard the asteroids speed rather than<BR>
>> increase it.<BR>
><BR>
>Nope. *Any* change in velocity takes the *same* amount of energy.<BR>
>Regardless of direction.<BR>
<BR>
True, and I said as much later - but that wasn't what I was talking about.<BR>
<BR>
It is easier to slow down the asteroid -in practice- because to speed<BR>
it up you need to detonate the nukes on the -far- side of the rock.<BR>
That takes more time, more complex targeting systems, and requires<BR>
more reaction fuel (to swing around the rock to get the bomb into position<BR>
for the blast). In fact, if the bomb has to detonate less than 100 metres<BR>
from the surface you would have to match velocities with the asteroid to<BR>
get to the blast point on the far side. That really rules out speeding<BR>
up the asteroid. More reaction fuel = less payload, so it's far cheaper,<BR>
faster and more effective to blast on the nearest side & slow it down.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>> Instead all nukes are to target the centre of the rock, and detonate<BR>
>> at the optimum distance from it (Care would have to be taken that the<BR>
>> nukes are spaced far enough apart to avoid being caught in each<BR>
>> others blast).<BR>
><BR>
>Nope. You have to target for a very precise location in relation to the<BR>
>asteroid and it's path. You need to target for a point *close* (maybe<BR>
>as much as 100 meters, likely around 10 or so) and that point has to be<BR>
>in the right direction from the center of the asteroid to give a shove<BR>
>in the proper direction.<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, sloppy writing on my part. What I should have said was that the<BR>
nukes don't need to have as complex a targeting system as you do to<BR>
divert the rock, and that they should be targeted to act through the<BR>
asteroid's centre of mass.<BR>
<BR>
To divert the rock you have to have more complex targeting (because<BR>
the bomb has to detonate -beside- the asteroid as they pass each other.<BR>
That has to be very precisely calculated, because range, position<BR>
and speed of both the bomb and the rock must be known with great<BR>
accuracy to pinpoint when and where the bomb must explode to impart<BR>
the greatest delta vee on the rock.<BR>
<BR>
It's even worse if you want to speed the rock up. All of that would<BR>
have to be worked out on the -far side- of the asteroid - so you need<BR>
a very complex, costly and heavy targeting computer to be -on board-<BR>
the bomb + lots more fuel to get into position.<BR>
<BR>
However, if you just want to slow it down, you are targeting the near<BR>
side of the asteroid and you can cut corners with the targeting system.<BR>
The bomb is always in line of sight - so you can transmit accurate<BR>
targeting information to it all the time. And because the asteroid is<BR>
coming right at the missile as long as the positioning is accurate<BR>
you can detonate the bomb at the right distance with just a proximity<BR>
sensor. Hence you save a lot of weight which you can use for a higher<BR>
yield payload (or just lower the cost of the missile).<BR>
<BR>
Basically my argument is that it's quicker & easier to get the<BR>
systems in place to slow down an asteroid than it is to divert it or<BR>
speed it up.<BR>
<BR>
Graeme Batho<BR>
Lateral thinker at large<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:56:12 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
On 27 Jul 2000, at 16:06, Douglas E. Berry wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 08:42 AM 7/28/2000 -0000, you wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >> *WEG*  All of these things came up during the GF playtest, and it was<BR>
> >> pointed out that emitting anything would likely bring death unto thoust<BR>
> >> quickly.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Which is why I have doubts about all these ideas on point defence knocking down<BR>
> >everything that flies through the air. a PD system pretty much has to be<BR>
> >active, and to my mind that just makes it a great big fat target.<BR>
> <BR>
> This is why battlefields are unhealthy.  You can power up the PD system,<BR>
> and attrack attention, or leave it off and hope that nothing gets launched<BR>
> at you from an angle that you can't make a quick passive detection from.<BR>
> <BR>
> Choose now.<BR>
<BR>
Heh.<BR>
<BR>
I can't remember whether it was here or on the GURPS list, but somebody was <BR>
saying that good indirect missiles, etc would make tanks as we know them <BR>
obselete. I feel otherwise, mainly because passive detection of (relatively) <BR>
high tracjectory munitions, like indirect fire weapons, is fairly easy compared <BR>
to direct fire weapons which will have a lovely background of dirt and trees. I <BR>
also suspect that ultra-velocity DU penetrators, which have a fairly small <BR>
cross-section, aren't going to be the easiest targets for active sensors, <BR>
either (especially as even now the total available reaction time has to be <BR>
under 0.5 seconds).<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:56:12 -0000<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
On 27 Jul 2000, at 16:08, Douglas E. Berry wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 08:35 AM 7/28/2000 -0000, you wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >BTW the RNZIR (Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment), which is to say all our<BR>
> >infantry wears a green beret :) And your guys have no idea how to wear one<BR>
> >properly, either :)<BR>
> <BR>
> And that green beret confuses the hell out of American troops who equate a<BR>
> green beret with the Special Forces.<BR>
> <BR>
> There were many schemes I could have used, but I chose the British formula<BR>
> because I liked the image.<BR>
<BR>
Fine by me, as I rather dislike the US one. BTW, which rank structure did you <BR>
use? One thing that always peeved us about US style armies was that when they <BR>
visited soldiers with considerably less experience and skill than us got to <BR>
dine (and drink) in the Sergeant's Mess when as far as we were concerned many <BR>
weren't fit to enter the Corporal's Mess.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 18:56:40 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Testing, testing, 1 2 3...<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> ObTrav:  How much shoehorning must take place for a character's<BR>
> communicators and datalinks to work on any given planet?  What if a<BR>
> planet has developed a computing system that uses a base-3 (+, 0, -)<BR>
> and really doesn't want to change?  And you thought that Microsoft<BR>
> was bad...<BR>
<BR>
Trinary doesn't really buy you anything except making designs more<BR>
complex. <BR>
<BR>
And in any case the format used *internally* doesn't matter. Just what<BR>
*protocols* are used for data transfer. With the right protocols at the<BR>
various "layers" of the link, translation between formats happens<BR>
automatically.<BR>
<BR>
For example, I'm running a home LAN using Netware. Using PCs running<BR>
DOS, OS/2, and Windows 95; and Macs (and eventually Linux).<BR>
<BR>
The *physical* layer is category 5 twisted pair cables (except for the<BR>
one system still using coax, which hooks to a hub that has coax *and*<BR>
10baseT. All using Ethernet. If I added the right cards or hardware<BR>
converters, I could also support ArcNet and Token Ring.<BR>
<BR>
The protocol running on top of the ethernet is IPX (I'll be adding IP<BR>
eventually). That's yet another layer. The IPX packets are carried as<BR>
data in ethernet packets.<BR>
<BR>
Then we get to the higher level interfaces on the computers and at the<BR>
client computers. The protocols at this level are dependent on the OS. <BR>
<BR>
To the PCs running DOS, the server looks like a FAT formatted drive (or<BR>
several drives). To the OS/2 systems, it looks like an HPFS drive,<BR>
complete with long filenames. To the Win95 system it looks like a<BR>
normal Fat16 or FAT32 drive with LFN support. To the Macs, it looks<BR>
like a Mac drive, complete with long filenames, and data & resource<BR>
forks for files.<BR>
<BR>
The server keeps track of which DOS (8.3 format) filename corresponds<BR>
to which Win95 and OS/2 long file name, and translates as need for Mac<BR>
filenames. So the name of the file varies by OS. But for any given OS,<BR>
it's consistent, and where possible, the names are kept as similar as<BR>
possible between the different naming rules.<BR>
<BR>
So many types of files are freely exchangable. Between Mac and the<BR>
other OSes, you need to get the right kind of resource fork attached if<BR>
the file was created on a non-Mac system. But files created on the Mac<BR>
are freely usable by the other OSes, because the server "strips off"<BR>
the resource fork.<BR>
<BR>
So I don't see there being much trouble, except on newly contacted<BR>
worlds. After a few years, the proper conversion rules will be in place<BR>
on each end, and the systems will talk to each other. <BR>
<BR>
Consider that the Internet (back before the web) was connected to<BR>
BITNET which uses EBDIC instead of ASCII.<BR>
<BR>
Here's the above paragraph in EBCDIC:<BR>
<BR>
Ö@@@ɕ@M@@@]@@@<BR>
%@@@@@@K<BR>
%?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:31:41 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> If *I* was in charge on such a planet, I'd be *real* selective about<BR>
>> what was allowed to be sold offworld, just so that the Imperium (and<BR>
>> anybody else) would have some *real* problems if they ever tried to<BR>
>> run a black op on *my* planet without my consent.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Picture the 1950s or even 1970s FBI and KGB *trying* to plant bugs in<BR>
>> place that had current *commercially available* technology. Or trying<BR>
>> to protect themselves against it. <BR>
>> <BR>
>> Fiber optic & laser bugs, some of the hummingbird sized surviellance<BR>
>> drones you can buy *now* if you have the money, PGP & RSA<BR>
>> encryption...<BR>
><BR>
> Hummingbird sized surveillance drones???  Cool!  Do you have any <BR>
> references for these.  The smallest that I'd heard of are about the <BR>
> size of a small radio-controlled plane.  <BR>
<BR>
No, I saw them on a TV program. Probably on the Discovery Channel. The<BR>
hummingbird sized jobs were "cutting edge at the time, the "frisbee"<BR>
sized ones were "old, stable tech". And they are trying to get<BR>
dragonfly sized units going. But there are a lot of "bugs" to deal<BR>
with. (Sorry, I couldn't resist). <BR>
<BR>
BTW, one acknowledged problem is that birds and bats are apt to try<BR>
*eating* the damn things. At several thousand each, that's gonna be<BR>
expensive. <BR>
<BR>
You also know why 4U is selling that "bug/bird zapper" under a<BR>
different name to corpration security departments. With an optional<BR>
spectroscope attachment to analyze the composition of whatever just got<BR>
zapped. If it is "unusual" an alarm goes off in the security office and<BR>
a small robot is directed to fetch the remains.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:39:17 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2742<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> sneadj@mindspring.com wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> If *I* was in charge on such a planet, I'd be *real* selective about<BR>
>>> what was allowed to be sold offworld, just so that the Imperium (and<BR>
>>> anybody else) would have some *real* problems if they ever tried to<BR>
>>> run a black op on *my* planet without my consent.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> Picture the 1950s or even 1970s FBI and KGB *trying* to plant bugs in<BR>
>>> place that had current *commercially available* technology. Or trying<BR>
>>> to protect themselves against it.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> Fiber optic & laser bugs, some of the hummingbird sized surviellance<BR>
>>> drones you can buy *now* if you have the money, PGP & RSA<BR>
>>> encryption...<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Hummingbird sized surveillance drones???  Cool!  Do you have any<BR>
>> references for these.  The smallest that I'd heard of are about the<BR>
>> size of a small radio-controlled plane.<BR>
><BR>
> A small radio controlled plane is not much bigger than a humnmingbird,<BR>
> these days...<BR>
><BR>
> Leonard gets ahead of himself, here, though, I think. Such drones do<BR>
> exist, and the designers are working on making them even smaller, but<BR>
> you can't just go out and buy them, since they pretty much only exist in<BR>
> the lab.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. They've got units about the size of a frisbee for sale, and were<BR>
about to release the "hummingbird" sized version at the time the<BR>
program I saw was made. <BR>
<BR>
> The people desingning them are doing things like fabricating their own<BR>
> silicon and suchlike, so it's a mite outside of the average hobbyists<BR>
> reach. Since the people working on them are using DOD money, you can bet<BR>
> the Gummint gets first crack at any production run.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, these folks expect to sell most to private industry,<BR>
especially detective agencies and the like. But they cost like sin.<BR>
<BR>
> There was also a show on one of The Discovery Channel, TLC, perhaps NOVA<BR>
> or the History Channel about developent of these tiny aircraft.<BR>
<BR>
I'm pretty sure it was The Discovery Channel.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:44:46 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
>>Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2816<BR>
>>I had asked,<BR>
>>> I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
>>>  actually produced?  <BR>
><BR>
> You replied:<BR>
>>Yes -- weighed damn near two pounds and cost a fortune.<BR>
><BR>
> Two pounds?  What was it made of and how big was it?  <BR>
<BR>
Ok, 2 lbs = 900 grams (close enough). Assuming a density of 11 (lead is<BR>
11.3), I get about 80 cm^3. Which would be a cube 4.3 cm on a side, or<BR>
about 1.7 inches.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:52:25 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 26 Jul 2000, at 8:32, Douglas E. Berry wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> At 01:18 PM 7/26/2000 +0000, you wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> <BR>
>>>     There is a reason that us Navy-types *really*, *really* like EMCON<BR>
>>>Policy:  Silent/ Silent.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> *WEG*  All of these things came up during the GF playtest, and it was<BR>
>> pointed out that emitting anything would likely bring death unto thoust<BR>
>> quickly.<BR>
<BR>
"thee" not "thoust".<BR>
<BR>
> Which is why I have doubts about all these ideas on point defence knocking <BR>
> down <BR>
> everything that flies through the air. a PD system pretty much has to be <BR>
> active, and to my mind that just makes it a great big fat target.<BR>
<BR>
*Very* spread spectrum. Each pulse is at a different frequency. And you<BR>
can spread out cheap emitters linked by cheap fiber optics to the<BR>
control unit.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 19:55:45 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I'm doing all this, and trying to avoid resorting to calculus (not easy).  I<BR>
> suspect that we can get pretty close with simple formulae and 'fudge-factor'<BR>
> charts.  Hopefully, we can avoid the 10kg bipod, or the 18kg .45 caliber<BR>
> rifle.<BR>
<BR>
Just a thought, but rather than *tables*, maybe nomograms would be<BR>
simpler to *use*, and allow for data that's both more realistic, and<BR>
easier to grasp.<BR>
<BR>
In case you aren't aware on nomograms, they are those "charts" with a<BR>
scale on one side (say "angle") a different scale on another side (say<BR>
"baseline"), and a curve plotted with a scale on it (say "distance").<BR>
You read it by placing at straight edge between the two parameters, and<BR>
reading the answer from where the straightedge intersects the curve.<BR>
<BR>
You can have multiple curves on the same nomogram (say for different<BR>
TLs). <BR>
<BR>
*Designing* the nomogram is harder than doing a simple table. But it<BR>
removes the formulas and the need to interpolate.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:06:34 +1000<BR>
From: Graeme_Batho@agd.nsw.gov.au<BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch commented:<BR>
<BR>
>> > Next, the nukes don't need complex targeting systems, because you are<BR>
>> > not trying to accurately divert the rock.<BR>
>><BR>
>> *Very* wrong. You *have* to be accurate so as to avoid deflecting the<BR>
>> asteroid into the planet, or into an orbit where it'll get you on the<BR>
>> *next* pass.<BR>
><BR>
>Umm, I have to disagree there.<BR>
><BR>
>Lets say we deflect it, so it misses this time, but will hit on it's next<BR>
>pass.<BR>
><BR>
>That buys us the time to learn all the lessons from this time, so next time<BR>
>it will be better planned, better run and with better gear. All that should<BR>
>add up to next time being easier.<BR>
<BR>
I love it - you spotted my intentional deception!<BR>
<BR>
Slowing down the asteroid doesn't change the path of the orbit (though the<BR>
orbit will "flatten" somewhat) so the asteroid will keep crossing the<BR>
orbit of the planet.<BR>
<BR>
This illustrates the difference in mind-set between a scientist and an<BR>
engineer.<BR>
<BR>
The scientist will say "lets divert the orbit so it doesn't hit us".<BR>
<BR>
The engineer will point out to the politicians that it's cheaper & easier<BR>
to just slow down the asteroid so it misses us NOW.<BR>
<BR>
Then, in 20+ years time it will be a problem again. Then the engineers<BR>
can save their bacon again.<BR>
<BR>
Guaranteed continuity of employment.    ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Graeme Batho<BR>
Lateral thinker at large<BR>
(who forgot to mention that his character is a -mercenary- engineer)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 04:17:40 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> >> >Personally, I find the 'skirt' rather funny looking.<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> Sadly, there's no real good way to armor that area (which most people<BR>
feel<BR>
> >> is somewhat vital) and maintain mobility *and* deal with all the...<BR>
> >> plumbing required.  Using the usual BD plate would require a codpiece<BR>
that<BR>
> >> would make Dirk Diggler green with envy.  And that would be for the<BR>
female<BR>
> >> Marines.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >> Keeping enough mobility for the hips to allow BD-equipped troopers to<BR>
move<BR>
> >> in a tactical sense just precludes heavy armor around the hips and<BR>
groin.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I'm afraid I have to say that this is just plain silly.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > We're talking _battledress_ here, in other words high-tech _powered_<BR>
armour,<BR>
> > not combat armour.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I'd agree with skirts for combat armour, but not battledress, as it<BR>
makes no<BR>
> > sense.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > There is absolutely no requirement for 'cod-pieces' (battledress is<BR>
_not_<BR>
> > skin-tight, and does not have to follow body contours, though I'm sure<BR>
the<BR>
> > people who put nipples on Batman's chest plate would disagree ) and<BR>
there is<BR>
> > also no need for hip mobility, as it's the suit that moves, not the<BR>
person<BR>
> > inside it.<BR>
><BR>
> Sorry, but the person inside *has* to move, and move with the armor at<BR>
> that. After all, it's trying to assist the movements of his arms and<BR>
> legs, It's *not* "piloted" the way those stupid giant robots in anime<BR>
> are.<BR>
><BR>
> So the armor is either human sized, but with much thicker (and<BR>
> therefore movement limited) arms and legs, or it has to be more than 12<BR>
> feet tall, so that the wearer fits *completely* inside the torso, with<BR>
> room to move thru the full range of motion that the suit mimics.<BR>
><BR>
> Any intermediate size has the wearers arms and legs *partly* inside the<BR>
> arms and legs of the suit, with the resault that things like walking<BR>
> will require positions of the wearers legs (or arms) that aren't<BR>
> *possible* due to the position of the *suits* legs (or arms) when in<BR>
> the same position.<BR>
><BR>
> Simple example, picture a person with their right leg bent so that the<BR>
> upper leg sticks straight out to the front, and the lower leg points<BR>
> straight down (ie 90 degree bends at hip and knee).<BR>
><BR>
> Now picture the *suit* with it's legs in the same position. Now try to<BR>
> overlay the suit on the person. The only sizes that work are "human<BR>
> sized" and "big enough for human in capsul in suit body". All sizes<BR>
> in between will be impossible to match the human and the suit.<BR>
><BR>
> A 12+ foot suit is a *big* target.<BR>
><BR>
> A human sized suit is going to have *real* problems at the joints,<BR>
> especially the hips. Because the joints have to move around the *same*<BR>
> rotational centers as the joints inside or you'll dislocate or even<BR>
> break bones every time you move.<BR>
><BR>
> But that means that the sheer *bulk* of the suit (armor, power assist<BR>
> systems, etc) is going to require sudbtantial *gaps* at places like the<BR>
> back of the knee, the elbows, the armpits, and especially around the hips.<BR>
><BR>
> Find a book on plate armor and note all the places they had to leave<BR>
> gaps to keep the armor from binding on itself. This is an unavoidable<BR>
> problem with human sized armor.<BR>
><BR>
> Another thing to check is the hardsuits used for really deep diving.<BR>
> Note that since they *can't* have gaps, they have to have those weird<BR>
> bulbous joints, as well as the "rotating sleeve" joints in the upper<BR>
> and lower arms.<BR>
><BR>
> I've worn a partial suit of plate armor that used those sleeve joints<BR>
> in the upper arms. You had to learn how to move your arms so as to<BR>
> *not* fight the joints. I'm told the deep diving suits are even worse.<BR>
><BR>
> You *can* learn. But it takes time and practice. And I don't think that<BR>
> sort of joint is practical for power assisted armor. Mostly because if<BR>
> you forget and use the wrong "reflexes" you'll *jam* the joints to the<BR>
> point where you need to be cut out of it.<BR>
><BR>
> Frankly, I don't think "man-sized" BD is *possible*. Not until we have<BR>
> the sort of "magic tech" that allows solid metal to bend like rubber<BR>
> when the wearer moves and yet still be ultra-rigid against outside<BR>
> forces.<BR>
><BR>
How about this:<BR>
<BR>
A suit of armour that has it's movement controled directly, by the way the<BR>
user would like it to respond, on reflex to their motion. A system not<BR>
unlike that used to operate the controls in aircraft, ie Hydraulics, to<BR>
overcome the jerkiness of it's mechanical structure, in the hands of a<BR>
lesser strengthed human. A basic model would be limited to basic limb<BR>
movments. A more complex version would have responce system to every will of<BR>
it's operator. So sensitive, the user literally only has to think which<BR>
direction the suit is required to move. This system operated by pressure<BR>
applied to sensors on the inside of the armour which relay a signal to the<BR>
hydraulic system, which produces the powerfull movement required. Together<BR>
with a complex nervous system monitor, testing to see if the motion<BR>
sensored, are those required by the user; in order to fail safe any unwanted<BR>
movements like cramp etc.... Sensors could be developed through a building<BR>
up of tried and tested movement sensor readings against movement<BR>
requirements, in the form of a series of gas/ liquid filled bubbles which<BR>
detect changes in pressure applied to them; covering the total area of the<BR>
surface of the inside of the armour. Volume of this type of sensoring for<BR>
motion required, by the user, for their suit of armour can be kept to a<BR>
minimum. Though high tech high standard hydraulic networking with power<BR>
supply is greatly in requirement. Major power is required for the major<BR>
bodily movement, breaking down for smaller movements required by the user,<BR>
Thus prioritising hydraulic power to limbs for motion.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2826<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (rly-zd05.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.229]) by air-zd02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:18:32 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:17:38 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id XAA48034;<BR>
	Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:17:28 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:17:20 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id XAA47760<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:17:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:17:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007280317.XAA47760@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2826<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2827</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/28/00 12:23:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, July 28 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2827<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Traveller 5 - anything new?<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits, was Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
RE: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
RE: Plastic model vehicles<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:39:14 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/27/00 7:41 AM, pnewman@gci.net issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Ideally this product would take all the data from AOI<BR>
<BR>
What is AOI?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:54:35 -0700<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
<BR>
>From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
>Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
...<BR>
>>   It's perhaps worth looking into a well-stocked model store - from the<BR>
>>sounds of it, some of these (or fairly similar) models are out there,<BR>
>>either as re-releases or new (different) products.<BR>
><BR>
>There are two that I dearly want to acquire:<BR>
><BR>
>1.  Released by Aurora, the Orbital Interceptor.  From the beginning, I <BR>
>have always thought that it would make a cool patrol cruiser.<BR>
><BR>
>2.  Also by Aurora (and Airfix, IIRC), the Pan-Am Shuttle from 2001.<BR>
><BR>
>I've scoured the net looking for both, but no luck. :-(<BR>
<BR>
  I've seen the Pan-Am Shuttle new in stores this year; 90% certain, anyway.<BR>
<BR>
  I'm not sure what the other model referred to is.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:55:14 -0700<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>Subject: Re: Reinforcements have arrived<BR>
...<BR>
>>>Yes -- weighed damn near two pounds and cost a fortune.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Two pounds?  What was it made of and how big was it?  <BR>
><BR>
>Ok, 2 lbs = 900 grams (close enough). Assuming a density of 11 (lead is<BR>
>11.3), I get about 80 cm^3. Which would be a cube 4.3 cm on a side, or<BR>
>about 1.7 inches.<BR>
<BR>
  Mine was about (IIRC) 6cm wide, 1.5-2.5cm high (varying, plus turret),<BR>
and maybe 8-10cm long? It was hollow, of course, with a well-fitted deck<BR>
that also no doubt simplified production.<BR>
<BR>
        Steven Hudson<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:58:23 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
on 7/27/00 8:55 PM, Leonard Erickson at shadow@krypton.rain.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Just a thought, but rather than *tables*, maybe nomograms would be<BR>
> simpler to *use*, and allow for data that's both more realistic, and<BR>
> easier to grasp.<BR>
> <BR>
> In case you aren't aware on nomograms, they are those "charts" with a<BR>
> scale on one side (say "angle") a different scale on another side (say<BR>
> "baseline"), and a curve plotted with a scale on it (say "distance").<BR>
> You read it by placing at straight edge between the two parameters, and<BR>
> reading the answer from where the straightedge intersects the curve.<BR>
> <BR>
> You can have multiple curves on the same nomogram (say for different<BR>
> TLs). <BR>
> <BR>
> *Designing* the nomogram is harder than doing a simple table. But it<BR>
> removes the formulas and the need to interpolate.<BR>
<BR>
Leonard,<BR>
<BR>
You are a true techno-luddite.  I haven't seen nomograms since high school,<BR>
and even then they were a curiosity.  Are you sure you aren't writing on a<BR>
Babbage engine?!<BR>
<BR>
Normally, I like to use excel.  It has some nice features for curve fitting.<BR>
Or Mathematica for the more interesting stuff.  Too many years as a chemist,<BR>
I suppose, but what's so hard about calculus or Diff EQ?  How are we ever<BR>
going to get back into space if SciFi gamers, who are preselected for their<BR>
science geekiness, can't even do algebra?!<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 20:29:03 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/27/00 at 04:31 AM,  Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=14><BIG><BIG><BIG><BR>
<BR>
>> Well, that certainly does handle the big ship problem.  <g> It works<BR>
>> a little better if you use TL^2 instead, but I'm not going to<BR>
>> include that table.<BR>
<BR>
>These sizes are a little small for me. <BR>
<BR>
Me too.  I was being a trifle sarcastic with my comment about<BR>
handling the big ship problem.  <g> The table was just a first<BR>
draft.<BR>
<BR>
>They do give a Book 2 feel to things but I want to keep the 60,000<BR>
>ton 2-G Azhanti High Lightning for sentimental reasons.<BR>
<BR>
At TL-15, I don't diagree.<BR>
<BR>
>Additionally your curve seems a little flat how about TL^4/10 for<BR>
>maximum plate size in DT's.  This would make the maximum plate size<BR>
>at TL 14 3,814.6 tons., this would make the maximum size for TL 14<BR>
>2 g ships 76,832 tons which would allow the AHL.<BR>
<BR>
TL^4/10 was one that I looked at later yesterday, and I agree it<BR>
works better.  I like ^4 too, because it's doable with any<BR>
calculator that does squares, just hit the square button twice.<BR>
Using that scale you can have still have big battlewagons at the<BR>
higher TL's, but they are going to be 1 g ships.  For example, this<BR>
is the maximum sizes for ships if you use (TL^4)/10 for maximum<BR>
thruster size at a couple of TL's<BR>
<BR>
         1 g      2 g     3 g     4 g     5 g     6 g<BR>
TL 10   50,000   20,000  12,500   9,091   7,143   5,882<BR>
TL 15  253,125  101,250  63,281  46,023  36,161  29,779   <BR>
<BR>
Of course, IMO, those are *still* pretty big ships.  Maybe still too<BR>
big! Maybe divide by 14 instead of 10? <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:24:20 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
On 07/27/00 at 05:49 PM,  John Groth <wombat@premier.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> This is a project that has to get off the ground.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> So I'm electing myself dictator :)<BR>
<BR>
>Ave!  Ave imperator Ian! ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Ditto! <g><BR>
<BR>
><<snip>><BR>
<BR>
>One area that needs to be addressed is starship combat. <BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
>(for instance, if Bruce<BR>
>Macintosh's MCS becomes the basis for T5's starship combat system), the<BR>
>process should be included in the design sequence, and should be as<BR>
>transparent as possible.<BR>
<BR>
>Actually, this should also apply to vehicular design sequences.<BR>
<BR>
A six pack of points:<BR>
<BR>
1.  Some people on TNE-RCES list have been working along these lines<BR>
(updating FFS1, actually, but same idea) on and off for a couple of<BR>
years.  Some bright people there that aren't subscribed here.<BR>
<BR>
2.  David Golden, et al. began work on something like this with<BR>
Marc's approval a long time ago.  That effort produced some things<BR>
that shouldn't have to be duplicated.<BR>
<BR>
3.  The Trav-Tech list...enough said?  <g> Lots of talent there and<BR>
not much noise.  Which brings up point 4...<BR>
<BR>
4.  Don't do it on the TML, but *do* do it on a mailing list.<BR>
Trav-tech is a reasonable place for it, IMO.<BR>
<BR>
5.  To make this work, you need to make sure the results of the<BR>
designs are expressed in the terms of the game system (or systems)<BR>
in which they will be used.  It doesn't make sense to make better<BR>
sensor design rules that conform to DSR, if DSR isn't used in the<BR>
game system.  The details needed for Bruce's MCS aren't the same as<BR>
those needed for RPSCS, or Mayday and they aren't the standard USP.<BR>
IMO, the task and combat resolution systems come first, then you<BR>
make the design system produce the sort of results you need.<BR>
<BR>
6.  If this is for T5, then Marc *should* be heavily involved from the<BR>
beginning.<BR>
<BR>
I'll volunteer to be general purpose heretic again. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:43:24 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller 5 - anything new?<BR>
<BR>
On 07/27/00 at 05:54 PM,  "Boris Cibic" <kafka47@hotmail.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>   I have been doing too much studying lately, to take an active part on<BR>
>the  TML list...<BR>
>    Has anyone heard if Marc is anywhere near completing Traveller 5? <BR>
<BR>
Nothing has been posted to the TML about that.  I guess Marc does no T5 before its time. <g><BR>
<BR>
>When  I last wrote to him, he expected done by last January, but correct<BR>
>me if I  am wrong there was been nothing released (not even any new<BR>
>playtest files).   Has he dropped any further hints or suggestions<BR>
>regarding content?  I guess  that with SJG franchise and the CT reprints,<BR>
>there isn't any rush.<BR>
<BR>
I haven't seen anything new here in a while, but Marc has put something about "Lifepaths" on his website.  That's relatively new, I think.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:50:47 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies<BR>
<BR>
On 07/26/00 at 09:03 PM,  "Joseph Kimball" <jekimball@prodigy.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> >Now, *my* question is how do we gearheads keep the sizes restricted<BR>
>> >to these smaller ships?  What tweeks to the TU framework are needed<BR>
>> >to prevent ships in the hundred of thousands and millions of dtons<BR>
>> >from being built, because unless *something* prevents it somebody<BR>
>> >would build such monsters.<BR>
<BR>
>Integrating from LBB 2 (p22) and 3 (p15) (Starships and Worlds) we get:<BR>
<BR>
>TL 9 allows drives A-D, these can move ships 800 dtons and less. <BR>
>TL 10 allows drives E-H, these can move ships 1000 dtons and less. <BR>
>TL 11 allows drives J-K, these can move ships 2000 dtons and less. <BR>
>TL 12 allows drives L-N, these can move ships 2000 dtons and less. <BR>
>TL 13 allows drives P-Q, these can move ships 3000 dtons and less. <BR>
>TL 14 allows drives R-U, these can move ships 3000 dtons and less. <BR>
>TL 15 allows all drives (to Z), and can move ships 5000 dtons and less.<BR>
<BR>
Joseph, that's all very well, but it ignores HG where all those<BR>
really big ships begin to dominate.  Now if you propose adding<BR>
increasingly large(er) surcharges (by TL) for hulls, drives, power<BR>
plants, etc above 5 ktons it might work.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:10:47 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
on 7/27/00 8:39 PM, Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella at xrp@sierratel.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Via electronic medium on 7/27/00 7:41 AM, pnewman@gci.net issued forth:<BR>
> <BR>
>> Ideally this product would take all the data from AOI<BR>
> <BR>
> What is AOI?<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Atlas of the Imperium<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:22:42 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/25/00 at 10:44 AM,  Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk> said:<BR>
<BR>
>And if you do come up with a solution that does not affect the cost of <BR>
>starships, those who can afford it would have lots and lots and lots of<BR>
>ships instead. <BR>
<BR>
I know, I know!  OTOH, just because people had the resources to<BR>
build lots and lots of ships, doesn't mean they would.<BR>
<BR>
>My own ideas run in the direction of making military ships very much more<BR>
>expensive than civilian ships. One possibility I've considered is making<BR>
>the cost of a jump drive N-squared MCr/dT, where N is the jump number.<BR>
>Thus jump-1 drives would actually be cheaper than they are under the<BR>
>current rules, jump-2 drives would cost the same, which is good for<BR>
>civilian ships, but jump-4 drives would cost 4 times as much and jump-6<BR>
>drives 9 times. This mostly affects military ships.<BR>
<BR>
And couriers, but I get your point.  I still think any hardware<BR>
solution has to affect non-jump ships, too.  Otherwise you get<BR>
million dton monitors crushing puny jump ships.  Do your thing to<BR>
hulls, power plants and/or maneuver drives and it works.  <BR>
<BR>
What I totally agree with is the use of power or log curves to model<BR>
these things.<BR>
<BR>
>I've also considered making armor very expensive. 'Military-grade' armor,<BR>
>whatever that may be.<BR>
<BR>
Hum, that's an idea.  You don't need Superdense or Bonded Superdense<BR>
to build hulls for civilian ships, but if you want really thick<BR>
armor that's the way to go.  Maybe making the Superdense materials<BR>
much more expensive would help?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:33:17 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
on 7/28/00 7:56 AM, Rupert Boleyn at rboleyn@paradise.net.nz wrote:<BR>
> Fine by me, as I rather dislike the US one. BTW, which rank structure did you<BR>
> use? One thing that always peeved us about US style armies was that when they<BR>
> visited soldiers with considerably less experience and skill than us got to<BR>
> dine (and drink) in the Sergeant's Mess when as far as we were concerned many<BR>
> weren't fit to enter the Corporal's Mess.<BR>
<BR>
Well, we don't have the same sort of 'class structure' in our military.<BR>
Officers and enlisted.  and often it's hard to tell them apart.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:33:42 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits, was Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
On 07/26/00 at 01:10 AM,  "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>I've been meaning to comment.  There already is a limiter on ship sizes -<BR>
>computer size!  Instead of going elsewhere, why not just revise the table<BR>
>down?<BR>
<BR>
>                HG     New      New      New<BR>
>Computer  TL   Size   Size 1   Size 2   Size 3<BR>
>  1        5     6      6        6        6<BR>
>  1 bis    6     6      6        6        6<BR>
>  2        7     A      A        A        A<BR>
>  2 bis    8     A      A        A        A<BR>
>  3        9     D      D        A        A<BR>
>  4        A     K      H        B        B<BR>
>  5        B     P      L        C        C<BR>
>  6        C     R      P        D        D<BR>
>  7        D     Y      S        L        E<BR>
>  8        E     -      V        R        R<BR>
>  9        F     -      Z        V        V<BR>
<BR>
Sam, this makes a lot of sense to me.  You're right, I'm sure it<BR>
would need some tweeking, but it gives you TL limits on ship volume<BR>
tied directly to the required computer and when it becomes<BR>
available.  Unfortuately, in HG, that bit of important information<BR>
is pretty much buried at the foot of a table.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:36:06 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
on 7/28/00 7:56 AM, Rupert Boleyn at rboleyn@paradise.net.nz wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I <BR>
> also suspect that ultra-velocity DU penetrators, which have a fairly small<BR>
> cross-section, aren't going to be the easiest targets for active sensors,<BR>
> either (especially as even now the total available reaction time has to be<BR>
> under 0.5 seconds).<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
And they'll be harder to destroy.  It's not like shooting down a missile<BR>
with a laser, where all you have to do is damage the aerodynamics of the<BR>
thing and it all comes apart.  A KE round is a very dense hunk of metal<BR>
going at a very high rate of speed.  Even damaged, it's still a serious<BR>
hazard down range.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:04:49 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants from<BR>
>> TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant, that<BR>
>> basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of<BR>
>> plutonium.<BR>
><BR>
> Hm...damper-initiated fission (or just damper-assisted RTGs) may be a viable <BR>
> 'fusion+' alternative, though this is higher TL (probably TL 12, same as <BR>
> damper-assist fusion).<BR>
> At TL 9, antimatter-catalyzed fission (using extremely small amounts of <BR>
> antimatter) should be viable.  Antimatter power plants may be TL 17, but <BR>
> antimatter production in small quantities is TL 7.<BR>
<BR>
Make that "microscopic" quantities. And we only manage to start<BR>
*storing* it at TL8-9. Until then, you need a *big* cyclotron or the<BR>
like to produce the antimatter. Which makes in less useful than a<BR>
conventional reactor.<BR>
<BR>
If you count merely producing Anti-protons,  that's TL *6*.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:09:38 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> Actually, you can "hard land" chunks of it away from anyplace<BR>
>> important. Then depending on local conditions, mine it, melt it, or<BR>
>> collect the vapor. <BR>
><BR>
> Collect the vapor.  If you don't have enough heavy lift, it will land at <BR>
> terminal velocity<BR>
<BR>
On an airless world, there's no such thing as "terminal velocity".<BR>
<BR>
Still, I seem to recall that it's possible for a "right sized" chunk to<BR>
be mostly intact on landing. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 21:17:11 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> Also, the wee shoggoth that came with its sire looks like a juvenile<BR>
> Hiver,<BR>
>> except that it has all of those randomly placed eyes.<BR>
><BR>
> Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. It's so sweet, with its<BR>
> little furry tentacles....<BR>
<BR>
Where do you get those things?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 00:50:16 EDT<BR>
From: JFZeigler@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Square-cube law (was Re: Limiting ship sizes and Re: UWP's)<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 7/27/00 5:19:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <BR>
rboleyn@paradise.net.nz writes:<BR>
<BR>
> > Anderson did it an an obscure book that had countless numbers of<BR>
>  > governments. They each had spheres of influence covering hudreds or<BR>
>  > thousands of worlds, and had some sort of interaction with other nearby<BR>
>  > polities. But sheer *size* kept them from knowing much of anything<BR>
>  > about the rest of the Galaxy. (Btw, Earth had been *destroyed* by<BR>
>  > someone, and some of the surving humans were trying to figure out who<BR>
>  > had done it).<BR>
>  <BR>
>  _After Doomsday_, IIRC. There were two surviving human ships, one with an <BR>
> all <BR>
>  male crew. the other with an all female crew, and neither knew of the <BR>
others <BR>
> <BR>
>  exisitence.<BR>
<BR>
Correct.  Not a bad story, even if it was very early-period Anderson.  But<BR>
then you guys know about my Anderson bias anyway.<BR>
<BR>
- ----------<BR>
Jon F. Zeigler: Mathematician, computer geek, amateur historian, freelance<BR>
writer, occasional scribbler of bad poetry<BR>
"For any statement, no matter how innocuous, there exists a nonempty<BR>
set of people who will take offense at it."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:49:58 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
On 07/26/00 at 12:26 PM,  Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca> said:<BR>
<BR>
>I have always favoured M-drives requiring a greater % of tonnage<BR>
>	in larger ships.  This makes sense from an engineering POV<BR>
>	(taking into account superstructure, bracing, inertial comp.,<BR>
>	etc.)and tends to make very large ships less efficient.  For<BR>
>	example, using cube roots:<BR>
<BR>
 MDrive = Ship volume * (Ship volume^(1/3)/100) * g's<BR>
 <BR>
 Is that what you mean?  Take a look at ^(1/4)!<BR>
<BR>
           ^(1/3)       ^(1/4)<BR>
 Volume   MDrive %     MDrive %<BR>
    100     4.64         3.16<BR>
    200     5.85         3.76<BR>
    400     7.37         4.47<BR>
  1,000    10.00         5.62<BR>
  5,000    17.01         8.41<BR>
 50,000    36.84        14.95<BR>
100,000    46.42        17.78<BR>
500,000    79.37        26.59<BR>
<BR>
>	The curve could be flattened from 100-5,000 tons to maintain<BR>
>	consistency with Book 2.  Perhaps halve requirements for ships<BR>
>	10-99 tons, double them for 10,000-99,999 tons, quadruple them<BR>
>	for 100,000-999,999 tons, etc.  This would make agile fighters<BR>
>	easier to build as well.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 02:29:10 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
>General :<BR>
><BR>
>Some thoughts about a 'quality' system. I'm thinking about cost/efficiency<BR>
>for reliability tradeoffs. What sort of reliability bonus should you get<BR>
for<BR>
>accepting a 10% performance hit ? I dont want you to squeeze more<BR>
>performance out of a given TL, but I think you should be able to trade down<BR>
>performance or price for more reliability.<BR>
<BR>
This is tough, and it's something that no design system has handled in, at<BR>
least in my opinion, a satisfactory manner. I don't think that one should<BR>
have to trade down performance for greater reliability, because it's<BR>
possible to create components which not only have excellent performance, but<BR>
are also quite reliable. Granted, such components, as a general rule, are<BR>
also usually expensive.<BR>
<BR>
I think that there should be some wiggle room, and perhaps even an optional<BR>
section which offers guidelines for randomizing the optimization process. In<BR>
theory, this would reflect the difficulties in moving something from the<BR>
design stage to the prototype stage, and then the prototype stage to the<BR>
production stage.<BR>
<BR>
Sometimes, vehicles which look great on paper turn out having unintended<BR>
glitches which, at least in my opinion, could only be accurately reflected<BR>
by the introduction of a little randomness.<BR>
<BR>
The wiggle room is important though. Squeezing out extra performance should<BR>
be possible, within reason, but it should also be expensive. On the other<BR>
hand, it should be quite possible for certain builders to turn out vehicles<BR>
or weapons which are of excellent quality, that is to say with more than<BR>
adequate performance and reliability, but at a reasonable price.<BR>
<BR>
Such wiggle room, in my humble opinion, will allow FF&S-style systems to<BR>
move to the next level, so to speak, and turn out products which are<BR>
potentially much more interesting. A random element added on top of this<BR>
might make it that much more interesting.<BR>
<BR>
Just my two cents on the subject.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:55:15 -0700<BR>
From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
I've reading the book that started it all, and have come across one of the <BR>
Old Man's more famous quotes (that has already been mentioned in this <BR>
thread, I think):  "A suit, you just wear."<BR>
<BR>
Am I the only one who thinks that this statement is hopelessly <BR>
optimistic?  A metal gorilla suit /is/ going to restrict your range of <BR>
motion, and it's going to add mass and inertia that (even if the <BR>
power-assist means you don't have to carry it) will change your stride, try <BR>
to tip you over when you turn a corner at a trot, etc.  And that's assuming <BR>
that the feedback sensors somehow, magically, have no lag.<BR>
<BR>
I just don't believe that a person will be able to "immediately walk, run, <BR>
jump, lie down ... and jump right over the house next door and come down to <BR>
a feather landing" in powered armor with no training at all, "the very <BR>
first time you are fitted into one."  Heck, in several other stories, RAH <BR>
notes how bad lunar gravity messes up Earthers trying to get around on the <BR>
surface.  This would be at least as disorienting.<BR>
<BR>
So can we chuck that on the pile of lines that sound good, but don't stand <BR>
up to contact with reality?<BR>
<BR>
- --------------<BR>
Kelly St.Clair        "Never give up, never surrender!"<BR>
kellys@efn.org                   -- Commander Peter Q. Taggart<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 18:45:41 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry<BR>
<BR>
> > BTW the RNZIR (Royal New Zealand Infantry Regiment), which is to<BR>
> > say all our infantry wears a green beret :) And your guys have<BR>
> > no idea how to wear one properly, either :)<BR>
><BR>
> And that green beret confuses the hell out of American troops who equate a<BR>
> green beret with the Special Forces.<BR>
<BR>
It's not confusing them. All our infantry are as good as your "special"<BR>
forces !<BR>
<BR>
<grin><BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:06:19 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Plastic model vehicles<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > There are two that I dearly want to acquire:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > 1.  Released by Aurora, the Orbital Interceptor.  From the beginning, I<BR>
> > have always thought that it would make a cool patrol cruiser.<BR>
><BR>
> Don't recall it.<BR>
><BR>
> > 2.  Also by Aurora (and Airfix, IIRC), the Pan-Am Shuttle from 2001.<BR>
><BR>
> I used to have one of those. <sigh><BR>
<BR>
I still have one. Still in the box.<BR>
<BR>
The other common one was the the "Leif Ericsson" patrol cruiser.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2827<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></BIG></BIG><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yd02.mx.aol.com (rly-yd02.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.2]) by air-yd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:23:15 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yd02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:22:43 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id DAA56812;<BR>
	Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:22:37 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:22:25 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id DAA56767<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:22:25 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 03:22:25 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007280722.DAA56767@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2827<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</BIG></HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2828</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/28/00 5:58:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, July 28 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2828<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:11:55 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> on 7/27/00 8:55 PM, Leonard Erickson at shadow@krypton.rain.com wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> Just a thought, but rather than *tables*, maybe nomograms would be<BR>
>> simpler to *use*, and allow for data that's both more realistic, and<BR>
>> easier to grasp.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> In case you aren't aware on nomograms, they are those "charts" with a<BR>
>> scale on one side (say "angle") a different scale on another side (say<BR>
>> "baseline"), and a curve plotted with a scale on it (say "distance").<BR>
>> You read it by placing at straight edge between the two parameters, and<BR>
>> reading the answer from where the straightedge intersects the curve.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> You can have multiple curves on the same nomogram (say for different<BR>
>> TLs). <BR>
>> <BR>
>> *Designing* the nomogram is harder than doing a simple table. But it<BR>
>> removes the formulas and the need to interpolate.<BR>
><BR>
> Leonard,<BR>
><BR>
> You are a true techno-luddite.  I haven't seen nomograms since high school,<BR>
> and even then they were a curiosity.  Are you sure you aren't writing on a<BR>
> Babbage engine?!<BR>
<BR>
No, actually it's a PC compatible with an AMD K6-2 300 CPU. Which was<BR>
the best CPU that had been around long enough to be considerable<BR>
*reliable* by the guy who assembled the system for me about 18 months<BR>
back. <BR>
<BR>
> Normally, I like to use excel.  It has some nice features for curve fitting.<BR>
> Or Mathematica for the more interesting stuff.  Too many years as a chemist,<BR>
> I suppose, but what's so hard about calculus or Diff EQ?  How are we ever<BR>
> going to get back into space if SciFi gamers, who are preselected for their<BR>
> science geekiness, can't even do algebra?!<BR>
<BR>
I can do algebra, but nomograms are like slide rules. When you want a<BR>
quick way to get an answer good to only a couple of decimal places,<BR>
they are often a great idea. <BR>
<BR>
Analog computers (and that *is* what a nomogram is) are vastly under-rated.<BR>
<BR>
ps. Eventually I'll learn calculus. I understand the basic principles,<BR>
it's applying them that that I need to learn.<BR>
<BR>
<sigh> and then there's tensors to deal with...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:41:55 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Hum, that's an idea.  You don't need Superdense or Bonded Superdense<BR>
> to build hulls for civilian ships, but if you want really thick<BR>
> armor that's the way to go.  Maybe making the Superdense materials<BR>
> much more expensive would help?<BR>
<BR>
Well... Ships, even civilian ones, need *heavy* shielding against<BR>
stellar flares.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:32:22 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Assumptions:<BR>
><BR>
> 1.  The Moon is about 392,000 kilometers from Earth (see:<BR>
><BR>
> http://www.sciencenet.org.uk/database/Physics/SolarSystem/p01001c.html<BR>
><BR>
> for exact figures).<BR>
><BR>
> 2.  The flight profile is as follows: constant boost to midpoint, then<BR>
> the ship "flips over" and decelerates at the same thrust, arriving at<BR>
> the Moon at near zero velocity.  Without this deceleration maneuver, the<BR>
> ship would simply sail past the Moon, "to Infinity and Beyond." ;-)<BR>
><BR>
> 3.  One G of acceleration equals 9.8 meters/second.<BR>
><BR>
> 4.  "Mere minutes" means no more than one hour. <BR>
><BR>
> The equation is: A = 4 * D / T^2 where<BR>
><BR>
> A = Acceleration in meters per second^2<BR>
> D = Distance in meters<BR>
> T = Time in seconds<BR>
><BR>
> Plugging my values in, I get:<BR>
><BR>
> A = 4 * 392,000,000 / (3600)^2<BR>
><BR>
> A = 1,568,000,000 / 12,960,000<BR>
><BR>
> A = 120.99 meters/second^2<BR>
><BR>
> A / 9.8 = 12.35 Gs acceleration<BR>
><BR>
> In other words, "Freedom" expects us to believe that, with current<BR>
> technology, we can build spaceships capable of maintaining acceleration<BR>
> of over 12 times the force of Earth's gravity for at least an hour of<BR>
> continuous operation, without killing, or at least incapacitating, the<BR>
> crew.<BR>
><BR>
> That would come close to "snapping my disbelief suspenders" in a<BR>
> science-fiction setting, let alone at current tech levels.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, plugging in the figures for *one* g, I get 3.5 hours<BR>
for the trip (about 211 minutes). Higher acceleration doesn't drop the<BR>
time as much as you might think.<BR>
<BR>
Also, if you take the acceleration flat on your back, 12 g *is* doable.<BR>
It's not until 18 g that it becomes impossible to maintain control of<BR>
your arms and fingers, and thus, impossible to "fly" the ship.<BR>
<BR>
So *if* we had a ship that could do 12 g for that long, we could do it.<BR>
But when it only takes 3.5 hours to get there at *one* g, why bother?<BR>
<BR>
BTW, note that to reduce the time by a factor of 3.5, you have to<BR>
increase the acceleration by a factor of 3.5^2 (12.3).<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:19:46 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> on 7/27/00 6:49 PM, Terry Carlino at carlino@home.com wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>> Are the Jesuits still running schools in the 3I?<BR>
>> <BR>
>> As a graduate of a Jesuit education I certainly hope so.<BR>
>> <BR>
><BR>
> Cool.  Another disciple of darkness<BR>
><BR>
> Tod "Gonzaga U class of 1984" Glenn<BR>
<BR>
Cute. If I ever get it dug out again, there's a cartoon that you'd<BR>
appreciate. It's got a couple of hunched over  characters walking past<BR>
a huge poster on the wall. One is saying to the other something like:<BR>
<BR>
"Well, yes, I always knew it was c oming, I just didn't expect it to be<BR>
like *this*."<BR>
<BR>
The poster says "Big Brother is Watching You". And the picture is of a<BR>
man in monk's robes... <eg><BR>
<BR>
ps. Then there's the manual the army used to have for folks playing<BR>
"aggressor" in excercises. They recommended using Esperanto as the<BR>
language, and had a bunch of background details for the fictional<BR>
country we were fighting (so the members of the aggressor force could<BR>
give reasonable and consistent answers when interrogated).<BR>
<BR>
The ruler was one "Emil Grandfratro". In Esperanto "grand" is "big",<BR>
"fratro" is "brother". Yes, the Army had a sense of humor.<BR>
<BR>
I'd love to have a copy of that manual. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:44:51 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> Sorry, but the person inside *has* to move, and move with the armor at<BR>
>> that. After all, it's trying to assist the movements of his arms and<BR>
>> legs, It's *not* "piloted" the way those stupid giant robots in anime<BR>
>> are.<BR>
>><BR>
>> So the armor is either human sized, but with much thicker (and<BR>
>> therefore movement limited) arms and legs, or it has to be more than 12<BR>
>> feet tall, so that the wearer fits *completely* inside the torso, with<BR>
>> room to move thru the full range of motion that the suit mimics.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Any intermediate size has the wearers arms and legs *partly* inside the<BR>
>> arms and legs of the suit, with the resault that things like walking<BR>
>> will require positions of the wearers legs (or arms) that aren't<BR>
>> *possible* due to the position of the *suits* legs (or arms) when in<BR>
>> the same position.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Simple example, picture a person with their right leg bent so that the<BR>
>> upper leg sticks straight out to the front, and the lower leg points<BR>
>> straight down (ie 90 degree bends at hip and knee).<BR>
>><BR>
>> Now picture the *suit* with it's legs in the same position. Now try to<BR>
>> overlay the suit on the person. The only sizes that work are "human<BR>
>> sized" and "big enough for human in capsul in suit body". All sizes<BR>
>> in between will be impossible to match the human and the suit.<BR>
>><BR>
>> A 12+ foot suit is a *big* target.<BR>
>><BR>
>> A human sized suit is going to have *real* problems at the joints,<BR>
>> especially the hips. Because the joints have to move around the *same*<BR>
>> rotational centers as the joints inside or you'll dislocate or even<BR>
>> break bones every time you move.<BR>
>><BR>
>> But that means that the sheer *bulk* of the suit (armor, power assist<BR>
>> systems, etc) is going to require sudbtantial *gaps* at places like the<BR>
>> back of the knee, the elbows, the armpits, and especially around the hips.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Find a book on plate armor and note all the places they had to leave<BR>
>> gaps to keep the armor from binding on itself. This is an unavoidable<BR>
>> problem with human sized armor.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Another thing to check is the hardsuits used for really deep diving.<BR>
>> Note that since they *can't* have gaps, they have to have those weird<BR>
>> bulbous joints, as well as the "rotating sleeve" joints in the upper<BR>
>> and lower arms.<BR>
>><BR>
>> I've worn a partial suit of plate armor that used those sleeve joints<BR>
>> in the upper arms. You had to learn how to move your arms so as to<BR>
>> *not* fight the joints. I'm told the deep diving suits are even worse.<BR>
>><BR>
>> You *can* learn. But it takes time and practice. And I don't think that<BR>
>> sort of joint is practical for power assisted armor. Mostly because if<BR>
>> you forget and use the wrong "reflexes" you'll *jam* the joints to the<BR>
>> point where you need to be cut out of it.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Frankly, I don't think "man-sized" BD is *possible*. Not until we have<BR>
>> the sort of "magic tech" that allows solid metal to bend like rubber<BR>
>> when the wearer moves and yet still be ultra-rigid against outside<BR>
>> forces.<BR>
>><BR>
> How about this:<BR>
><BR>
> A suit of armour that has it's movement controled directly, by the way the<BR>
> user would like it to respond, on reflex to their motion. A system not<BR>
> unlike that used to operate the controls in aircraft, ie Hydraulics, to<BR>
> overcome the jerkiness of it's mechanical structure, in the hands of a<BR>
> lesser strengthed human.<BR>
<BR>
My arguments above have *nothing to do with how the user's movements<BR>
are conveyed to the suit. They have to do with the purely geometrical<BR>
problem of fitting the user and the suit together. <BR>
<BR>
And unless the armor *and* the "drivers" for moving it are thin as<BR>
cloth, you'll have to have cutouts for movement. Heck, if you've ever<BR>
worn a heavy coat with old style insulation (batton padding and the<BR>
like), you'll have had it bunch up on the inside if the elbow.<BR>
<BR>
Also, consider that the absolute limit on the motion of your foream is<BR>
when it touchs your biceps. In armor, the limit is reached sooner<BR>
because of when the armor over your forearm touches the armor over your<BR>
biceps. <BR>
<BR>
The farther from the elbow you cut back the armor, the closer to a<BR>
"normal" range of motion you'll get. Alas, that also means you get less<BR>
protection near the elbow. <BR>
<BR>
The same goes for other joints. As I said, until you can make metal<BR>
that can flow in the directions you want it to, while remaining rigid<BR>
against outside forces, there really isn't a *good* answer, just a<BR>
choice of what you want to compromise, range of motion or protection.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 22:56:27 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow) commented:<BR>
><BR>
>>> The actual approach will depend on the specifics of the orbits, but<BR>
>>> in practice it is easier to retard the asteroids speed rather than<BR>
>>> increase it.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Nope. *Any* change in velocity takes the *same* amount of energy.<BR>
>>Regardless of direction.<BR>
><BR>
> True, and I said as much later - but that wasn't what I was talking about.<BR>
><BR>
> It is easier to slow down the asteroid -in practice- because to speed<BR>
> it up you need to detonate the nukes on the -far- side of the rock.<BR>
> That takes more time, more complex targeting systems, and requires<BR>
> more reaction fuel (to swing around the rock to get the bomb into position<BR>
> for the blast). In fact, if the bomb has to detonate less than 100 metres<BR>
> from the surface you would have to match velocities with the asteroid to<BR>
> get to the blast point on the far side. That really rules out speeding<BR>
> up the asteroid. More reaction fuel = less payload, so it's far cheaper,<BR>
> faster and more effective to blast on the nearest side & slow it down.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. It takes EXACTLY THE SAME COMPLEXITY of guidance. And the<BR>
difference in fuel is miniscule. Remember, because the nuke is<BR>
traveling in a *very* different orbit (because it's moving in a<BR>
different direction and at a *much* higher speed), it's going to cross<BR>
the asteroid's orbit at an angle *anyway*.<BR>
<BR>
>>> Instead all nukes are to target the centre of the rock, and detonate<BR>
>>> at the optimum distance from it (Care would have to be taken that the<BR>
>>> nukes are spaced far enough apart to avoid being caught in each<BR>
>>> others blast).<BR>
>><BR>
>>Nope. You have to target for a very precise location in relation to the<BR>
>>asteroid and it's path. You need to target for a point *close* (maybe<BR>
>>as much as 100 meters, likely around 10 or so) and that point has to be<BR>
>>in the right direction from the center of the asteroid to give a shove<BR>
>>in the proper direction.<BR>
><BR>
> Sorry, sloppy writing on my part. What I should have said was that the<BR>
> nukes don't need to have as complex a targeting system as you do to<BR>
> divert the rock, and that they should be targeted to act through the<BR>
> asteroid's centre of mass.<BR>
<BR>
> To divert the rock you have to have more complex targeting (because<BR>
> the bomb has to detonate -beside- the asteroid as they pass each other.<BR>
> That has to be very precisely calculated, because range, position<BR>
> and speed of both the bomb and the rock must be known with great<BR>
> accuracy to pinpoint when and where the bomb must explode to impart<BR>
> the greatest delta vee on the rock.<BR>
<BR>
That has to be calculated onboard, regardless.<BR>
<BR>
> It's even worse if you want to speed the rock up. All of that would<BR>
> have to be worked out on the -far side- of the asteroid - so you need<BR>
> a very complex, costly and heavy targeting computer to be -on board-<BR>
> the bomb + lots more fuel to get into position.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. Same amount of fuel. You are coming in from the side, that's the<BR>
way the orbits work out. To follow the *same* orbit in the opposite<BR>
direction would require launching the nukes from the point the planet<BR>
would be at when the asteroid would hit, and launching it with the same<BR>
velocity that the asteroid would have when it got there, but in the<BR>
opposite direction. And you could only do it at a specific time. Any<BR>
other time you'd have to launch from a different point along the<BR>
asteroids orbit. <BR>
<BR>
So the orbits or the nukes are going to be crossing the asteroid's<BR>
orbit at an angle. You could do a "head on" approach, but that'd<BR>
require using a Hohmann transfer orbit, which is slow. For a fast<BR>
transit, since you *don't* need to match *orbits*, just be at the same<BR>
*place*, regardless of relative velocities, you merely need<BR>
intersecting orbits, and that intersection won't a "head on" approach.<BR>
<BR>
> However, if you just want to slow it down, you are targeting the near<BR>
> side of the asteroid and you can cut corners with the targeting system.<BR>
> The bomb is always in line of sight - so you can transmit accurate<BR>
> targeting information to it all the time. And because the asteroid is<BR>
> coming right at the missile as long as the positioning is accurate<BR>
> you can detonate the bomb at the right distance with just a proximity<BR>
> sensor. Hence you save a lot of weight which you can use for a higher<BR>
> yield payload (or just lower the cost of the missile).<BR>
<BR>
Except that between time lag (which is *minutes* at the ranges in<BR>
question) and distance, your targeting info is pretty worthless. <BR>
<BR>
The missile *must* figure the final approach and detonation on its own.<BR>
Nothing else will be accurate enough. Well, you *could* have a ship<BR>
standing off and trying to sterr the missile in. But cureent guidance<BR>
systems are more than adequate. <BR>
<BR>
Given the delta-v involved in just *getting* the missile there, the<BR>
sensor and guidance package *aren't* that big a deal.<BR>
<BR>
> Basically my argument is that it's quicker & easier to get the<BR>
> systems in place to slow down an asteroid than it is to divert it or<BR>
> speed it up.<BR>
<BR>
And again, you've ignored everything I said. To change the course at<BR>
all you have to be so close to the asteroid, and detonate at so little<BR>
distance that whether you detonate in front, behind, or off to one side<BR>
is irrelevant.<BR>
<BR>
We are talking about 10-100 meters distance at detonation, and an<BR>
approach from off to one side. At a relative velocity of at least 100<BR>
km/sec.<BR>
<BR>
That means that the "window" for detonation is all of a *microsecond*.<BR>
You *can't* do that remotely. <BR>
<BR>
So either you use a guidance package that can steer the intercept on<BR>
its own once it gets to the general vicinity, or you use a missile that<BR>
can match orbits before positioning itself and detonating. Which is<BR>
going to require more mass in fuel and engines than any guyidance<BR>
system would.<BR>
<BR>
Space is *big*. And things move at high speeds. We are talking about<BR>
the equivalent of trying to hit a mach 1 BB one earth with a mach 1<BR>
ameoba going in a different direction. And doing it on the other side<BR>
of the earth, with communications relays that take half an hour for a<BR>
round trip message.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 23:17:51 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Ian Whitchurch commented:<BR>
><BR>
>>> > Next, the nukes don't need complex targeting systems, because you are<BR>
>>> > not trying to accurately divert the rock.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> *Very* wrong. You *have* to be accurate so as to avoid deflecting the<BR>
>>> asteroid into the planet, or into an orbit where it'll get you on the<BR>
>>> *next* pass.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Umm, I have to disagree there.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Lets say we deflect it, so it misses this time, but will hit on it's next<BR>
>>pass.<BR>
>><BR>
>>That buys us the time to learn all the lessons from this time, so next time<BR>
>>it will be better planned, better run and with better gear. All that should<BR>
>>add up to next time being easier.<BR>
><BR>
> I love it - you spotted my intentional deception!<BR>
><BR>
> Slowing down the asteroid doesn't change the path of the orbit (though the<BR>
> orbit will "flatten" somewhat) so the asteroid will keep crossing the<BR>
> orbit of the planet.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. Slowing it down moves it into a *larger* orbit, not a smaller<BR>
one. Orbital mechanics is funny that way. Do the right amount at the<BR>
right time, and you'll put it in an orbit that no longer gets as close<BR>
to the star as the planet does.<BR>
<BR>
> This illustrates the difference in mind-set between a scientist and an<BR>
> engineer.<BR>
<BR>
> The scientist will say "lets divert the orbit so it doesn't hit us".<BR>
><BR>
> The engineer will point out to the politicians that it's cheaper & easier<BR>
> to just slow down the asteroid so it misses us NOW.<BR>
<BR>
And the scientist will point out that slowing it down moves it *out*,<BR>
not in. <BR>
<BR>
> Then, in 20+ years time it will be a problem again. Then the engineers<BR>
> can save their bacon again.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. Eventually, the corrections will place it in an orbit that's no<BR>
longer dangerous. Or rather, won't be dangerous again for a geological<BR>
timespan.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:14:43 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Kelly St.Clair wrote:<BR>
> I've reading the book that started it all, and have come across one of the<BR>
> Old Man's more famous quotes (that has already been mentioned in this<BR>
> thread, I think):  "A suit, you just wear."<BR>
><BR>
> Am I the only one who thinks that this statement is hopelessly<BR>
> optimistic?  A metal gorilla suit /is/ going to restrict your range of<BR>
> motion, and it's going to add mass and inertia that (even if the<BR>
> power-assist means you don't have to carry it) will change your stride,<BR>
try<BR>
> to tip you over when you turn a corner at a trot, etc.  And that's<BR>
assuming<BR>
> that the feedback sensors somehow, magically, have no lag.<BR>
><BR>
> I just don't believe that a person will be able to "immediately walk, run,<BR>
> jump, lie down ... and jump right over the house next door and come down<BR>
to<BR>
> a feather landing" in powered armor with no training at all, "the very<BR>
> first time you are fitted into one."  Heck, in several other stories, RAH<BR>
> notes how bad lunar gravity messes up Earthers trying to get around on the<BR>
> surface.  This would be at least as disorienting.<BR>
><BR>
> So can we chuck that on the pile of lines that sound good, but don't stand<BR>
> up to contact with reality?<BR>
><BR>
Not in my book.<BR>
Having considered posible soultions to this problem, size is going to be the<BR>
only problem. Which is restricted by the followig factors:<BR>
    Power    -    Powering up the suit of arour is required to be self<BR>
suffient.<BR>
    Strength / size ratio - of the Hydraulic system.<BR>
The sensor part and whether the operator is able orient oneslf is not going<BR>
to be a problem, I could see this as being a viable solution.<BR>
<BR>
Michael<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 05:13:39 -0700<BR>
From: "J. Paul Sanders" <timmon@primenet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
<BR>
I noticed a couple of errors/omissions on your list:<BR>
<BR>
Error:<BR>
Alien Mercenaries is 1004 (not 1003)<BR>
<BR>
Omission(s):<BR>
Alien Animals (1003)<BR>
<BR>
Seeker in its very earliest days also made 15mm deckplans for Traveller &<BR>
MegaTraveller. The ones I know of (and own) are:<BR>
Gazelle Class Close Escort (Trav)<BR>
Express Boat, Tender & Scout Ship (Mega-T)<BR>
System Defense Boat & Jump Shuttle (Mega-T)<BR>
Empress Marava II $00-ton Merchant (Mega-T)<BR>
(Space Opera 15mm: Merchant Class Ships, Volume I)<BR>
<BR>
The Alien Star fanzine also produced 7 issues before it ceased publication.<BR>
<BR>
Variant also had many more issues (13-14?) before it died as well...I have<BR>
them, but don't recall the specific number offhand.<BR>
<BR>
There was also a promotional item given out by GDW at a few cons. It was an<BR>
Imperial 10 Credit note - flexible black mylar plastic with silver printing. <BR>
<BR>
Another item from GDW was a black plastic three-ring notebook binder with<BR>
the Traveller logo on it. These were sold directly from GDW in the very<BR>
early 80's.<BR>
<BR>
Hope this helps fill in a few holes on your big-list (which I liked greatly<BR>
BTW!).<BR>
<BR>
Paul<BR>
<BR>
At 06:18 PM 7/27/00 -0400, you wrote:<BR>
>They did several armored vehicles among them three grav tanks and two<BR>
>air/rafts.  A listing of all of the Martian Metals minis exists in several<BR>
>places, including: http://www.downport.com/ct/biglist.html  Between<BR>
>Shadowcat and myself we can confirm the existence of everything listed there<BR>
>for MM.<BR>
><BR>
>-Colin<BR>
><BR>
>----- Original Message ----- > >I was just looking at an old JTAS and saw a<BR>
>Martian Metals<BR>
>> >advertisement that said "Reinforcements have arrived,"<BR>
>> >superimposed on an extreme close up of a metal grav tank.<BR>
>> >I have never seen the actual tank in any store.  Was it<BR>
>> >actually produced?<BR>
>><BR>
>From: "Steven Hudson" <shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca><BR>
>>   I believe so - I had one that was probably based on the Keith<BR>
>> illo on the back of the Striker box - big, well-detailed, and<BR>
>> quite nice, unlike most of the Martian Metals people figs, IMHO.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:25:47 -0400<BR>
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
<BR>
At 08:54 PM 07/27/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>   I've seen the Pan-Am Shuttle new in stores this year; 90% certain, anyway.<BR>
><BR>
>   I'm not sure what the other model referred to is.<BR>
<BR>
The Orbital Interceptor was about 12" long and needle thin.  It had wings <BR>
similar to the F-23, diamond shaped, and a high tail with the engines <BR>
mounted on the tail.  On the ventral side of the body, it had a missile bay <BR>
that opened to show the missile and a removable reactor assembly.  In the <BR>
aft section, below the tail, it carried a smaller fighter, kind of like a <BR>
pinnace or ship's boat.<BR>
<BR>
It was rather cool.<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger<BR>
<BR>
"To our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations,<BR>
    may she always be in the right, but our country, right or wrong!"<BR>
      ~Stephen Decatur<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
mailto:kurt@blazenet.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:37:50 -0400<BR>
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Plastic model vehicles <BR>
<BR>
At 08:54 PM 07/27/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>   I've seen the Pan-Am Shuttle new in stores this year; 90% certain, anyway.<BR>
><BR>
>   I'm not sure what the other model referred to is.<BR>
<BR>
A friend I work with has a client that collects models and pointed me to <BR>
this site.  Looks like I finally found them!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
http://www.greenmodels.com/images/aurora-129-nuclearplane.jpg  Airliner version<BR>
<BR>
http://www.greenmodels.com/images/aurora-251-orbitalinterceptor.jpg <BR>
Ragnarok Orbital Interceptor<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger<BR>
<BR>
"To our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations,<BR>
    may she always be in the right, but our country, right or wrong!"<BR>
      ~Stephen Decatur<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
mailto:kurt@blazenet.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:53:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> Just keep in mind that asteroids move *relative to each other*. Except<BR>
> for asteroids that are actually orbiting each other, they'll all have<BR>
> different orbits, which means that your neighbors this month (if you<BR>
> can call something tens to hundreds of thousands of km away a<BR>
> "neighbor" will be *millilions* of km away next month. <BR>
<BR>
I believe Larry Niven addresses this issue (the politics of "variable<BR>
geography" in an inhabited asteroid belt) in the sequel to "The Mote in<BR>
God's Eye" (whose title has, unfortunately, slipped my mind).<BR>
<BR>
                                                            - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:52:24 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
The Mote in Murcheson's Eye<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: John P. Raynor [mailto:john.raynor@yale.edu]<BR>
Sent: 28 July 2000 13:53<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> Just keep in mind that asteroids move *relative to each other*. Except<BR>
> for asteroids that are actually orbiting each other, they'll all have<BR>
> different orbits, which means that your neighbors this month (if you<BR>
> can call something tens to hundreds of thousands of km away a<BR>
> "neighbor" will be *millilions* of km away next month. <BR>
<BR>
I believe Larry Niven addresses this issue (the politics of "variable<BR>
geography" in an inhabited asteroid belt) in the sequel to "The Mote in<BR>
God's Eye" (whose title has, unfortunately, slipped my mind).<BR>
<BR>
                                                            - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:54:54 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
Correction:THe Mote AROUND Murcheson's eye<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Jones, Dean [mailto:Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com]<BR>
Sent: 28 July 2000 13:52<BR>
To: 'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
Subject: RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
The Mote in Murcheson's Eye<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: John P. Raynor [mailto:john.raynor@yale.edu]<BR>
Sent: 28 July 2000 13:53<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> Just keep in mind that asteroids move *relative to each other*. Except<BR>
> for asteroids that are actually orbiting each other, they'll all have<BR>
> different orbits, which means that your neighbors this month (if you<BR>
> can call something tens to hundreds of thousands of km away a<BR>
> "neighbor" will be *millilions* of km away next month. <BR>
<BR>
I believe Larry Niven addresses this issue (the politics of "variable<BR>
geography" in an inhabited asteroid belt) in the sequel to "The Mote in<BR>
God's Eye" (whose title has, unfortunately, slipped my mind).<BR>
<BR>
                                                            - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2828<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (rly-yd05.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.5]) by air-yd01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:58:15 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:57:51 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id IAA68210;<BR>
	Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:57:42 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:57:22 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id IAA68177<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:57:21 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:57:21 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007281257.IAA68177@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2828<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2829</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/28/00 7:47:06 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, July 28 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2829<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
A "FFS3" Suggestion (was "Re: Bunch of...")<BR>
Re: Scale<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:29:18 -0400<BR>
Sequel to Mote in God's Eye<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2822<BR>
Re: Good hobbies to ban on starships<BR>
Re: Traveller Minis<BR>
New miniature  pictures are up<BR>
RE: Sequel to Mote in God's Eye<BR>
Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
Re: FFS3<BR>
RE: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
Re: Feedback/forward systems and Battledress <BR>
RE: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re:  Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:43:46 +0100<BR>
From: Martin Hardgrave <martin@deira.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
In message <023b01bff77a$9b610200$1c66fea9@kosh>, Nick Bradbeer<BR>
<nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> writes<BR>
>> IMTU, not only are the Jesuits running schools, they are running _at<BR>
>> least_ one of the most sophisticated non-governmental intelligence<BR>
>> services in known space.  Art imitating life....<BR>
><BR>
>Have you played Shadowrun?  Don't EVER annoy the Jesuits.<BR>
><BR>
>Nick<BR>
><BR>
Jesuits - God's stormtroopers.<BR>
- -- <BR>
Martin Hardgrave<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 17:52:08 +0100<BR>
From: Martin Hardgrave <martin@deira.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: R&D in the 3I<BR>
<BR>
In message <00727.005103.0m4.rnr.w165w@krypton.rain.com>, Leonard<BR>
Erickson <shadow@krypton.rain.com> writes<BR>
>I'm a bit worried about the Jesuits. But the *Dominicans* scare me. <BR>
><BR>
>Richelieu was a Jesuit. The Dominicans ran the Inquisition...<BR>
><BR>
>Which would *you* rather deal with?<BR>
<BR>
A Dominican was arguing with a Benedictine as to whether God was a<BR>
Dominican or Benedictine.  They reached no conclusion so they agreed to<BR>
ask God.  They wrote their question on a piece of paper and placed it in<BR>
a chalice on the altar and prayed.  A little while later they checked<BR>
the paper, and written at the bottom was <BR>
<BR>
NEITHER<BR>
<BR>
signed<BR>
<BR>
GOD SJ <BR>
- -- <BR>
Martin Hardgrave<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:05:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
Here's another proposal for eliminating Really Big Ships:<BR>
<BR>
Tie the amount of thrust produced by a reactionless drive to its<BR>
*surface area*, rather than to its *volume* (they're called<BR>
"thruster PLATES" for a reason...)<BR>
                                                     - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:24:33 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: A "FFS3" Suggestion (was "Re: Bunch of...")<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
> If anyone else thinks they can write a better set of design rules than<BR>
> who I've asked to do it, please feel free to chip in.<BR>
<BR>
I'm afraid I can't volunteer to do anything technically useful, but I<BR>
would like to make a suggestion: please, *please* put plenty of examples<BR>
in the next version of "Fire, Fusion, and Steel."  It would be *really*<BR>
nice to be able follow the assembly of (for instance) a typical grav tank,<BR>
or a typical starship laser, through the design process, step by step.  <BR>
If page limits make this difficult, please consider chopping out some of<BR>
the more esoteric (and seldom-used) design rules.  I would be quite happy<BR>
to do without "Design Sequence 2865(b): Blenders, Mixers, and Other Food<BR>
Processors", if it meant a better sense of how to put vehicles and<BR>
starships together.<BR>
                                                           - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:25:12 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Scale<BR>
<BR>
> Sorry, but at 1/76 scale, the distance from the base to the top of the<BR>
>  head of a 6 foot man would be 24 mm. <BR>
<BR>
See what I mean? There is considerable disagreement over what "scale" means <BR>
for figs -- in some ways it is the "near C rock" of the miniatures community <BR>
- -- everybody has their own standard. The only reference I have immediately to <BR>
hand (Ian Weekley's "Buildings for the Military Modeler") says 25mm = 1:76. <BR>
You don't have to accept Mr Weekley's ruling in this matter -- many people <BR>
don't -- but I am not wrong in accepting it.<BR>
<BR>
It has been too long since I''ve done any RR modeling either, but my <BR>
definition of HO as 3.5mm = 1 foot is a common shorthand in the US (there is <BR>
a more formal definition, but I don't have it to hand, and frankly, I don't <BR>
care right now).<BR>
<BR>
In any case, at SJGames, we're going to pick a ratio that gives us a size we <BR>
like, and insist the sculptors stick with it throughout the range, which is <BR>
the important thing -- consistency. Right now, the leading candadate is a <BR>
ratio that will give us figures that match with the Grenadier Marines, but <BR>
that could change.<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:29:18 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
Subject: Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:29:18 -0400<BR>
<BR>
Hi all,<BR>
<BR>
I finally got my isp<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:32:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Sequel to Mote in God's Eye<BR>
<BR>
I thought it was "The Gripping Hand"?  Or is that a third book?<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:36:56 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2822<BR>
<BR>
> Two pounds?  What was it made of and how big was it? <BR>
<BR>
Lead, and in scale with the 15mm minis. I am guilty of "memory inflation", <BR>
however, as I suspect the weight was a pound or less. I was never satisfied <BR>
with it, for aestetic reasons -- didn't look much like the sketches we had <BR>
sent.<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:43:32 -0400<BR>
From: Ethan Henry <egh@klg.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Good hobbies to ban on starships<BR>
<BR>
Rodney Basler <rgb@odetics.com> wrote:<BR>
>         Ick...I've seen flint knapping actually done in an archaeology class<BR>
> - - you end up with a large amount of waste (PILES of the stuff) that consists<BR>
> of various-sized flakes of razor-sharp glass.  I'd hate to be in her<BR>
> stateroom if the grav ever failed before she vacuumed up her latest project.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Hmmm... perhaps another good technique to use against hostile boarders.<BR>
Combined with grav pong... maybe that's how they make hamburger when the<BR>
food processor fails.<BR>
<BR>
Ethan<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:41:57 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Minis<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 27-Jul-00 3:54:42 PM Central Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> hat sort of time scale are we<BR>
>  looking at before these will be available?<BR>
<BR>
No idea -- we're still talking with Marc about the details of the license. <BR>
Only thing for certain is that SJ Games will do Ogre minis, and SJ wants to <BR>
do other stuff (Traveller was very high on the list).<BR>
<BR>
Ballpark, I'd not look for them before next Spring at the earliest, probably <BR>
later. <BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:45:40 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
Subject: New miniature  pictures are up<BR>
<BR>
The Traveller Starships and Science Fiction Misc. miniatures pages have been<BR>
updated.<BR>
<BR>
The Dragon SDB (with nose art!) and the Modular cutter are new on the Trav<BR>
Ship page. Also a new blue and white paint scheme for the Free Trader.<BR>
SFMisc has a lot of Star Frontiers and Knighthawk ships added.<BR>
<BR>
[OT] And another Ent was added to the fantasy page.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.icubed.com/~gemyers/<BR>
<BR>
Next up, more Call of Cthulhu, the Darrian cruiser, and Star Frontiers<BR>
pirates.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, any other gamers out there who have considered miniature painting<BR>
should give it a try. I had painted while in my teens, and resumed only<BR>
after turning 30 and needing glasses for the first time. (kind of a<BR>
reassurance that I could cope with aging). I think I am far better now at<BR>
painting than in my youth. I wish I could say that about my times on my<BR>
daily 3 mile run. <BR>
<BR>
Oh, well...I guess to some of you I am still in my youth, ehh<BR>
<BR>
Bye all,<BR>
<BR>
Glenn<BR>
<BR>
Glenn E. Myers <BR>
Email: glenn.myers@ansys.com<BR>
<BR>
When faced with a choice between evils, why choose the lesser?<BR>
Cthulu for President!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:44:48 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Sequel to Mote in God's Eye<BR>
<BR>
On the one hand God, other hand Murcheson, Gripping hand Gripping hand :)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Dean<BR>
<insert standard disclaimer here><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Charles Collin [mailto:charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca]<BR>
Sent: 28 July 2000 14:33<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Sequel to Mote in God's Eye<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I thought it was "The Gripping Hand"?  Or is that a third book?<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 05:46:59 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >> The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made up of<BR>
> >> thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units, high-level<BR>
> >> command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be fairly neutral.  I<BR>
> >> chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own dress uniforms, which can get<BR>
> >> quite colorful.<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><just to cause trouble> but what gray? Light, dark?  How about feldgrau<BR>
> >(sp?)<BR>
> <BR>
> I believe I specified a dark gray.  <BR>
<BR>
Are gray Imperial uniforms gray in the ultra violet and/or <BR>
infra red colors that some aliens can see?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:51:09 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3<BR>
<BR>
One thing I think every design system should have: Lemon rolls.  No, not<BR>
sour sticky pastries, but something borrowed from the Heavy Gear game. <BR>
Basically, the more you push the tech to the bleeding edge, the more<BR>
"quirks" a machine has.  Some of these are merely inconvenient: Strange<BR>
smells and noises, etc.  Others are more dangerous:  Systems jam up, fail<BR>
unexpectedly under certain circumstances, etc.<BR>
<BR>
In Heavy Gear*, you get LRs for both the overall design (the "Class" in<BR>
ship terms)  and the individual machine you buy.  So _your_ model X-9<BR>
Super Gyroblaster might work fine, but the next guy's might blow up on him<BR>
if he tries to fire it twice in one round (or whatever).  On the other<BR>
hand, all X-8s have the same problem in that they're hard to load (double<BR>
loading time or some such). Very cool stuff. <BR>
<BR>
<OT plug> BTW, some of you military/miniature enthsiasts will probably<BR>
want to check out "Gear Kreig".  It's an alternate-universe WW2 mecha<BR>
RPG/tactical game.  Sounds weird, but I tried it at NE Wars Con last year<BR>
and it's tons of fun.  The look is just incredible:  Nazi, British and<BR>
American "War Walkers" (complete with rotary IC engines on their backs :-) <BR>
duking it out with Panzers and infantry in small war-shattered villages.<BR>
Check it out at dp9.com. </OT plug><BR>
<BR>
Have a good one,<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
* I wanted to abbreviate this to HG, but then realized it might confuse<BR>
the hell out of people "What?  I never saw that rule in Book 5!  What<BR>
page?!" :-)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:53:24 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
Technically I don't think colours in the IR/UV ranges can be compared to<BR>
colours in the visible spectrum, but for simplicities sake let's say yes :).<BR>
It's the old philosophiccal question, do you and I see the same thing when<BR>
we look at something blue?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Dean<BR>
<insert standard disclaimer here><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Peter Newman [mailto:pnewman@gci.net]<BR>
Sent: 28 July 2000 14:47<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >> The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made up of<BR>
> >> thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units, high-level<BR>
> >> command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be fairly neutral.<BR>
I<BR>
> >> chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own dress uniforms, which can<BR>
get<BR>
> >> quite colorful.<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><just to cause trouble> but what gray? Light, dark?  How about feldgrau<BR>
> >(sp?)<BR>
> <BR>
> I believe I specified a dark gray.  <BR>
<BR>
Are gray Imperial uniforms gray in the ultra violet and/or <BR>
infra red colors that some aliens can see?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:59:24 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Feedback/forward systems and Battledress <BR>
<BR>
One thing I _must_ try is the new robotic arm feed-back system they just<BR>
put in at one of the labs at McGill.  Basically, you strap your arm to the<BR>
robot arm and it moves with you until you hit virtual objects, at which<BR>
point it applies resistance in such a way as to simulate the<BR>
characteristics of the object. <BR>
<BR>
I tried a finger-tip version and the effect is just freaky.  It _really_<BR>
feels like you've bumped into a slippery spongy ball or a smooth solid<BR>
cube, or whatever they've put up for you.  The feedback is quite<BR>
transparent after just a few seconds of use.<BR>
<BR>
Now if I can just get them to do feed-forward: "Okay, I'm going to punch<BR>
the door here, and I want the robot to carry my fist through it, okay?"<BR>
[One busted fist later... :-)<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:57:12 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
On second thought, if the uniforms in question feature materials designed to<BR>
reduce the IR profile of the wearer for camo purposes, it would appear black<BR>
to IR vision, and similarly for UV<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Jones, Dean [mailto:Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com]<BR>
Sent: 28 July 2000 14:53<BR>
To: 'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
Subject: RE: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Technically I don't think colours in the IR/UV ranges can be compared to<BR>
colours in the visible spectrum, but for simplicities sake let's say yes :).<BR>
It's the old philosophiccal question, do you and I see the same thing when<BR>
we look at something blue?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Dean<BR>
<insert standard disclaimer here><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Peter Newman [mailto:pnewman@gci.net]<BR>
Sent: 28 July 2000 14:47<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> >> The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made up of<BR>
> >> thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units, high-level<BR>
> >> command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be fairly neutral.<BR>
I<BR>
> >> chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own dress uniforms, which can<BR>
get<BR>
> >> quite colorful.<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><just to cause trouble> but what gray? Light, dark?  How about feldgrau<BR>
> >(sp?)<BR>
> <BR>
> I believe I specified a dark gray.  <BR>
<BR>
Are gray Imperial uniforms gray in the ultra violet and/or <BR>
infra red colors that some aliens can see?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 07:07:53 -0700 (MST)<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > Remember the progenitor of BD, the MI Powered Armor in Starship Troopers.<BR>
> > Heinlein realized thatusing something like that was going to require a lot<BR>
> > of training. Same in Traveller...you need BD skill to use it at all.<BR>
> <BR>
> Actually, his point was the exact *opposite*. You *didn't* need to<BR>
> learn how to *move*, just how to control the extra strength, and to use<BR>
> the sensors and the "jump jets". <BR>
> <BR>
> > I daresay, Leonard, were you to own that suit of plate armor and do an<BR>
> > hour or two of sword drills each morning, very soon you would a) have worn<BR>
> > the hinge points of the armor just right to accomodate your movements,<BR>
> > found the exact places to set all the buckles and straps (likely making<BR>
> > new holes in the straps in the process) and trained your muscle memory to<BR>
> > wear that armor like a t-shirt and a pair of comfortable jeans.<BR>
> <BR>
> Sure, but it takes a lot of practice. Something that BD (at least<BR>
> Heinlein's version) specificly *doesn't* take. <BR>
<BR>
Yes, he also said that it took some amazing engineering wizardry to<BR>
achieve that. Again, I go back to my Newton analogy. The last generation<BR>
(the Newt2K) took far less practice on the part of the user to get very<BR>
good HWR. <BR>
<BR>
You can have it either way, of course IYTU. Either you have engineering<BR>
wizardry that lets you aoutomatically wear the suit like casual clothing<BR>
(a la Heinlein) or suits that require fitting and training. But none of<BR>
the engineering is all that out of line...we could probably do the<BR>
control software now. <BR>
<BR>
The materials are where we're not at right now. But it still doesn't<BR>
require magical rubber metal. Remember hard armor design hasn't been<BR>
worked on seriously for hundreds of years. The NewtSuit is, in fact, the<BR>
only advance in the state of the art since the widespread use of firearms,<BR>
and it's designed for an entirely different purpose (withstanding high<BR>
water pressure) than BD. <BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:09:07 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Myers <glenn.myers@ansys.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
Chaosium sold them a while back.  Check out The Wizards Attic<BR>
http://www.wizards-attic.com/Chaosium.html or watch ebay auctions<BR>
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=392275829to to find<BR>
one.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> <BR>
> >> Also, the wee shoggoth that came with its sire looks like <BR>
> a juvenile<BR>
> > Hiver,<BR>
> >> except that it has all of those randomly placed eyes.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. It's so <BR>
> sweet, with its<BR>
> > little furry tentacles....<BR>
> <BR>
> Where do you get those things?<BR>
> <BR>
> -- <BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:18:37 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
> From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
> Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
> A six pack of points:<BR>
><BR>
> 1.  Some people on TNE-RCES list have been working along these lines<BR>
> (updating FFS1, actually, but same idea) on and off for a couple of<BR>
> years.  Some bright people there that aren't subscribed here.<BR>
><BR>
> 2.  David Golden, et al. began work on something like this with<BR>
> Marc's approval a long time ago.  That effort produced some things<BR>
> that shouldn't have to be duplicated.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Good :)<BR>
<BR>
> 3.  The Trav-Tech list...enough said?  <g> Lots of talent there and<BR>
> not much noise.  Which brings up point 4...<BR>
><BR>
> 4.  Don't do it on the TML, but *do* do it on a mailing list.<BR>
> Trav-tech is a reasonable place for it, IMO.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Ummm, why not do it on the TML ? It beats much of the crap thats been here<BR>
lately ...<BR>
<BR>
> 5.  To make this work, you need to make sure the results of the<BR>
> designs are expressed in the terms of the game system (or systems)<BR>
> in which they will be used.  It doesn't make sense to make better<BR>
> sensor design rules that conform to DSR, if DSR isn't used in the<BR>
> game system.  The details needed for Bruce's MCS aren't the same as<BR>
> those needed for RPSCS, or Mayday and they aren't the standard USP.<BR>
> IMO, the task and combat resolution systems come first, then you<BR>
> make the design system produce the sort of results you need.<BR>
<BR>
My feeling is that the way to go is to crunch out performance stats, and<BR>
then have an attached set of short rules that put this into game terms.<BR>
<BR>
That way, people that need 'civilian lasers' and 'military lasers' just need<BR>
to tote up how many lasers are less than 250 MJ, and how many are greater<BR>
than 250 MJ, etc.<BR>
<BR>
The bigger keys are to have actual pre-built designs and modules, scattered<BR>
throughout as examples, and to know what is being aimed for ("I want better<BR>
armours, so that TL12 Battledress cant be penetrated by a Anti-Tank Rifle",<BR>
"I want life support rules that allow systems to improve as TLs go up" etc).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> 6.  If this is for T5, then Marc *should* be heavily involved from the<BR>
> beginning.<BR>
><BR>
> I'll volunteer to be general purpose heretic again. <g><BR>
><BR>
> Eris<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 06:21:26 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re:  Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
CardSharks@aol.com wrote<BR>
<BR>
> pnewman@gci.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
>  I would like to see the entirety of Atlas of the Imperium<BR>
>  made into one giant (60" x 60" ?) poster map. I would<BR>
>  pay a considerable sum for this map especially if it was<BR>
>  laminated & suitable for use with dry erase pens.<BR>
<BR>
> The world data exists in file form for all these star systems. It just takes <BR>
> some editiing to eliminate the small typos and mistakes. The data will be <BR>
> printed in one of the upcoming Reprint series.<BR>
<BR>
Yay!<BR>
<BR>
> 60 x 60 inch would be hard to do. <BR>
<BR>
I know it would be hard to do. Years ago TSR did a very nice<BR>
set of two 22" x 35" maps of the world of Greyhawk. I was<BR>
thinking of a similarly sized map of the whole Imperium<BR>
even if it was in multiple sheets. I am aware that this may<BR>
be impossible given Traveller's smaller market and the changes<BR>
in printing costs etc.<BR>
<BR>
> I could see it done as a 23 x 35 inch map, <BR>
> horizontal format. Maybe even just 1 color for marking up with markers.<BR>
> Marc<BR>
<BR>
The thing about a map to the scale of Atlas of the Imperium<BR>
is that it is about the smallest scale that you can see any<BR>
details at.<BR>
<BR>
How about a series of 17 x 22 (or larger) maps of the various<BR>
Imperial Domains (or other four sector areas) designed with <BR>
fairly small margins and borders. When the whole collection <BR>
came out the true fanatics (such as myself) could put them <BR>
all up on one wall. I would suggest starting with a Domain <BR>
other than the Domain of Deneb because so many longtime Traveller <BR>
fans already have nice maps of the Spinward Marches and/or the <BR>
whole Domain.<BR>
<BR>
I'd suggest the following maps<BR>
<BR>
Deneb (Spin Marches, Deneb, Troj.. Reach, Reft)<BR>
Vland (Vland, Lishun, Gushmedge, Dagudashag)<BR>
Antares (Meshan, Mendan, Lishun, Fornast)<BR>
Greater Reft (Riftspan Reaches, Verge, Hlakhoi, Ealiyasiyw)<BR>
Ilelish (Illelish, Zarushagar, Reavers Deep, Daibei)<BR>
Sylea (Core, Fornast, Massila, Delphi)<BR>
Gateway (Ley, Gateway, Glimmerdrift, Crucis Marg.)<BR>
Hierate Border (Dark Nebula, Magyar, Ustal, Canopus)<BR>
Sol (Diaspora, Old Exp., Solomani Rim, Alpha Cruc.)<BR>
Federation Border (Hinterworlds, Leonidae, Spica, Phlask)<BR>
would cover every single planet in the Milieu 1100<BR>
Imperium, based on the borders shown in Sup 11.<BR>
<BR>
Most of the work has already been done and you could<BR>
presumably get help from fans. If it was printed up<BR>
nicely it could be a very beautiful project.<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium is one of the coolest features of Traveller and<BR>
I think that a reversed color poster, or series of domain<BR>
sized posters, of all the data from AOI could be a selling <BR>
point. When you look at a map that big you really get a good <BR>
sense of the size of the Imperium and the scope that it can<BR>
provide a Traveller game.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 07:25:49 -0700 (MST)<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, John Groth wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I had a bit of fun this evening, running the numbers on an alleged<BR>
> non-rocket Lunar trip (using an "electrogravity" drive) to demonstrate<BR>
> the absurdity of a claim on alt.conspiracy.  I don't expect to convince<BR>
> anyone on alt.conspiracy, but it still seemed a worthwhile endeavor at<BR>
> the time.<BR>
<BR>
Never argue with Someone who randomly CAPITALIZES and Shouts his words.<BR>
<BR>
I'm kinda suprised he didn't end his message with "UN-altered REPRODUCTION<BR>
and DISSEMINATION of this IMPORTANT information is ENCOURAGED"<BR>
<BR>
(yes, I am that old!)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:38:39 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
> If anyone else thinks they can write a better set of design rules than<BR>
> who I've asked to do it, please feel free to chip in.<BR>
<BR>
I have a couple of additional wishes/suggestions for the next <BR>
version of "Fire, Fusion, and Steel":<BR>
<BR>
I wish that practical reaction drives became available slightly earlier,<BR>
(at Tech Level 9) became obsolete slightly later (at Tech Level 12, or<BR>
perhaps even 13).  I have no problem with reactionless drives being<BR>
absolutely dominant at very high Tech Levels (14 or better), but at Tech<BR>
Levels 11, 12, and perhaps even 13, reactionless drives should still "have<BR>
plenty of room for improvement," while HEPlaR should be mature and "fully<BR>
optimized."  It might be nice if there was an "inferior HEPlaR-like<BR>
reaction drive" available at Tech Level 9, "standard HEPlaR" available at<BR>
Tech Levels 10 and 11, and "superior HEPlaR" available at Tech Level 12.  <BR>
Likewise, it would be nice if "inferior Thruster Plates" become available<BR>
at Tech Level 11 or 12, with the introduction of "standard Thruster<BR>
Plates" being delayed until Tech Level 13 or so...<BR>
<BR>
I love reaction drives.  I wish that a "high tech" reaction drive was<BR>
available to replace "superior HEPlaR" (see above) at Tech Level 13, and<BR>
give Thruster Plates some serious competition at Tech Levels 14 or 15.<BR>
Perhaps something involving antimatter?  Big, hideously expensive to<BR>
keep supplied with fuel, fragile, and generally dangerous, but still<BR>
effective... Perhaps the *Imperium* thinks such a drive isn't suitable for<BR>
installation aboard its warships, but I can see wacky and/or suicidal<BR>
Vargr riding antimatter rockets...<BR>
<BR>
> Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants from<BR>
> TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant, that<BR>
> basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of plutonium.<BR>
> Note that if we keep the 'big' TL9-11 fusion plants, then many Interstellar<BR>
> Wars/Long Night/Lo-tech el-cheapo starships are going to run on fission, so<BR>
> (say) a better TL10 fission plant will have a big impact. Many belters etc<BR>
> would also probably have a small fission plant stashed away, just in case<BR>
> something goes wrong with the main power plant.<BR>
<BR>
Yes!  Absolutely, positively, yes, please!  <BR>
                                                            - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 06:45:20 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> > The movie plot and script aside, I thought that Starship Troopers handled<BR>
> > the space station rather well.  The ships could dock to the edge of the<BR>
> > station as well as land on the upper hull, as many did after getting shot <BR>
<BR>
> Haven't seen it. Not likely to either.<BR>
<BR>
What you have a problem with a movie that features characters<BR>
_outrunning_ the blast from a nuclear weapon? A movie that <BR>
features the destruction of BA by an asteroid launched many <BR>
light years away. A movie whose troopers are less combat <BR>
equipped than a WW I infantry unit. Etc.<BR>
<BR>
Forget about all that and go rent it anyway, not only is it<BR>
funny in a MS2K way but it features both Casper van Diem (drool)<BR>
in a shower scene and Denise Richards (drool) as well as one of <BR>
the funniest scenes in any movie: Neil Patrick Harris as a <BR>
psychic  and wearing a _very_ campy Doogie Houser: SS kind of <BR>
uniform.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2829<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (rly-zb03.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.3]) by air-zb01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:47:06 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:46:29 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA72639;<BR>
	Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:46:04 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:45:59 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id KAA72595<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:45:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:45:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007281445.KAA72595@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2829<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2830</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/28/00 11:35:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, July 28 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2830<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
Re: A "FFS3" Suggestion (was "Re: Bunch of...")<BR>
FF&S2 question<BR>
Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps YES!<BR>
Re: A "FFS3" Suggestion (was "Re: Bunch of...")<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2827<BR>
re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
Demilitarized Penguins<BR>
Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
Traveller Links<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:32:43 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
I really like the idea of a professionally produced map...I have a map of<BR>
the Imperium I produced myself using Anthony Jackson's PDFs, some scissors<BR>
and a lot of sticky tape. Impressively, I got my time down to 3 minutes per<BR>
sector :)<BR>
I would suggest mapping out everything first though...including territory<BR>
occupied by Dave Pulvers new races for GT. While I like the smaller,<BR>
Domain-level maps I don't think they can really do justice to the sheer<BR>
scale of the Traveller universe. I can remember my players faces when I<BR>
showed them exactly how big 3I was...<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Peter Newman [mailto:pnewman@gci.net]<BR>
Sent: 28 July 2000 15:21<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
CardSharks@aol.com wrote<BR>
<BR>
> pnewman@gci.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
>  I would like to see the entirety of Atlas of the Imperium<BR>
>  made into one giant (60" x 60" ?) poster map. I would<BR>
>  pay a considerable sum for this map especially if it was<BR>
>  laminated & suitable for use with dry erase pens.<BR>
<BR>
> The world data exists in file form for all these star systems. It just<BR>
takes <BR>
> some editiing to eliminate the small typos and mistakes. The data will be <BR>
> printed in one of the upcoming Reprint series.<BR>
<BR>
Yay!<BR>
<BR>
> 60 x 60 inch would be hard to do. <BR>
<BR>
I know it would be hard to do. Years ago TSR did a very nice<BR>
set of two 22" x 35" maps of the world of Greyhawk. I was<BR>
thinking of a similarly sized map of the whole Imperium<BR>
even if it was in multiple sheets. I am aware that this may<BR>
be impossible given Traveller's smaller market and the changes<BR>
in printing costs etc.<BR>
<BR>
> I could see it done as a 23 x 35 inch map, <BR>
> horizontal format. Maybe even just 1 color for marking up with markers.<BR>
> Marc<BR>
<BR>
The thing about a map to the scale of Atlas of the Imperium<BR>
is that it is about the smallest scale that you can see any<BR>
details at.<BR>
<BR>
How about a series of 17 x 22 (or larger) maps of the various<BR>
Imperial Domains (or other four sector areas) designed with <BR>
fairly small margins and borders. When the whole collection <BR>
came out the true fanatics (such as myself) could put them <BR>
all up on one wall. I would suggest starting with a Domain <BR>
other than the Domain of Deneb because so many longtime Traveller <BR>
fans already have nice maps of the Spinward Marches and/or the <BR>
whole Domain.<BR>
<BR>
I'd suggest the following maps<BR>
<BR>
Deneb (Spin Marches, Deneb, Troj.. Reach, Reft)<BR>
Vland (Vland, Lishun, Gushmedge, Dagudashag)<BR>
Antares (Meshan, Mendan, Lishun, Fornast)<BR>
Greater Reft (Riftspan Reaches, Verge, Hlakhoi, Ealiyasiyw)<BR>
Ilelish (Illelish, Zarushagar, Reavers Deep, Daibei)<BR>
Sylea (Core, Fornast, Massila, Delphi)<BR>
Gateway (Ley, Gateway, Glimmerdrift, Crucis Marg.)<BR>
Hierate Border (Dark Nebula, Magyar, Ustal, Canopus)<BR>
Sol (Diaspora, Old Exp., Solomani Rim, Alpha Cruc.)<BR>
Federation Border (Hinterworlds, Leonidae, Spica, Phlask)<BR>
would cover every single planet in the Milieu 1100<BR>
Imperium, based on the borders shown in Sup 11.<BR>
<BR>
Most of the work has already been done and you could<BR>
presumably get help from fans. If it was printed up<BR>
nicely it could be a very beautiful project.<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium is one of the coolest features of Traveller and<BR>
I think that a reversed color poster, or series of domain<BR>
sized posters, of all the data from AOI could be a selling <BR>
point. When you look at a map that big you really get a good <BR>
sense of the size of the Imperium and the scope that it can<BR>
provide a Traveller game.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 07:35:05 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote<BR>
<BR>
>Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net> said:<BR>
> >These sizes are a little small for me. <BR>
<BR>
> Me too.  I was being a trifle sarcastic with my comment about<BR>
> handling the big ship problem.  <g> The table was just a first<BR>
> draft.<BR>
<BR>
> >They do give a Book 2 feel to things but I want to keep the 60,000<BR>
> >ton 2-G Azhanti High Lightning for sentimental reasons.<BR>
<BR>
> At TL-15, I don't diagree.<BR>
<BR>
The AHL is TL 14. Canon says its getting obsolete. To keep this <BR>
as canon it has to stay TL 14 and TL 15 ships have to be<BR>
better. <BR>
<BR>
> TL^4/10 was one that I looked at later yesterday, and I agree it<BR>
> works better.  I like ^4 too, because it's doable with any<BR>
> calculator that does squares, just hit the square button twice.<BR>
> Using that scale you can have still have big battlewagons at the<BR>
> higher TL's, but they are going to be 1 g ships.  For example, this<BR>
> is the maximum sizes for ships if you use (TL^4)/10 for maximum<BR>
> thruster size at a couple of TL's<BR>
 <BR>
>          1 g      2 g     3 g     4 g     5 g     6 g<BR>
> TL 10   50,000   20,000  12,500   9,091   7,143   5,882<BR>
<BR>
  Tl 14  192,080   76,832  48,020  34,924  27,440  22,598<BR>
(to nearest ton)<BR>
<BR>
> TL 15  253,125  101,250  63,281  46,023  36,161  29,779   <BR>
> <BR>
> Of course, IMO, those are *still* pretty big ships.  Maybe still too<BR>
> big! Maybe divide by 14 instead of 10? <g><BR>
<BR>
Then the AHL is state of the art and can stand in the line<BR>
of battle which is not canon. To stop the AHL from still <BR>
being a ship of the line we would need to establish that a <BR>
ship of the line to the Imperium is a 1G 250,000 ton Tigress <BR>
while to the Zhodani it is a 190,000 ton 1 G Tl 14 Battleship.<BR>
This would mean that the AHL might be able to outrun a 1G Zho<BR>
ship of the line and would be slightly overmatched by a TL 14<BR>
75,000 ton 2G Zhodani ship. Thus the canonical references<BR>
to the class showing its age and being farmed out to the<BR>
Scouts would still make sense.<BR>
<BR>
This hand wave might help fighters somewhat (although probably<BR>
not enough) since 6-G Fighters will have a much better<BR>
chance of outrunning (or rather out accelerating since both<BR>
ships will have the same top speed) a 1G ship than they did<BR>
of outrunning the canon, mostly 4G, battleships.<BR>
<BR>
Naturally if the limits listed above are based on the limits<BR>
of thruster plate size ships might well mount an auxiliary<BR>
HEPLAR drive for combat and rely on the Thruster plates for<BR>
normal movement.<BR>
<BR>
If we broaden the hand wave to say that no thruster plate<BR>
will work at acceleration of less than one G, possibly<BR>
thruster plate technology is related in some way to anti<BR>
gravity technology and just as maximum G-Comp increases<BR>
by one full gravity a tech level with a 1G minimum so to<BR>
do thruster plates have a 1G minimum.<BR>
<BR>
If we increase the maximum thrust of a thruster plate we<BR>
can make this even more interesting. To make this hard<BR>
to achieve in a design we will throw out the +3% of<BR>
ship size per +2 G rule that holds true for 2 G's to 6 G's<BR>
How about:<BR>
<BR>
TL 11 Max Thrust 6G's     17% of hull <BR>
TL 12 Max Thrust 7G's     24% of hull<BR>
TL 13 Max Thrust 8G's     32% of hull<BR>
TL 14 Max Thrust 9G's     41% of hull<BR>
TL 15 max Thrust 10G's    52% of hull<BR>
TL 16 Max Thrust 11G's.   63% of hull.<BR>
<BR>
Thus a TL 15 a 10G ship could be up to 8,036 tons<BR>
in size which is still too big for the right feel.<BR>
[Perhaps a (more relaistic) rule that requires hulls<BR>
to be able to take the stress of high G forces and<BR>
(because of the square cube law) this means that<BR>
large high G ships need massive internal bracing.<BR>
<BR>
Now all we need is a handwave reducing the maximum<BR>
firing ranges and tracking ranges at these TL's<BR>
and we have a 'feel' that is much more WW IIish and<BR>
we can have fighters. Maybe operating a Thruster plate <BR>
interferes with sensor use because [handwave on] the <BR>
Thruster plate is 'actually pushing on jumpspace' <BR>
(ala stuterwarp perhaps) this causes the normal universe <BR>
to _slightly_ blur around the ship thus making long range <BR>
tracking and firing _more_ difficult than it is today.<BR>
Since the ship and the universe actually are slightly<BR>
blurred with respect to one another this effects _all_<BR>
sipboard sensors.<BR>
<BR>
This might also help the defender of a system, the<BR>
defender could monitor the system with dumb telescopes<BR>
to track the enemy ships and help fire on them while<BR>
the intruder would be relying on the (blurred) sensor<BR>
picture they could pick up.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 07:56:30 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
"John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
<BR>
> I have a couple of additional wishes/suggestions for the next<BR>
> version of "Fire, Fusion, and Steel":<BR>
<BR>
> I wish that practical reaction drives became available slightly earlier,<BR>
> (at Tech Level 9) became obsolete slightly later (at Tech Level 12, or<BR>
> perhaps even 13).  It might be nice if there was an "inferior HEPlaR-like<BR>
> reaction drive" available at Tech Level 9, "standard HEPlaR" available at<BR>
> Tech Levels 10 and 11, and "superior HEPlaR" available at Tech Level 12.<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps we could simply improve fuel efficiency so the 'better'<BR>
drive can be used for longer periods of time before the fuel<BR>
runs out.<BR>
<BR>
> Likewise, it would be nice if "inferior Thruster Plates" become available<BR>
> at Tech Level 11 or 12, with the introduction of "standard Thruster<BR>
> Plates" being delayed until Tech Level 13 or so...<BR>
<BR>
Currently Thruster plates are TL 11 while anti grav units<BR>
(only half thrust beyond a few diameters) are TL 9. What if<BR>
they were bumped up to TL 12 and TL 10 respectively. This<BR>
would mean that the Vilani would not have had Thruster plates<BR>
only anti grav plates. This would help explain why the TL 12<BR>
Terrans won.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
It was half way to Rivendell when the drugs began to take hold" <BR>
Hunter S Tolkien "Fear and Loathing in Barad Dur"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:49:15<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
<BR>
At 07:25 AM 7/28/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Never argue with Someone who randomly CAPITALIZES and Shouts his words.<BR>
<BR>
Freedom is an alt.conspiracy regular, and honestly believes that<BR>
*everybody* is in on the plot except for him and perhaps his dog.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:50:08<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
At 01:52 PM 7/28/2000 +0100, you wrote:<BR>
>The Mote in Murcheson's Eye<BR>
<BR>
That was the original title for MiGE.  The sequel is "The Gripping Hand".<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:55:01<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
At 05:46 AM 7/28/2000 -0800, you wrote:<BR>
>Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
>> I believe I specified a dark gray.  <BR>
><BR>
>Are gray Imperial uniforms gray in the ultra violet and/or <BR>
>infra red colors that some aliens can see?<BR>
<BR>
Penguin Stare of Death(tm)<BR>
<BR>
They are gray in the portions of the EM spectrum visable to most humans.<BR>
In the UV areas, they are tie-died, which causes much giggling.<BR>
- --<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
"I created the universe; give ME the gift certificate!!"<BR>
                   - Lisa Simpson, Overachiever<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:02:23<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
At 02:56 PM 7/28/2000 -0000, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Fine by me, as I rather dislike the US one. BTW, which rank structure did<BR>
>you use? One thing that always peeved us about US style armies was that when <BR>
>they visited soldiers with considerably less experience and skill than us <BR>
>got to dine (and drink) in the Sergeant's Mess when as far as we were <BR>
>concerned many weren't fit to enter the Corporal's Mess.<BR>
<BR>
The Army ranks are drawn directly from Book 4, with almost no changes.  The<BR>
Marine ranks are the variant that I've posted before.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:03:42<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
At 06:45 PM 7/28/2000 +1200, you wrote:<BR>
>Douglas E. Berry<BR>
<BR>
>> And that green beret confuses the hell out of American troops who equate a<BR>
>> green beret with the Special Forces.<BR>
><BR>
>It's not confusing them. All our infantry are as good as your "special"<BR>
>forces !<BR>
<BR>
*ouch*  Wow, you might be in trouble then because our Special Forces aren't<BR>
front-line combat troops, and over half of them aren't even from combat<BR>
arms...<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:08:56 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> > At TL 9, antimatter-catalyzed fission (using extremely small amounts of <BR>
> > antimatter) should be viable.  Antimatter power plants may be TL 17, but <BR>
> > antimatter production in small quantities is TL 7.<BR>
> <BR>
> Make that "microscopic" quantities. And we only manage to start<BR>
> *storing* it at TL8-9. Until then, you need a *big* cyclotron or the<BR>
> like to produce the antimatter. Which makes in less useful than a<BR>
> conventional reactor.<BR>
<BR>
Right.  However, antimatter-catalyzed fission requires dramatically less antimatter, and there's a reason I still left it at TL 9.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:14:02 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
> <BR>
> Nope. Eventually, the corrections will place it in an orbit that's no<BR>
> longer dangerous. Or rather, won't be dangerous again for a geological<BR>
> timespan.<BR>
<BR>
Depending on what direction the asteroid is passing, one correction might do it (or one correction, plus another correction a few months later).  The asteroid's orbit is going to be significantly altered by a near miss with a planet.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 09:15:11 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population "Problems" (was Re: Classic Traveller for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> On an airless world, there's no such thing as "terminal velocity".<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, I meant escape velocity.<BR>
> <BR>
> Still, I seem to recall that it's possible for a "right sized" chunk to<BR>
> be mostly intact on landing. <BR>
<BR>
Only if you have sufficient contragrav to support it.  Otherwise its going to hit at several kilometers per second.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:13:26 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: A "FFS3" Suggestion (was "Re: Bunch of...")<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, John P. Raynor wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> If page limits make this difficult, please consider chopping out some of<BR>
> the more esoteric (and seldom-used) design rules.  I would be quite happy<BR>
> to do without "Design Sequence 2865(b): Blenders, Mixers, and Other Food<BR>
> Processors", if it meant a better sense of how to put vehicles and<BR>
> starships together.<BR>
<BR>
Ouch.  My blood pressure spiked when I read this.  I don't want to lose<BR>
*any* design sequences.  Examples could always be posted on the web<BR>
somewhere.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:20:05 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: FF&S2 question<BR>
<BR>
Could someone with FF&S2 please open it to page 70?<BR>
<BR>
If could do that, then I have a problem.  As someone who loves his FF&S, I<BR>
was pleased to get my hands on the T4 version.  While I was prepared for<BR>
printing errors, such as Imperium's unique representation of<BR>
multiplication, I was a bit surprised to find that pages 65-80 are<BR>
missing, and that to compensate I have extra copies of pages 49-64.  Are<BR>
all FF&S2 books screwed up in this way, or is mine even more thoroughly<BR>
botched than most?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:19:44 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
<BR>
>Forget about all that and go rent it anyway, not only is it<BR>
>funny in a MS2K way but it features both Casper van Diem (drool)<BR>
>in a shower scene and Denise Richards (drool) as well as one of<BR>
>the funniest scenes in any movie: Neil Patrick Harris as a<BR>
>psychic  and wearing a _very_ campy Doogie Houser: SS kind of<BR>
>uniform<BR>
<BR>
Doogie Houser:SS was one of the cute parts of the movie.  There is a clip <BR>
floating around the net that shows a chopped scene of Van Diem & Richards <BR>
making out on the campus lawn (with Van Diem copping a serious feel).<BR>
<BR>
Remember that this movie was directed/written by the team that brought you <BR>
Basic Instinct & Showgirls.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
It was blasphemous, it was sacrilegious, and it was a little bit too much fun.<BR>
http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:42:36 EDT<BR>
From: CardSharks@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 7/27/00 11:12:53 PM Central Daylight Time, <BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< <BR>
 >> Ideally this product would take all the data from AOI<BR>
 > <BR>
 > What is AOI?<BR>
 > <BR>
 > <BR>
 <BR>
 Atlas of the Imperium<BR>
  >><BR>
<BR>
Or from the upgraded data files from which AOI was created.<BR>
<BR>
Marc<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:44:09 EDT<BR>
From: CardSharks@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps YES!<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 7/27/00 9:40:21 PM Central Daylight Time, <BR>
xrp@sierratel.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< <BR>
 Preferred time-frame: CT<BR>
  >><BR>
ie, Second Survey, published 1065<BR>
<BR>
Marc<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:55:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: A "FFS3" Suggestion (was "Re: Bunch of...")<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, Gregory Carl Kettler wrote:<BR>
> On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, John P. Raynor wrote:<BR>
> > If page limits make this difficult, please consider chopping out some of<BR>
> > the more esoteric (and seldom-used) design rules.  I would be quite happy<BR>
> > to do without "Design Sequence 2865(b): Blenders, Mixers, and Other Food<BR>
> > Processors", if it meant a better sense of how to put vehicles and<BR>
> > starships together.<BR>
> <BR>
> Ouch.  My blood pressure spiked when I read this.  I don't want to lose<BR>
> *any* design sequences.  Examples could always be posted on the web<BR>
> somewhere.<BR>
<BR>
I wasn't advocating including a couple of pages of completely assembled<BR>
vehicles, weapons, and starships at the end of the book (or even at the<BR>
end of each section), I was suggesting that the examples should be woven<BR>
in through the actual design rules (perhaps in alternating paragraphs) so<BR>
the reader doesn't have to "reverse engineer" *anything* to see how the<BR>
rules work.  I'd rather have, say, five good, clearly written and<BR>
illustrated design sequences (with examples provided and potential sources<BR>
of confusion identified and addressed) than six or seven design sequences<BR>
presented without this kind of extra care.<BR>
<BR>
I'd say that rarely-used design sequences are better candidates for exile<BR>
to the Internet (lighter-than-air vehicles, for instance, would go the<BR>
head of my personal "better off elsewhere" list).<BR>
<BR>
Another possibility:<BR>
What about a "Deluxe 'Fire, Fusion, and Steel' CD-ROM Edition," with<BR>
design sequences for dirigibles, toasters, electric toothbrushes,<BR>
rocket-assisted pogo-sticks, and other esoterica?<BR>
                                                              - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:04:41 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
Eris wrote:<BR>
> On 07/26/00 at 01:10 AM,  "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com> said:<BR>
> <BR>
> >I've been meaning to comment.  There already is a limiter on ship sizes -<BR>
> >computer size!  Instead of going elsewhere, why not just revise the table<BR>
> >down?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > [table elided]<BR>
> <BR>
> Sam, this makes a lot of sense to me.  You're right, I'm sure it<BR>
> would need some tweeking, but it gives you TL limits on ship volume<BR>
> tied directly to the required computer and when it becomes<BR>
> available.  <BR>
<BR>
I think I speak for most of the CTStarships mailing list when I say we all <BR>
hate the tech-computer-ship size limiting charts. <BR>
<BR>
They seem very arbitrary, and don't make much sense from either a computer-<BR>
science perspective[1] nor from a contemporary naval architecture[2] <BR>
perspective.<BR>
<BR>
I'd much rather see an inefficiency-at-large-scale solution to limiting <BR>
ship sizes than arbitrary TL-defining-maximum-size things. Consider that<BR>
some of the world's largest and most powerful vehicles were actually <BR>
built at lower tech levels than our current one -- Saturn V, Boeing 747,<BR>
Typhoon SSBN. At higher tech levels, you get to do more in a smaller <BR>
(but sometimes more expensive) package.<BR>
<BR>
- - Russell B<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
[1] All computers are capable of the same operations, so if X tons of ship <BR>
needs Y amount of processing power to manage, you should be able to get Y <BR>
amount of processing power by ganging together any number of model/1 <BR>
computers. This may not apply for combat operations, where fast response<BR>
time is of the essence, but should work for routine ops. <BR>
<BR>
[2] How much computing power does a modern supertanker need, versus a 40-<BR>
foot yacht?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:12:47 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Robert Conley <estar@toolcity.net><BR>
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Man on the moon... a FAKE?]<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Freedom is an alt.conspiracy regular, and honestly believes that<BR>
> *everybody* is in on the plot except for him and perhaps his dog.<BR>
<BR>
Of course his dog is in the conspiracy. How do you think we monitor him?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 10:08:25 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2827<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> > Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. It's so sweet, with its<BR>
> > little furry tentacles....<BR>
> <BR>
> Where do you get those things?<BR>
<BR>
http://www.tccorp.com/outsider/doll.html<BR>
<BR>
Pics of ours:<BR>
http://www.estarcion.com/shock/cthulu1.jpg<BR>
http://www.estarcion.com/shock/cthulu2.jpg<BR>
<BR>
And a story to go with them:<BR>
http://www.estarcion.com/kaleja/frathouse.html<BR>
<BR>
And despite both the image URLs and quoted text above, it's "Cthulhu" with <BR>
a second H towards the end. <BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 18:12:44 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
<BR>
At 18:41 -0400 27/7/00,  "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com> wrote:<BR>
>I am in search of a Mac version of Optima for the Traveller map project.  If<BR>
>you have it, or know where I can get it, please let me know.<BR>
<BR>
If you can find a Windows clone version as a TrueType there are <BR>
several third party convertors out there... can't remember what they <BR>
are called though...<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:03:37 +0100<BR>
From: "Ben Aaronovitch" <bem@imaginaryfilms.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
<BR>
You know I think that was one of the most useful posts<BR>
I have ever read over the internet - anywhere.<BR>
<BR>
Thank you very much.<BR>
<BR>
Ben Aaronovitch<BR>
<BR>
'Let's be honest here - you paid for the women.'<BR>
                                       Bill Murrey - Scrooged<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: J. Paul Sanders <timmon@primenet.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2000 12:41 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Super nova and the haunted solar system<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Here's something from the MT days on Super Novas...<BR>
> Lots of good stuff snipped.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:13:26 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
Eris writes:<BR>
>>I have always favoured M-drives requiring a greater % of tonnage<BR>
>>in larger ships.  This makes sense from an engineering POV<BR>
>>(taking into account superstructure, bracing, inertial comp.,<BR>
>>etc.)and tends to make very large ships less efficient.  For<BR>
>>example, using cube roots:<BR>
>MDrive = Ship volume * (Ship volume^(1/3)/100) * g's<BR>
>Is that what you mean?  Take a look at ^(1/4)!<BR>
>           ^(1/3)       ^(1/4)<BR>
> Volume   MDrive %     MDrive %<BR>
>    100     4.64         3.16<BR>
>    200     5.85         3.76<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>500,000    79.37        26.59<BR>
<BR>
	Almost.  I used MDrive = Ship volume * (Ship volume^(1/3))/200<BR>
	as a starting point, but IIRC maneuver drives are more efficient<BR>
	as higher G's (In HG2, isn't it 2% for 1G, 3% for 2G, etc.?).<BR>
	In the CT tradition of simplicity, I am considering increasing<BR>
	the HG2 maneuver drive (and perhaps jump drive) requirements by<BR>
	a factor of 2 for ships 1,000+ tons, 4 for ships 10,000+ tons,<BR>
	etc.  This also happens to make ships over 1,000,000 tons<BR>
	very difficult to build (50% MDrive at 1,000,000 tons, 100% at<BR>
	8,000,000 tons).<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:17:50 EDT<BR>
From: GypsyComet@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Demilitarized Penguins<BR>
<BR>
They DO have non-military uses, you know:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.bobbins.org/d/20000727.html<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
GC<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:24:08 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Optima Font Needed<BR>
<BR>
TTTConverter is a very nice one:<BR>
<BR>
http://hometown.aol.com/mmqchome/fonts/TTConverter15.hqx<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
SD Mooney wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> At 18:41 -0400 27/7/00,  "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com> wrote:<BR>
> >I am in search of a Mac version of Optima for the Traveller map project.  If<BR>
> >you have it, or know where I can get it, please let me know.<BR>
> <BR>
> If you can find a Windows clone version as a TrueType there are<BR>
> several third party convertors out there... can't remember what they<BR>
> are called though...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:31:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Traveller Links<BR>
<BR>
Hi all.<BR>
<BR>
Does anyone have a well-organized list of Traveller links?  Everytime I<BR>
start randomly cruising for Trav sites, I get the awful feeling I'm<BR>
missing tons of good stuff.<BR>
<BR>
On a related note, who's in charage of the HIWG site?  It has a number of<BR>
broken links...<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2830<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37]) by air-yh04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:35:08 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:34:31 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id OAA81964;<BR>
	Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:34:24 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:31:37 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id OAA81849<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:31:36 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:31:36 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007281831.OAA81849@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2830<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2831</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/28/00 1:03:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, July 28 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2831<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: A "FFS3" Suggestion (was "Re: Bunch of...")<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
FF&S, not for the weak at heart...<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Wanted: URL for IMperial Cultural Information<BR>
Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
An off topic questions<BR>
Re: An off topic questions<BR>
(OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2830<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Sector Maps<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:34:40 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: The future battlefield (was: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP)<BR>
<BR>
> either (especially as even now the total available reaction time has to<BR>
be<BR>
> under 0.5 seconds).<BR>
<BR>
There were reports in defence journals that during the Gulf War, British<BR>
Challenger MBTs scored first-hit kills in one case at a range where the<BR>
rounds were in flight for over three seconds! That's a LONG way out,<BR>
amigos, even if the targets were stationary.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:37:00 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
> Graeme Batho<BR>
> Lateral thinker at large<BR>
> (who forgot to mention that his character is a -mercenary- engineer)<BR>
<BR>
And? I *am* a mercenary engineer.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
(Although not in the GPMG-wielding sense, I admit.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:36:30 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: A "FFS3" Suggestion (was "Re: Bunch of...")<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 12:55 PM,  "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
>I wasn't advocating including a couple of pages of completely assembled<BR>
>vehicles, weapons, and starships at the end of the book (or even at the<BR>
>end of each section), I was suggesting that the examples should be woven<BR>
>in through the actual design rules (perhaps in alternating paragraphs) so<BR>
>the reader doesn't have to "reverse engineer" *anything* to see how the<BR>
>rules work.  I'd rather have, say, five good, clearly written and<BR>
>illustrated design sequences (with examples provided and potential<BR>
>sources of confusion identified and addressed) than six or seven design<BR>
>sequences presented without this kind of extra care.<BR>
<BR>
Sidebar the examples.  And I agree, an example of designing a laser<BR>
running down the page next to the the actual design sequence would<BR>
help a lot!<BR>
<BR>
>I'd say that rarely-used design sequences are better candidates for exile<BR>
>to the Internet (lighter-than-air vehicles, for instance, would go the<BR>
>head of my personal "better off elsewhere" list).<BR>
<BR>
I will argue to include alternative technologies, not just the OTU<BR>
ones.  So, I can't agree with "better off elsewhere" for anything<BR>
substantive.  I'd rather see 2, or even 3, books rather than leave<BR>
things out. <BR>
<BR>
>Another possibility:<BR>
>What about a "Deluxe 'Fire, Fusion, and Steel' CD-ROM Edition," with<BR>
>design sequences for dirigibles, toasters, electric toothbrushes,<BR>
>rocket-assisted pogo-sticks, and other esoterica?<BR>
<BR>
Well, doing this with CD-Rom in mind from the beginning is a good<BR>
idea. That includes spreadsheets already done and included.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:36:39 -0700<BR>
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
I ran into that at the RAF station in Plymouth. I was there for deep sea<BR>
survival training as our missions took us out over the North Sea and it was<BR>
a NATO requirement. Most of us were "Warrant Officers" (Aviation outfit) and<BR>
the UK armed forces considered a Warrant Officer an enlisted man. It was<BR>
equivalent to Sergeant Major in the US Army. They finally agreed and we<BR>
stayed in the Officer's Quarters and had our meals served to us. Oh what a<BR>
feeling....<BR>
<BR>
Thom Harris - GOFIR - <Gnarly Old Fart In Residence><BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 7:56 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> One thing that always peeved us about US style armies was that when they<BR>
> visited soldiers with considerably less experience and skill than us got<BR>
to<BR>
> dine (and drink) in the Sergeant's Mess when as far as we were concerned<BR>
many<BR>
> weren't fit to enter the Corporal's Mess.<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:41:50 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/27/00 at 10:41 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> Hum, that's an idea.  You don't need Superdense or Bonded Superdense<BR>
>> to build hulls for civilian ships, but if you want really thick<BR>
>> armor that's the way to go.  Maybe making the Superdense materials<BR>
>> much more expensive would help?<BR>
<BR>
>Well... Ships, even civilian ones, need *heavy* shielding against stellar<BR>
>flares.<BR>
<BR>
Crystal Iron won't do?  <g> <BR>
<BR>
Civilian ships don't *need* superdense, and certainly not bonded or<BR>
enhanced bonded superdense to be shielded. <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:44:51 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 02:13 PM,  Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca> said:<BR>
<BR>
>	Almost.  I used MDrive = Ship volume * (Ship volume^(1/3))/200<BR>
>	as a starting point, but IIRC maneuver drives are more efficient<BR>
>	as higher G's (In HG2, isn't it 2% for 1G, 3% for 2G, etc.?).<BR>
<BR>
The percentages increase by 3%, I think.  If I remember it right,<BR>
MDrives are a flat 2%, 5%, 8%, 11%, 14% and 17% of ship's volume.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:45:30 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 09:05 AM,  "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Here's another proposal for eliminating Really Big Ships:<BR>
<BR>
>Tie the amount of thrust produced by a reactionless drive to its *surface<BR>
>area*, rather than to its *volume* (they're called<BR>
>"thruster PLATES" for a reason...)<BR>
<BR>
Interesting idea!  <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:54:16 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: FF&S, not for the weak at heart...<BR>
<BR>
>I'd say that rarely-used design sequences are better candidates for exile<BR>
>to the Internet (lighter-than-air vehicles, for instance, would go the<BR>
>head of my personal "better off elsewhere" list).<BR>
<BR>
Perverse gearhead that I am, one of the designs I did (either during or <BR>
right after the BETA period) was a Zeppelin.<BR>
<BR>
http://spacevermin.homepage.com/TRAV/GH/zepp.html<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
It was blasphemous, it was sacrilegious, and it was a little bit too much fun.<BR>
http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:55:00 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
>I think I speak for most of the CTStarships mailing list when I say we<BR>
>all hate the tech-computer-ship size limiting charts. <BR>
<BR>
	I agree.<BR>
<BR>
They seem very arbitrary, and don't make much sense from either a computer-<BR>
science perspective[1] nor from a contemporary naval architecture[2] <BR>
perspective.<BR>
<snipped><BR>
<BR>
	If additional electronics/computing power is required in large ships,<BR>
	then isn't that taken care of by the bridge tonnage?  I have always<BR>
	assumed that bridge tonnage incudes controls, maybe an air lock or two,<BR>
	sensors, and electronics (CT).<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:58:14 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
> On 07/28/00 at 09:05 AM,  "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu> said:<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> >Here's another proposal for eliminating Really Big Ships:<BR>
> <BR>
> >Tie the amount of thrust produced by a reactionless drive to its *surface<BR>
> >area*, rather than to its *volume* (they're called<BR>
> >"thruster PLATES" for a reason...)<BR>
<BR>
Or just give T-plates specific surface area restrictions.  It means that you can build really big ships if you're willing to accept them being really slow, which is good for having 'fighter' type ships as well.<BR>
<BR>
I've considered this for (non-traveller) GURPS Space.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 14:51:18 -0700<BR>
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
Once an individual goes through the training they are assigned an 18 series<BR>
MOS which is completely combat arms. I totally agree that some are medics<BR>
and some communications weenies but they all get the 18 series MOS once they<BR>
complete their training. When they first came out with the SF warrant<BR>
officer MOS (180xx) they were sending them to the Military Intel Warrant<BR>
Officer Advanced Course. About half my graduating class were from Special<BR>
Forces.<BR>
<BR>
I became real good friends with one of them and we hit a few drinking<BR>
establishments together. I'm 6'1" and about 200 lbs. back then, and in<BR>
decent condition due to mandatory Physical Training. My new buddy walked up<BR>
behind this bouncer that was around 6'5" and pushing 280 lbs. if it was an<BR>
ounce. My friend yelled out "My buddy Thom can take any sumbi%$# in this<BR>
place." I immediately tried to shrink down to about an inch and get the hell<BR>
away from him, especially since this was a cowboy bar in Tucson, Arizona<BR>
chuck full of real cowboys, all of whom were liquored up and just looking<BR>
for some FUN.....His favorite saying was "I can order beer and hookers in 27<BR>
languages!" You can add that to your manuscript Doug....<BR>
<BR>
Thom Harris - GOFIR - <Gnarly Old Fart In Residence><BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 9:03 AM<BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> *ouch*  Wow, you might be in trouble then because our Special Forces<BR>
aren't<BR>
> front-line combat troops, and over half of them aren't even from combat<BR>
> arms...<BR>
> --<BR>
><BR>
> Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
> http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:54:56 -0500<BR>
From: "LLOYD ROBINSON" <LJR@sbscorp.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Where is the TNE-RCES list and do they have an archive site?<BR>
<BR>
Lloyd<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
A six pack of points:<BR>
<BR>
1.  Some people on TNE-RCES list have been working along these lines<BR>
(updating FFS1, actually, but same idea) on and off for a couple of<BR>
years.  Some bright people there that aren't subscribed here.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:46:37 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
> Technically I don't think colours in the IR/UV ranges can be compared to<BR>
> colours in the visible spectrum, but for simplicities sake let's say yes<BR>
:).<BR>
> It's the old philosophiccal question, do you and I see the same thing<BR>
when<BR>
> we look at something blue?<BR>
<BR>
For grey (or black or white) surely they can?<BR>
<BR>
Isn't white just a fairly constant distribution of all the wavelengths of<BR>
light you can perceive with a high albedo, black the same with a low<BR>
aldebo, and grey the same with somewhere in the middle?<BR>
<BR>
(I forget what the right word is when the object in question isn't a<BR>
planet, but I'm an engineer, so I'll use the word albedo and include this<BR>
explanation in the sure knowledge you'll figure out what I mean.)<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:54:17 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
<BR>
> Could someone with FF&S2 please open it to page 70?<BR>
><BR>
> If could do that, then I have a problem.  As someone who loves his FF&S,<BR>
I<BR>
<BR>
Err, I'm afraid I have just opened mine to P70, to be greeted by the sight<BR>
of two people playing The What's In This Bottle Game. Which was slightly<BR>
surreal, but doesn't seem to appear anywhere else in the book.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:03:13 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
> I think I speak for most of the CTStarships mailing list when I say we<BR>
all<BR>
> hate the tech-computer-ship size limiting charts.<BR>
<BR>
I agree. I think we're looking at this from the wrong angle. We shouldn't<BR>
make it impossible to build large ships - we should just reduce the<BR>
incentive to do so.<BR>
<BR>
If a pair of 50,000 ton cruisers can whop a 100,000 ton dreadnought, people<BR>
will build 50,000 ton ships, despite the fact they *could* build bigger<BR>
ones. At the moment the 100,000 ton ship can carry a much bigger gun, and<BR>
can absord damage a lot better, so it wins hands down. By contrast, a<BR>
modern day frigate (alright, not a Perry) carries enough firepower (in the<BR>
way of SSMs) to sink any two ships you care to name, so navies buy frigates<BR>
and destroyers, not cruisers and battleships. Ignoring aircraft carriers,<BR>
small warships are most effective.<BR>
<BR>
(Yes, I know the USN has cruisers, but they're not very *big* cruisers.)<BR>
<BR>
So I say we should be crippling the big ships, not making them illegal.<BR>
Radiators were a good suggestion, and there have been others.<BR>
<BR>
<set mode?rant=off><BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:05:15 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
> <sigh> and then there's tensors to deal with...<BR>
<BR>
<whirBLAMBLAMBLAM><BR>
<BR>
Sorry guys, he mentioned the evil T-word. My point defence is programmed to<BR>
respond autonomously. <wags finger> Naughty boy, now don't say it again.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:11:37 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
> > Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. It's so sweet, with<BR>
its<BR>
> > little furry tentacles....<BR>
><BR>
> Where do you get those things?<BR>
<BR>
<Sigh>, if I but knew that, sir, my post would not have included the words<BR>
'friend' or 'Jules''.<BR>
<BR>
Fly over here and come to GenCon, then you can see it. And ask him where he<BR>
got it.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:20:49 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
> Crystal Iron won't do?  <g><BR>
><BR>
> Civilian ships don't *need* superdense, and certainly not bonded or<BR>
> enhanced bonded superdense to be shielded.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah they do. Superdense is a lot cheaoer. It's thinner for any given<BR>
protection. The material itself is cheaper (IIRC) and the savings it hands<BR>
on to M-drive, power plant and (if you use HEPlaR) fuel tankage eating into<BR>
cargo space are greater still.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:23:20 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Wanted: URL for IMperial Cultural Information<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000 22:18:56 -0400 (EDT), John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>I'm finishing up my research paper for sociology class on the problems<BR>
>of maintaining cultural unity in the 3I, and I need at least one<BR>
>Internet source for "works cited."<BR>
<BR>
>Can anyone suggest any good Web sites?<BR>
<BR>
>(BTW, if Jeff Zeitlin is willing, I'd like to have him post my paper on<BR>
>Freelance Traveller when he gets a chance to update.)<BR>
<BR>
The question is not whether I am willing; rather, the questions are whether<BR>
you, as the author, are willing, and whether I, as webmaster, can either<BR>
fit it into an existing category, or make up a new category for it.  I<BR>
think this might be a perfectly good candidate for The Lab Ship.  Send it<BR>
on; I'll schedule it for the September update. (Which may very well be the<BR>
next update at all; I'm in the throes of buying a coop, and then moving -<BR>
mostly out of necessity; my landlord doesn't want to be a landlord -<BR>
anyone's landlord - any more, which means that he's selling one of the apts<BR>
that he owns in this coop, and living in the other.  Mine is the better<BR>
one; which do you think he wants to live in?  Worse, this board has already<BR>
rejected me once, so buying the one that he's selling is not really a<BR>
likely option.  So, I've found one that's a hell of a lot nicer, and still<BR>
within my price range, so now I have to wait for the seller to accept my<BR>
offer, and for the rest of the paperwork, etcetera, ... Officially, I only<BR>
have until 01 September, and that's the premise I'm operating on, but I've<BR>
heard noises that suggest that it might not be so tight.)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:23:24 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000 00:24:49 -0400 (EDT), Phill Webb<BR>
<pwebbtrav@yarranet.net.au> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>KenRoney@aol.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> The Earth's population passed six million last year, having doubled<BR>
>> since 1960.<BR>
<BR>
>I think you mean billion both here and throughout the post, otherwise<BR>
>half the world lives here in Melbourne, Australia.<BR>
<BR>
Not possible, since under that population figure, the entire world lives<BR>
here in NYC - along with a third of another world just like it...<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:31:08 -0700<BR>
From: "Brian Jenkins" <Brian.Jenkins@grpwise1.westek.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, I just have to put my .02 credit in.<BR>
<BR>
As usual I am outta my depth in the technical discussions but I do know one reason that I liked smaller ships, and still do.<BR>
<BR>
I think they make for better adventures!<BR>
<BR>
Ok, go back to intelligent discussion now.<BR>
<BR>
Brian<BR>
<BR>
>>> "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> 07/28/00 08:03PM >>><BR>
> I think I speak for most of the CTStarships mailing list when I say we<BR>
all<BR>
> hate the tech-computer-ship size limiting charts.<BR>
<BR>
I agree. I think we're looking at this from the wrong angle. We shouldn't<BR>
make it impossible to build large ships - we should just reduce the<BR>
incentive to do so.<BR>
<BR>
If a pair of 50,000 ton cruisers can whop a 100,000 ton dreadnought, people<BR>
will build 50,000 ton ships, despite the fact they *could* build bigger<BR>
ones. At the moment the 100,000 ton ship can carry a much bigger gun, and<BR>
can absord damage a lot better, so it wins hands down. By contrast, a<BR>
modern day frigate (alright, not a Perry) carries enough firepower (in the<BR>
way of SSMs) to sink any two ships you care to name, so navies buy frigates<BR>
and destroyers, not cruisers and battleships. Ignoring aircraft carriers,<BR>
small warships are most effective.<BR>
<BR>
(Yes, I know the USN has cruisers, but they're not very *big* cruisers.)<BR>
<BR>
So I say we should be crippling the big ships, not making them illegal.<BR>
Radiators were a good suggestion, and there have been others.<BR>
<BR>
<set mode?rant=off><BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:38:36 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: An off topic questions<BR>
<BR>
Ok, so I'll burn in heck for this.  I remember that some folks on the list <BR>
do custom doll costume work, like Leather Dyke Barbie and such.<BR>
<BR>
Has anyone tried to pull this one off:<BR>
<BR>
"Speaking for myself, my niece can't get enough of Hacker Barbie's Dream <BR>
Basement Apartment!<BR>
The pink Sun workstation in the corner, the little containers of takeout <BR>
Szechuan scattered across the floor,<BR>
her "Don't Blame Me, I Voted Libertarian" t-shirt -- it's on every little <BR>
girl's Xmas list!<BR>
To me, the most realistic thing is how if you put in her in the chair in <BR>
front of the monitor,<BR>
she'll stare at it for hours without blinking or taking her hands off the <BR>
keyboard."<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
It was blasphemous, it was sacrilegious, and it was a little bit too much fun.<BR>
http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:53:36 -0700<BR>
From: "Dave Strebe" <strebe@intergate.bc.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: An off topic questions<BR>
<BR>
Sounds like a good character for 'The Sims'<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Mark Urbin" <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 12:38 PM<BR>
Subject: An off topic questions<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Ok, so I'll burn in heck for this.  I remember that some folks on the list<BR>
> do custom doll costume work, like Leather Dyke Barbie and such.<BR>
><BR>
> Has anyone tried to pull this one off:<BR>
><BR>
> "Speaking for myself, my niece can't get enough of Hacker Barbie's Dream<BR>
> Basement Apartment!<BR>
> The pink Sun workstation in the corner, the little containers of takeout<BR>
> Szechuan scattered across the floor,<BR>
> her "Don't Blame Me, I Voted Libertarian" t-shirt -- it's on every little<BR>
> girl's Xmas list!<BR>
> To me, the most realistic thing is how if you put in her in the chair in<BR>
> front of the monitor,<BR>
> she'll stare at it for hours without blinking or taking her hands off the<BR>
> keyboard."<BR>
><BR>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
- ---<BR>
> urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
> It was blasphemous, it was sacrilegious, and it was a little bit too much<BR>
fun.<BR>
> http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
- ---<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:47:17 -0400<BR>
From: trentfs@ix.netcom.com<BR>
Subject: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
>Remember that this movie was directed/written by the team that brought you <BR>
>Basic Instinct & Showgirls.<BR>
<BR>
Directed, but not written.  And anyone who knows Paul Verhoeven's other work should know that all of the cheesiness in Starship Troopers (well, maybe not science stuff, but certainly plot/character/dialogue stuff) is entirely intentional.  Verhoeven (who grew up in Nazi-occupied Holland) was doing a deliberate hatchet-job on what he perceived as a pro-fascist book, and the level of irony, both subtle and not, is extremely high throughout.<BR>
<BR>
Due to his sensational subject-matter and straight-faced irony, Paul Verhoeven's entire oeuvre is extremely misunderstood.  I say he is perhaps the last Intelligent director of b/exploitation movies; hearkening back to an age when directors like Anthony Mann, Sergio Leone, and Jean-Pierre Melville worked in b-movie genres by choice, not because it was all they were capable of.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Trent<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav: Considering the vast number of worlds in the Imperium, and those long downtimes during Jump, there must be a huge demand for entertainment-media in the 3I.  Does this incredible volume and demand mean that all of it is lowest-common-denominator trash, or is there some Art involved?  Is most of it produced by individual worlds or are there subsector-sector-Imperium-wide entertainment conglomerates?  And, if so, how culturally denatured would their material have to be to "play" across the distances involved: "Sure they love it in Vland, but on Mora they're walking out!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:51:04 +0100<BR>
From: Mark S Peace <mark.s.peace@dunelm.org.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2830<BR>
<BR>
> Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:50:08<BR>
> From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
> Subject: RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
> <BR>
> At 01:52 PM 7/28/2000 +0100, you wrote:<BR>
> >The Mote in Murcheson's Eye<BR>
> <BR>
> That was the original title for MiGE.  The sequel is "The Gripping Hand".<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Well my copy is called "The Mote in Murcheson's Eye".  (UK edition)<BR>
<BR>
Mark.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 12:42:58<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2808<BR>
<BR>
At 02:51 PM 7/27/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>for some FUN.....His favorite saying was "I can order beer and hookers in 27<BR>
>languages!" You can add that to your manuscript Doug....<BR>
<BR>
alas, the book is already in to SJG for final editing and layout.  And I<BR>
doubt that Marc would let that phrase through...<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
Embrace Fascism.    The uniforms look cool<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:09:43 +0100<BR>
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
Terry Carlino <carlino@home.com> wrote,<BR>
> I just read the article in the latest SJGames JTAS issue and it<BR>
> strikes me that while canon talks about balkanized worlds I don't<BR>
> recall any mention of balkanized systems, a situation I consider much<BR>
> more likely. As a matter of fact it seems to me that interplanetary<BR>
> matters are very much ignored by Traveller. Systems are named after<BR>
> the main world, where the major starport is. The PC's, if they have<BR>
> their own ship, typically travel strait there from the jump point, and<BR>
> strait to the jump point when they leave. Gas giants are refuel points<BR>
> and pirates lurk in the system's dark corners. It's no wonder the PC's<BR>
> don't get around to the rest of the systems.<BR>
<BR>
Agreed - I have the bones of an article to submit to JTAS on<BR>
the rest of the system (other than the mainworld), though it's currently<BR>
on hold until _101 Corporations_ is finished. I hadn't thought about<BR>
balkanised systems explicitly, but did list disagreements with the<BR>
mainworld government as a reason for colonising other worlds.<BR>
<BR>
John<BR>
 <BR>
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom<BR>
IMTU tc+ tm+ tn t4(+) tg+ ru ge 3i+ jt au- st ls+ hi++ so- zh+ pi+ jd++<BR>
Traveller IS Forms, Gal2CC, etc: http://www.elvw.demon.co.uk/Traveller/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:08:47 +0100<BR>
From: John Wood <John@elvw.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Sector Maps<BR>
<BR>
Joseph J Alberti Jr <albertijjr@juno.com> writes:<BR>
> I am looking to create a sector map of Corridor Sector using Corridor<BR>
> Sector data.  Does a program exist that takes sector data and creates <BR>
> a sector map which cab be printed out?  I have seen sub-sector map<BR>
> creators, but have not found one that makes sector maps.<BR>
<BR>
If you have Windows and Campaign Cartographer 2 (which limits the market<BR>
I admit) you can generate maps from Galactic data using my Gal2CC<BR>
program, available from<BR>
<BR>
        http://www.elvw.demon.co.uk/Traveller/Supplement12.html<BR>
<BR>
IMNSHO the output is very nice. You mostly just need to move some of the<BR>
world names where X-Boat routes cross them and it's done. Defaults to<BR>
white-on-black, but you can reverse this when printing.<BR>
<BR>
If you only have the CC2 viewer I can generate it for you - let me know.<BR>
<BR>
At some point I intend to implement the suggestions for colouring worlds<BR>
based on trade classifications but haven't done so yet.<BR>
<BR>
Speaking of which, I was thinking of using a variant of William F.<BR>
Hostman's suggestion, as follows (pairs of colours are given to support<BR>
white and black backdrops):<BR>
<BR>
Shape:<BR>
        As:    Blobs (use appropriate land colour, ignoring Va)<BR>
        Not:   Circular<BR>
<BR>
Base land colour:<BR>
        Ag:    Green<BR>
        Na:    Dark brown/orange<BR>
        Va:    Black/white<BR>
        Na+Va: Both of the above, combined*<BR>
        None:  Brown/yellow<BR>
<BR>
Base sea colour:<BR>
        Fl:    Purple/magenta<BR>
        Not:   Blue/cyan<BR>
<BR>
Combination (interior of circle):<BR>
        De:    Use just land colour<BR>
        Ic:    Use land colour and add grey/white caps<BR>
        Wa:    Use just sea colour<BR>
        None:  Combine land and sea colour*<BR>
<BR>
Edge of circle:<BR>
        In:    Grey<BR>
        Po:    Red<BR>
        In+Po: Brown<BR>
        Ri:    Gold/yellow<BR>
        None:  White/black<BR>
<BR>
World name (italicised for Ba, Lo, Ni):<BR>
        Ba:    (name)<BR>
        Lo:    name<BR>
        Ni:    Name<BR>
        Hi:    NAME<BR>
        None:  Name<BR>
<BR>
* These could be combined in whatever way is appropriate. I rather like<BR>
the idea of yin-yang swirl myself.<BR>
<BR>
How's that?<BR>
<BR>
John<BR>
 <BR>
John G. Wood  |  john@elvw.demon.co.uk  |  Oxford, United Kingdom<BR>
IMTU tc+ tm+ tn t4(+) tg+ ru ge 3i+ jt au- st ls+ hi++ so- zh+ pi+ jd++<BR>
Traveller IS Forms, Gal2CC, etc: http://www.elvw.demon.co.uk/Traveller/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2831<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (rly-yh03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.35]) by air-yh05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:03:06 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:02:26 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA86010;<BR>
	Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:02:19 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:02:07 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA85950<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:02:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:02:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007282002.QAA85950@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2831<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2832</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/28/00 3:14:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, July 28 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2832<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
Re: Scales<BR>
mercenary engineer<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
TNE-RCES (was Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
a campaign seed<BR>
Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
RE: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2831<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
re: FF&S2 question<BR>
RE: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Testing....MIME slaying<BR>
Testing - MIME slayingII<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:02:56 -0400<BR>
From: trentfs@ix.netcom.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
<BR>
Jerry Paul Sanders wrote:<BR>
> Another item from GDW was a black plastic three-ring notebook binder with<BR>
> the Traveller logo on it. These were sold directly from GDW in the very<BR>
> early 80's.<BR>
<BR>
I got one of these from Marc himself (I believe) at GenCon circa 1989 (they'd found a few in their warehouse or some such).  It's just too cool looking!  Unfortunately, as a binder, it's not so hot (only 1" thick, you have to stretch the inside-cover pockets to fit anything inside).  Nevertheless, I keep my essential Trav-papers in it and impress all my friends.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Trent<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:07:35 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: Merrick Burkhardt <merrick@shell.rt66.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Scales<BR>
<BR>
 <BR>
> One possibility would be making "plaster" casts of the master, then<BR>
> using that to make wax figures, which can then be used for high detail<BR>
> lost wax castings.<BR>
> <BR>
> But this takes extra time and effort. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, the waxes would be poured into the same rubber mold. The<BR>
wax pieces would then be covered in a plaster (called "investment"),<BR>
burned out, then cast. If you used silver you could get decent<BR>
detail, but the lost wax process also involves shrinkage (in both<BR>
the wax, and the metal casting).<BR>
<BR>
Resin will give best detail every time (not counting those crappy<BR>
casts with bubbles, that's just sloppy work by people who don't know<BR>
what they're doing).<BR>
<BR>
Merrick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:07:25 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: mercenary engineer<BR>
<BR>
H. Beam Piper did a short story about Mercenary Scientists.<BR>
<BR>
Good game fodder.<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
Monday special, two valiums with a coffee chaser.<BR>
http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:07:08 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 08:20 PM,  "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> Crystal Iron won't do?  <g><BR>
>><BR>
>> Civilian ships don't *need* superdense, and certainly not bonded or<BR>
>> enhanced bonded superdense to be shielded.<BR>
<BR>
>Yeah they do. Superdense is a lot cheaoer. It's thinner for any given<BR>
>protection. The material itself is cheaper (IIRC) and the savings it<BR>
>hands on to M-drive, power plant and (if you use HEPlaR) fuel tankage<BR>
>eating into cargo space are greater still.<BR>
<BR>
Nick, that's right as things stand now, but that wasn't my point.<BR>
If you make the dense materials more expensive..a *lot* more<BR>
expensive...then civilian ships won't use it.  It might still be<BR>
worthwhile for military ships where you want high protection/high<BR>
velocity.  This would keep civilian ships smaller and no more<BR>
expensive while letting military ships be larger but a whole lot<BR>
more expensive.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:14:41 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
<BR>
trentfs@ix.netcom.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Directed, but not written.  And anyone who knows Paul Verhoeven's other<BR>
> work should know that all of the cheesiness in Starship Troopers (well, maybe not science stuff, but certainly plot/character/dialogue stuff) is entirely intentional.  Verhoeven (who grew up in Nazi-occupied Holland) was doing a deliberate hatchet-job on what he perceived as a pro-fascist book, and the level of irony, both subtle and not, is extremely high throughout. <BR>
<BR>
Which is a significant chunk of the problem with the movie.  Someone who dislikes a book shouldn't be the person to make a movie about it (clearly, the movie he should have made was an adaptation of John Steakley's 'Armor')<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:15:47 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
<BR>
> ObTrav: Considering the vast number of worlds in the Imperium, and those<BR>
long downtimes during Jump, there must be a huge demand for<BR>
entertainment-media in the 3I.  Does this incredible volume and demand mean<BR>
that all of it is lowest-common-denominator trash, or is there some Art<BR>
involved?  Is most of it produced by individual worlds or are there<BR>
subsector-sector-Imperium-wide entertainment conglomerates?  And, if so, how<BR>
culturally denatured would their material have to be to "play" across the<BR>
distances involved: "Sure they love it in Vland, but on Mora they're walking<BR>
out!"<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
Just look at the stuff that plays be internationally.  Subtle films with<BR>
witty dialog seldom play well outside their home country.  Action films do<BR>
well everywhere, and Baywatch is the hot international smash TV show (go<BR>
figure).  IMTU, we have super-spy Dick Salamander (played by dashing Dirk<BR>
Savage).  Lots of high-tech gadgets, super-villains like the evil yet suave<BR>
SolSec master spy who holds his dope stick in that weird 'foreign' way and<BR>
always has a few beautifully biosculpted minions is skin-tight neo-leather<BR>
body suits,or the powerful Zhodani psionic with his brilliant master plan to<BR>
bring down the Imperium.  Hey, it plays well everywhere.<BR>
<BR>
If you get bored, you can read an 'interview' with Dirk Savage on out<BR>
website.  See http://www.travellercentral.com, look in Press: Democracia,<BR>
issue #6 "Dinner with Dick Salamander".  One of my players is a master of<BR>
mimicking the schmaltzy popular press.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:15:23 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: TNE-RCES (was Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 01:54 PM,  "LLOYD ROBINSON" <LJR@sbscorp.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Where is the TNE-RCES list and do they have an archive site?<BR>
<BR>
Sending an email to <tne-rces-help@silent-tower.org> should get you the commands for subscribing. <BR>
<BR>
Yes, there is an archive site.  Go to  http://www.silent-tower.org/  and choose the list you want. You can join from here or browse the archives.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:17:59 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: a campaign seed<BR>
<BR>
All this talk of deep meaning behind Starship Troopers: The Movie (besides <BR>
Verhoven having the military sense of a BoleWeeve) reminded me of a short <BR>
story in Bruce Stirling's latest collection (another Leggy Starlitz story!).<BR>
<BR>
After Mad Cow *really* surfaced, causing widespread death in Europe, North <BR>
& South America, India rose to be the dominate world power.  This story is <BR>
about an Indian writer/director and his film crew travelling England (to <BR>
avoid creditors in Bombay) knocking out a movie every couple of weeks (he <BR>
doesn't bother to name them anymore, they are numbered in sequence and <BR>
given titles by the post production crew in India).<BR>
<BR>
Most of the stuff is hack work, but some put enough butts in theatre seats <BR>
to keep the Film Studio sending him money.<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
"Tension, apprehension and dissension have begun." -- Alfred Bester<BR>
http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:23:19 -0700<BR>
From: sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
<BR>
trentfs@ix.netcom.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> urbin@bigfoot.com wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> >Remember that this movie was directed/written by the team that<BR>
> >brought you Basic Instinct & Showgirls.<BR>
> <BR>
> Directed, but not written.  And anyone who knows Paul Verhoeven's<BR>
> other work should know that all of the cheesiness in Starship Troopers<BR>
> (well, maybe not science stuff, but certainly plot/character/dialogue<BR>
> stuff) is entirely intentional.  Verhoeven (who grew up in<BR>
> Nazi-occupied Holland) was doing a deliberate hatchet-job on what he<BR>
> perceived as a pro-fascist book, and the level of irony, both subtle<BR>
> and not, is extremely high throughout.<BR>
> <BR>
> Due to his sensational subject-matter and straight-faced irony, Paul<BR>
> Verhoeven's entire oeuvre is extremely misunderstood.  I say he is<BR>
> perhaps the last Intelligent director of b/exploitation movies;<BR>
> hearkening back to an age when directors like Anthony Mann, Sergio<BR>
> Leone, and Jean-Pierre Melville worked in b-movie genres by choice,<BR>
> not because it was all they were capable of.<BR>
<BR>
Very much agreed.  I love his work.  I initially avoided seeing the <BR>
movie because I greatly disliked the book, but when I heard what it <BR>
was like I saw it and loved it.  IMHO it was a brilliant satire.  <BR>
Remember, Verhoven is also the director who did Robocop.  The <BR>
recruiting ads in ST were an especially well-done touch.  The <BR>
science and tech were silly, but that's pretty much standard for <BR>
Hollywood, and were not central to what Verhoven was doing.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:28:11 -0400<BR>
From: "Mike Demetro" <punkabilly@sprint.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
> > > Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. <BR>
> ><BR>
> > Where do you get those things?<BR>
> <BR>
Try www.wizards-attic.com or www.chaosium.com<BR>
<BR>
Mike Demetro, President, The Guildhall Press, Canada<BR>
www.guildhallpress.com president@guildhallpress.com <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:36:44 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
Rather than move the asteroid, why not move the planet.  Sure,<BR>
it is a "tad" larger, but everyone is already on it and if<BR>
you could just get them to all get on one side and "push"....<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:44:44 -0700<BR>
From: Rodney Basler <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
<BR>
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand<BR>
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8D4.A90956E0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
<BR>
>From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
><BR>
>>> The Earth's population passed six million last year, having doubled<BR>
>>> since 1960.<BR>
><BR>
>>I think you mean billion both here and throughout the post, otherwise<BR>
>>half the world lives here in Melbourne, Australia.<BR>
><BR>
>Not possible, since under that population figure, the entire world lives<BR>
>here in NYC - along with a third of another world just like it...<BR>
<BR>
	Speaking as a dedicated resident of the west coast, _one_ world of<BR>
New York, let alone a second, is a very disturbing thought.   ;o)<BR>
<BR>
	<joke mode off><BR>
 <BR>
	Rod Basler, COFIT (No really, some of my best friends are from New<BR>
York..honest!)<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Disclaimer - They just tell me to think - _what_ I think is my own problem<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8D4.A90956E0<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<HEAD><BR>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =<BR>
charset=3Diso-8859-1"><BR>
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =<BR>
5.5.2651.75"><BR>
<TITLE>RE: Imperium Overpopulated?</TITLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
&gt;From: Jeff Zeitlin =<BR>
&lt;jzeitlin@cyburban.com&gt;<BR>
<BR>
&gt;Subject: Re: Imperium Overpopulated?<BR>
&gt;<BR>
&gt;&gt;&gt; The Earth's population passed six =million last year, having doubled<BR>
&gt;&gt;&gt; since 1960.<BR>
&gt;<BR>
&gt;&gt;I think you mean billion both here and =throughout the post, otherwise<BR>
&gt;&gt;half the world lives here in Melbourne, =Australia.<BR>
&gt;<BR>
&gt;Not possible, since under that population =figure, the entire world lives<BR>
&gt;here in NYC - along with a third of another =world just like it...<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Speaking =as a dedicated resident of the west coast, _one_ world of New York, let =alone a second, is a very disturbing thought.&nbsp;&nbsp; =;o)<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &lt;joke =mode off&gt;<BR>
&nbsp;<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Rod =Basler, COFIT (No really, some of my best friends are from New =York..honest!)<BR>
---------------------------------------------------------------=- ---<BR>
Disclaimer - They just tell me to think - _what_ I =think is my own problem<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8D4.A90956E0--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 13:40:06 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2831<BR>
<BR>
Nick Bradbeer wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> I think we're looking at this from the wrong angle. We shouldn't<BR>
> make it impossible to build large ships - we should just reduce the<BR>
> incentive to do so.<BR>
<BR>
Oh, absolutely -- many of the posts on the topic have been aimed that way.<BR>
<BR>
> If a pair of 50,000 ton cruisers can whop a 100,000 ton dreadnought, people<BR>
> will build 50,000 ton ships, despite the fact they *could* build bigger<BR>
> ones. At the moment the 100,000 ton ship can carry a much bigger gun, and<BR>
> can absord damage a lot better, so it wins hands down.<BR>
<BR>
2x 50Kdt cruisers can be a credible threat to a 100Kdt dreadnought in HG2. I <BR>
think the current discussion is mostly about making 20x 5Kdt ships more <BR>
viable. <BR>
<BR>
To-hit bonuses against large ships would, I think, be a step in the right <BR>
direction. Those 5Kdt frigates can field 1000 triple missile turrets for a <BR>
cost on the order of one spinal mount.[1] Requiring surface area for <BR>
weapons mounts prevents the dreadnought from doing the same thing back<BR>
to the frigates.<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
[1] My High Guard Fu is weak. Do the damage tables allow armor to push a <BR>
damage roll to "no effect", or does a hit always inflict some damage? <BR>
If the latter, what's the last slot on each damage table?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 20:38:19 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 7:27 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > Also, the wee shoggoth that came with its sire looks like a juvenile<BR>
> Hiver,<BR>
> > except that it has all of those randomly placed eyes.<BR>
><BR>
> Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. It's so sweet, with its<BR>
> little furry tentacles....<BR>
><BR>
> We're hoping to mate it with a Furbie (in a surgical procedure) so it<BR>
flaps<BR>
> its wings when you talk to it.<BR>
><BR>
> I'll try and persuade him to bring it to GenCon...<BR>
><BR>
> Nick<BR>
<BR>
You are sick, sick people... I hope I'm there to see it <g><BR>
<BR>
BTW does anyone know how much accommodation is left, as I'm going to be<BR>
sending off a cheque next week when my paycheque clears?<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
(This is for GenConUK, before the Yanks ask <g>)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:52:34 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 12:31 PM,  "Brian Jenkins" <Brian.Jenkins@grpwise1.westek.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Sorry, I just have to put my .02 credit in.<BR>
<BR>
>As usual I am outta my depth in the technical discussions but I do know<BR>
>one reason that I liked smaller ships, and still do.<BR>
<BR>
>I think they make for better adventures!<BR>
<BR>
I agree with you, and that's why I'm harping on this. <g><BR>
<BR>
>Ok, go back to intelligent discussion now.<BR>
                                 <BR>
Okay, so radiator surfaces.....<BR>
<BR>
Right now, FFS2 gives the following for fusion power plants.<BR>
<BR>
       Area      Area Needed for         Area Needed for a<BR>
 TL  (m^2/MW)     a 2,000 MW PP    40,000 EP (30,000,000 MW PP)<BR>
 --------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
  9    1.0          2,000              30,000,000  impossible<BR>
 10    0.1            200               3,000,000  impossible<BR>
 11    0.1            200               3,000,000  impossible<BR>
 12    0.01            20                 300,000  impossible<BR>
 13    0.01            20                 300,000  impossible<BR>
 14    0.001            2                  30,000     14%<BR>
 15    0.001            2                  30,000     14%<BR>
 16    0.001            2                  30,000     14%<BR>
 <BR>
One thousand MW per meter!  Does it strike anyone as even remotely<BR>
reasonable?  It looks like magic radiators arrive at TL 14, and<BR>
suddenly make huge ships possible to me. <BR>
<BR>
Shadow suggested using "more reasonable" area requirements.  So,<BR>
Leonard, do you want to make a concrete suggestion as to what might<BR>
be more reasonable?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 21:51:06 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: re: FF&S2 question<BR>
<BR>
At 14:31 -0400 28/7/00, Gregory Carl Kettler <BR>
<gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu> wrote:<BR>
>If could do that, then I have a problem.  As someone who loves his FF&S, I<BR>
>was pleased to get my hands on the T4 version.  While I was prepared for<BR>
>printing errors, such as Imperium's unique representation of<BR>
>multiplication, I was a bit surprised to find that pages 65-80 are<BR>
>missing, and that to compensate I have extra copies of pages 49-64.  Are<BR>
>all FF&S2 books screwed up in this way, or is mine even more thoroughly<BR>
>botched than most?<BR>
<BR>
Yours may well be a binding error - I have the complete text with no <BR>
duplication.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:07:39 -0700<BR>
From: Thing <gduke@kendaco.telebyte.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
>Rather than move the asteroid, why not move the planet.  Sure,<BR>
>it is a "tad" larger, but everyone is already on it and if<BR>
>you could just get them to all get on one side and "push"....<BR>
<BR>
This reminds me...<BR>
<BR>
I remember some scientist or someone in a magazine advocating interstellar <BR>
journies by moving the sun.  Inducing and keeping a large flare to move the <BR>
sun towards the system you want to visit and having it take the planets with <BR>
it.  You get the convienence of not having to leave your home but you end up <BR>
buring off 15-40% of the suns mass in the increased fusion needed to produce <BR>
this huge drive plume.<BR>
<BR>
I could see some culture developing this form of interstelar drive as a <BR>
varient of the Darrian star trigger technology and coming to pay the Imperium <BR>
a visit.<BR>
<BR>
G.D.D.<BR>
ThingUnderTheStairs.<BR>
=====================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 14:14:32 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Right now, FFS2 gives the following for fusion power plants.<BR>
<snip>: TL 9 is 1 MW/M^2, TL 10-11 is 10, TL 12-13 is 100, TL 14-16 is 1000<BR>
>  <BR>
> One thousand MW per meter!  Does it strike anyone as even remotely<BR>
> reasonable?  It looks like magic radiators arrive at TL 14, and<BR>
> suddenly make huge ships possible to me. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, magic radiators appear to arrive at TL 9 or 10.  Assuming 90% efficiency (optimistic), TL 10 radiators have to operate at around 1500 kelvins.  A realistic limit is that a ship needs about 100 M^2 of radiator per megawatt of heat it produces, and heat output is basically equal to power consumption.  With extremely hot radiators (which are very inefficient -- they are consuming 4 MW power per MW of heat removed) this could drop down to about 1 M^2 of radiator per megawatt of heat.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:21:15 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000 eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
> One thousand MW per meter!  Does it strike anyone as even remotely<BR>
> reasonable?  It looks like magic radiators arrive at TL 14, and<BR>
> suddenly make huge ships possible to me. <BR>
<BR>
Hiding *anything* radiating that ferociously would be a good trick, too.<BR>
This reminds me of a "Battletech" game I was invited to participate in. I<BR>
bought a handful of walking-tank miniatures, and gave them *bright* paint<BR>
jobs -- shiny metal heads and limbs, and broad patches of colorful<BR>
heraldry (copied from a local SCAdian household to which several friends<BR>
belonged) on the torso.  Each of the walking-tank miniatures came with a<BR>
piece of *extremely* fine stiff metal wire (intended, I imagine, to make<BR>
antennae with).  I used these for flagpoles, made banners out of<BR>
lightly-crinkled aluminum foil, and painted those up with spray-on primer<BR>
and equally bright heraldic designs. I showed up to the game and saw that<BR>
*everyone* else brought walking tanks painted in various shades of<BR>
*camouflage*!  Somebody even had the nerve to tell me "That's not how<BR>
mechs are *supposed* to be painted."  Huh?  The damn things are supposed<BR>
to be four stories tall, and radiate goodness-only-knows how much heat.  <BR>
How much good will a little blotchy green paint do?  I have to confess<BR>
that I sometimes feel the same way about starships being "military<BR>
ultrablack." I often find it nicer to picture them with bright (and,<BR>
perhaps, heraldic) "paint" jobs... <BR>
                                                             - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:00:44 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 02:14 PM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
>> Right now, FFS2 gives the following for fusion power plants.<BR>
><snip>: TL 9 is 1 MW/M^2, TL 10-11 is 10, TL 12-13 is 100, TL 14-16 is<BR>
>1000 >  <BR>
<BR>
Hee, you just reversed my (and the way they appear in FFS2's)<BR>
numbers.  <g> Doing it this way really makes the absurity stand out<BR>
doesn't it?<BR>
<BR>
>> One thousand MW per meter!  Does it strike anyone as even remotely<BR>
>> reasonable?  It looks like magic radiators arrive at TL 14, and<BR>
>> suddenly make huge ships possible to me. <BR>
<BR>
>Actually, magic radiators appear to arrive at TL 9 or 10.  <BR>
<BR>
Yeah, I know, but I don't think we want realistic, just something<BR>
*remotely* realistic.<BR>
<BR>
>Assuming 90% efficiency (optimistic), TL 10 radiators have to<BR>
>operate at around 1500 kelvins.  A realistic limit is that a ship<BR>
>needs about 100 M^2 of radiator per megawatt of heat it produces,<BR>
>and heat output is basically equal to power consumption.<BR>
<BR>
Anthony, I asked for "reasonable", because I *knew* realisticly<BR>
wouldn't work game-wise.  Frankly, I estimated 200 M^2 per MW as<BR>
realistic.<BR>
<BR>
>With extremely hot radiators (which are very inefficient -- they<BR>
>are consuming 4 MW power per MW of heat removed) this could drop<BR>
>down to about 1 M^2 of radiator per megawatt of heat.<BR>
<BR>
Let's look at it this way.  If we take the percent of hull on some<BR>
some standard ship using some standard power we can figure out the<BR>
effeciency of the radiators at that TL.<BR>
<BR>
Take TL 9, let's say radiators occupy 80% of a 100 dton ship that is<BR>
using 140 MW.  I don't think we can go more than that.  The 100 dton<BR>
ship has an area of ~770 M^2, 80% of that is 616 M^2, so the<BR>
radiators are removing 0.23 MW per M^2, or 4.4 M^2 per MW.<BR>
<BR>
Can we extrapolate improvements from there?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:08:16 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
I've been very busy lately, so I haven't been able to follow much of<BR>
this thread.  I've been making my own PostScript sector files from <BR>
the text files with a Perl script I wrote called sec2ps.  I think I<BR>
mentioned this a few months ago.<BR>
<BR>
(This got to be necessary since I'm running a campaign in the Core,<BR>
and the players have a jump-6 courier so they can get around.  :) <BR>
It also means I've gotten to play with the sector files in a part<BR>
of the Imperium that's less familiar, and that's been fun.)<BR>
 <BR>
It outputs a single sector on US Letter (8.5x11"), so the entire<BR>
ATLAS area *would* fit in a 60x60 space.  I haven't even seen a copy<BR>
of ATLAS for years (more's the pity), but I like the output of my <BR>
script better anyway.  Shrinking any smaller than a domain at 11x17"<BR>
would probably be illegible.  <BR>
<BR>
There's a page with a screenshot from a PostScript previewer at<BR>
  http://www.ima.umn.edu/~bonnevil/traveller/sec2ps/<BR>
showing a magnified view of what typical output roughly looks like.  <BR>
<BR>
  -- Steve Bonneville<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:10:14 -0700<BR>
From: Rodney Basler <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
Subject: Testing....MIME slaying<BR>
<BR>
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand<BR>
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8E0.9AC18600<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
<BR>
Just testing - plain text format<BR>
<BR>
	Rod Basler, COFIT<BR>
- --------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Disclaimer - they just pay me; it's not their fault<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8E0.9AC18600<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><BR>
<BR>
<HEAD><BR>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><BR>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2651.75"><BR>
<TITLE>Testing....MIME slaying</TITLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>Just testing - plain text format</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>Rod Basler, COFIT</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>--------------------------------------------------------</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>Disclaimer - they just pay me; it's not their fault</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8E0.9AC18600--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:12:21 -0700<BR>
From: Rodney Basler <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
Subject: Testing - MIME slayingII<BR>
<BR>
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand<BR>
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8E0.E6CEF9B0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
<BR>
Still Testing - HTML format<BR>
(Sorry for the noise folks, I'm trying to kill that dratted MIME)<BR>
<BR>
	Rod Basler, COFIT<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Disclaimer - I just work here; the nutball opinions are my own.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8E0.E6CEF9B0<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><BR>
<BR>
<HEAD><BR>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><BR>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2651.75"><BR>
<TITLE>Testing - MIME slayingII</TITLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>Still Testing - HTML format</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>(Sorry for the noise folks, I'm trying to kill that dratted MIME)</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>Rod Basler, COFIT</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>------------------------------------------------------</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=2 PTSIZE=8>Disclaimer - I just work here; the nutball opinions are my own.</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFF8E0.E6CEF9B0--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2832<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb01.mx.aol.com (rly-zb01.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.1]) by air-zb03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 18:14:31 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 18:13:58 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA91856;<BR>
	Fri, 28 Jul 2000 18:13:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 28 Jul 2000 18:12:35 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA91802<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 28 Jul 2000 18:12:35 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 18:12:35 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007282212.SAA91802@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2832<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2833</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/28/00 9:06:19 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, July 29 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2833<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: FFS3<BR>
Re: Bunch of stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2831<BR>
Re : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3 (longish)<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Update to my trade maps<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Traveller Technical Architecture (was Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
FFS3 vehicles<BR>
Re: Sector Maps<BR>
RE: a campaign seed<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:01:07 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Large Format Maps<BR>
<BR>
Steven Bonneville writes:<BR>
> I've been very busy lately, so I haven't been able to follow much of<BR>
> this thread.  I've been making my own PostScript sector files from <BR>
> the text files with a Perl script I wrote called sec2ps.  I think I<BR>
> mentioned this a few months ago.<BR>
>  <BR>
> It outputs a single sector on US Letter (8.5x11"), so the entire<BR>
> ATLAS area *would* fit in a 60x60 space.  I haven't even seen a copy<BR>
> of ATLAS for years (more's the pity), but I like the output of my <BR>
> script better anyway.  Shrinking any smaller than a domain at 11x17"<BR>
> would probably be illegible.  <BR>
<BR>
Hm...I'm surprised that even this is legible.  My attempts to fit a sector on 8.5x11 are a bit small to be easily read (however, you did inspire me to shift some things, which helps; I now fit complete names on my maps).<BR>
> <BR>
> There's a page with a screenshot from a PostScript previewer at<BR>
>   http://www.ima.umn.edu/~bonnevil/traveller/sec2ps/<BR>
> showing a magnified view of what typical output roughly looks like.  <BR>
> <BR>
>   -- Steve Bonneville<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 09:02:45 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
General point here. If you are drafting rules, dont be afraid to class<BR>
something as "TL8.3".<BR>
<BR>
This will allow us to have a couple of gradiations, to cover periods like<BR>
the Interstellar Wars, where both sides were at roughly the same "TL".<BR>
<BR>
While I want to keep contragravity at TL9 (to keep Grav Tanks TL9), I dont<BR>
mind 'early Fusion Drive' being TL9, and 'late Fusion drive' being TL9.5.<BR>
<BR>
Also, I'm tending towards Radiators getting their own explicit design<BR>
sequence, rather than being written into every power source. This is to fix<BR>
a favorite FS rort, namely that batteries do not require radiator area.<BR>
<BR>
> From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
> Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
><BR>
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
> > If anyone else thinks they can write a better set of design rules than<BR>
> > who I've asked to do it, please feel free to chip in.<BR>
><BR>
> I have a couple of additional wishes/suggestions for the next<BR>
> version of "Fire, Fusion, and Steel":<BR>
><BR>
> I wish that practical reaction drives became available slightly earlier,<BR>
> (at Tech Level 9) became obsolete slightly later (at Tech Level 12, or<BR>
> perhaps even 13).  I have no problem with reactionless drives being<BR>
> absolutely dominant at very high Tech Levels (14 or better), but at Tech<BR>
> Levels 11, 12, and perhaps even 13, reactionless drives should still "have<BR>
> plenty of room for improvement," while HEPlaR should be mature and "fully<BR>
> optimized."  It might be nice if there was an "inferior HEPlaR-like<BR>
> reaction drive" available at Tech Level 9, "standard HEPlaR" available at<BR>
> Tech Levels 10 and 11, and "superior HEPlaR" available at Tech Level 12.<BR>
> Likewise, it would be nice if "inferior Thruster Plates" become available<BR>
> at Tech Level 11 or 12, with the introduction of "standard Thruster<BR>
> Plates" being delayed until Tech Level 13 or so...<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Congratulations. You just got appointed 'Reaction Drive Supervisor'.<BR>
<BR>
The good news is we already have inferior TL8-9 reaction drives - fission<BR>
and fusion rockets. Do you need me to type in tables 163 and 167 (the<BR>
thruster tables) and send them to you ? Due to their obscene minimum cost, I<BR>
wouldnt call TL9 Fusion Drives to be 'practical' (15 meganewtons minimum<BR>
size, at about a gigacredit per meganewton ... I dont *think* so. As it's<BR>
designed to be unstable and leaking, I think we can have it radically<BR>
smaller and cheaper than the nice, well-behaved TL9 fusion plants).<BR>
<BR>
I'd like some more work on area requirements for thruster plates. At the<BR>
moment, they need 0.1 m2 area per meganewton. Increasing this (thruster<BR>
*plates*) will make ships run out of surface area faster, and result in more<BR>
maneuver hits in combat.<BR>
<BR>
Ditzie is putting in a request for higher-tech liquid rocket fuels, so she<BR>
can update the Rocket Bike.<BR>
<BR>
> I love reaction drives.  I wish that a "high tech" reaction drive was<BR>
> available to replace "superior HEPlaR" (see above) at Tech Level 13, and<BR>
> give Thruster Plates some serious competition at Tech Levels 14 or 15.<BR>
> Perhaps something involving antimatter?  Big, hideously expensive to<BR>
> keep supplied with fuel, fragile, and generally dangerous, but still<BR>
> effective... Perhaps the *Imperium* thinks such a drive isn't suitable for<BR>
> installation aboard its warships, but I can see wacky and/or suicidal<BR>
> Vargr riding antimatter rockets...<BR>
<BR>
HePLar does see use on some shipping. It is cheap (KCr 5 a meganewton), and<BR>
if you just need a 'boost pack', then a good solution is a small maneuver<BR>
drive (1G), backed up with a 3 gee HEPLAR drive with short duration (the<BR>
extra power requirements are provided by batteries).<BR>
<BR>
Basically, it's an afterburner, designed to get you the heck away from the<BR>
problem in time to jump, or dodge for long enough while you tag the problem<BR>
with the PAW often enough for it not to matter that you are now a 1G ship.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 09:17:02 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3<BR>
<BR>
> From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3<BR>
><BR>
> One thing I think every design system should have: Lemon rolls.  No, not<BR>
> sour sticky pastries, but something borrowed from the Heavy Gear game.<BR>
> Basically, the more you push the tech to the bleeding edge, the more<BR>
> "quirks" a machine has.  Some of these are merely inconvenient: Strange<BR>
> smells and noises, etc.  Others are more dangerous:  Systems jam up, fail<BR>
> unexpectedly under certain circumstances, etc.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Congratulation, Charles, you just got appointed 'Chief of Maintenence'.<BR>
<BR>
What I want is a 'Quirks Table' and a 'Malfunctions Table'.<BR>
<BR>
It should have a column each for Power, Movement, Weapons, Sensors and<BR>
Miscellaneous (or whatever you think of. You are Cheif of Maintainence,<BR>
after all :). I would like a 'Jump Drive demands 10% more power to avoid<BR>
misjump' result on Movement, in order to encourage people to build some<BR>
spare power into starships).<BR>
<BR>
Basically, as things get old (accumulate Wear Values), they get rolls on<BR>
these tables. If things are too bleeding edge (eg anything by Famile<BR>
Spofulam), then it starts with a non-zero Wear Value (a 'Lemon' ...).<BR>
<BR>
Needless to say, you use Electronics, Mechanic etc skill to either<BR>
ameliorate the effects of the Wear on a system, or to try and reduce it's<BR>
Wear Value.<BR>
<BR>
What this will do is to provide a reason for why older ships get less<BR>
expensive ... which I want. A party of PCs should be able to pick up a 60<BR>
year old Far Trader for a song (the other bad news is you have to collect it<BR>
... last we checked 120 days ago, it was at 34 degrees from the mainworld at<BR>
12.04 orbits in the 567-128 system). If it still worked perferctly, it would<BR>
still sell for full price, right ?<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 09:23:28 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
> > > From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
 > Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
 ><BR>
 > Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
 ><BR>
 > > Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants<BR>
 from<BR>
 > > TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant,<BR>
 that<BR>
 > > basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of<BR>
 > > plutonium.<BR>
 ><BR>
 > Hm...damper-initiated fission (or just damper-assisted RTGs) may be a<BR>
 viable 'fusion+' alternative, though this is higher TL (probably TL 12,<BR>
same<BR>
 as damper-assist fusion).<BR>
 > At TL 9, antimatter-catalyzed fission (using extremely small amounts of<BR>
 antimatter) should be viable.  Antimatter power plants may be TL 17, but<BR>
 antimatter production in small quantities is TL 7.<BR>
<BR>
 Could you please chuck together some numbers so we can play with them ?<BR>
<BR>
 Basically, I'd like to see what a better fission plant does for things like<BR>
 TL10 Seekers, TL11 Far Traders and so on.<BR>
<BR>
 My theory for this project is to fix things a sub-system at a time, with<BR>
 testing all the way through. release early, release often ... that kinda<BR>
 theory.<BR>
<BR>
 ><BR>
 > > Anyone :<BR>
 > ><BR>
 > > Armour. I dont want to re-type all of table 158 tonight, but could<BR>
 people<BR>
 > > put some thought into hi-tech armours ?<BR>
 ><BR>
 > Towards what goal?  There's various plausible options which might disrupt<BR>
 canon if introduced.<BR>
<BR>
 Towards viable battledress that can stop a TL6-8 Anti-Tank Rifle. Once we<BR>
 get that, then we tweak the other rules.<BR>
<BR>
 Although my feeling is that armour efficiency could be scaled up quite a<BR>
 bit. Big PAWs and meson guns still chew through lots of armour, so I think<BR>
 even an order of magnitude wouldnt be too bad.<BR>
<BR>
 I think there will be 'islands of defense', where only nukes get thru<BR>
 'buffered planetoid' designs, but this isnt neccessarily a bad thing, and<BR>
is<BR>
 solved by Meson Guns, anyway.<BR>
<BR>
 > ><BR>
 > > Some thoughts about a 'quality' system. I'm thinking about<BR>
 cost/efficiency<BR>
 > > for reliability tradeoffs. What sort of reliability bonus should you<BR>
get<BR>
 > > for accepting a 10% performance hit ? I dont want you to squeeze more<BR>
 > > performance out of a given TL, but I think you should be able to trade<BR>
 down<BR>
 > > performance or price for more reliability.<BR>
 ><BR>
 > Why not allow trading down reliability for performance?  Happens in the<BR>
 real world all the time.  Trading cost for performance happens too, but<BR>
 interacts strangely with the tech system.<BR>
<BR>
 I'm kinda assuming that the 'vanilla' rules already have that tradeoff.<BR>
 Being part of Famile Spofulam (cue jokes about poachers and gamekeepers, or<BR>
 the lunatics running the asylum), I dont want to create more opportunities<BR>
 for rules-compliant abominations.<BR>
<BR>
 Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:48:16 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2831<BR>
<BR>
> 2x 50Kdt cruisers can be a credible threat to a 100Kdt dreadnought in<BR>
HG2. I<BR>
> think the current discussion is mostly about making 20x 5Kdt ships more<BR>
> viable.<BR>
<BR>
It's a continuation of the same argument. Sure, we want to continue it down<BR>
to making four 5kdT ships a better investment than one 20kdT ship.<BR>
<BR>
And I'm not just talking about High Guard. Under FFS, a large ship can<BR>
mount enough armour and meson screens to laugh in the face of anything but<BR>
an equally sized ship. It makes trying a 'last ditch heroic stand' against<BR>
a Tigress just a little pointless.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 09:40:01 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3 (longish)<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch wrote :-<BR>
> This is a project that has to get off the ground.<BR>
<BR>
Damn it Ian, just when I was in lurk mode because of 'job season' for<BR>
2001... and a professional exam <g>.<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson :<BR>
> I got into a blue with you months ago about fuel cells and life support.<BR>
<BR>
I posted some draft rules for fuel cells on 3rd May 2000, which plonked<BR>
into oblivion. Have a look at them ; I'd like to think that my research<BR>
wasn't entirely in vain. Not that I don't enjoy reading 'Science',<BR>
'Nature', etc.<BR>
<BR>
> Anyone :<BR>
> Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants from<BR>
> TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant, that<BR>
> basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of plutonium.<BR>
That was me. Accelerator driven subcritical reactors can run on thorium,<BR>
which means that conventional fuel cycles aren't necessary.<BR>
<BR>
The fission power plant table is a mess and needs to be replaced in its<BR>
entirely. I heartily agree that damper and antimatter catalysed fission<BR>
are good workarounds at the higher TLs, but fusion beats it hands down<BR>
in terms of power density (using numbers from contemporary fusion<BR>
research rather than the traditional tables).<BR>
<BR>
Where fission may well have benefit at higher TLs is in scaling (lower<BR>
minimum size) and higher reliability.<BR>
<BR>
RTGs should be included ; batteries need to be tweaked a little.<BR>
Nuclear isomer 'batteries' look promising at higher TLs ; there's a<BR>
stable (half life ~10^15yr) tantalum isomer with an energy density of<BR>
several MJ/g...<BR>
<BR>
> Anyone : <BR>
> Armour. I dont want to re-type all of table 158 tonight, but could people<BR>
> put some thought into hi-tech armours ?<BR>
<BR>
Partial draft material table :-<BR>
(approximately uses values for Young's modulus from introductory<BR>
material sciences texts and rough energy costs of production)<BR>
<BR>
Substance                     Tough     Density     Cost(per unit mass)<BR>
Steel = hard steel, TTL 4     3         8           1<BR>
soft steel                    2         8           0.75<BR>
Iron                          1.5       8           0.5<BR>
Super steel alloy             4.5       8           3<BR>
Aluminium                     1         2.7         4<BR>
Titanium                      1.84      4.9         14<BR>
Bronzes                       0.75      7           0.5<BR>
Brasses                       0.9       7           0.6        <BR>
Copper                        0.7       7           0.5<BR>
Magnesium alloys              1.2       6           1.5<BR>
Wood                          0.3       0.8         1/60<BR>
Plywood                       0.15      0.8<BR>
Bone                          0.25      1.11<BR>
Hides                         0.08      1<BR>
Glass                         0.01      2.5         2/5<BR>
Fibreglass                    0.6       1.0         0.75<BR>
Dirt                          0.06      1.5<BR>
Cement/concrete/stone         0.75      3-5.5       ~1/15<BR>
Ceramics                      0.02      2<BR>
Plastics (early)              0.03      0.9<BR>
Kevlar 49                     1.86      1.45        70<BR>
Bulk diamond                  1.7       3.7         ?<BR>
Carbon fibre composite        5.86      3.2         70-100<BR>
Carbon whisker composite      8.7       2.3         100+<BR>
Boron fibre composite         7.7       3.5         300+<BR>
Silicon carbide composite     7.2       3.2         200+<BR>
Composite laminate            9         8           4<BR>
<BR>
<Stream of consciousness><BR>
- - Foamed metals ; variants on superdense (superdense iron should be<BR>
different to superdense diamond, which should be different to diamond<BR>
sheathed metallic hydrogen (?!))<BR>
- - Electrostatic armour is still sort of viable.<BR>
- - Electromagnetic shielding as described in CSC is counterproductive in<BR>
an atmosphere due to the magnetic properties of oxygen and nitrogen.<BR>
</Stream of consciousness><BR>
<BR>
> Anyone (maybe also Leonard)<BR>
> Life Support. I'd like something a bit more differentiated.<BR>
<BR>
Does this include items such as G-couches, etc?<BR>
Check out :-<BR>
Subject: Effects of acceleration and gravity (part 3, longish)<BR>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 04:32:36 +1000<BR>
<BR>
for a more plausible treatment of same.<BR>
<BR>
> General :<BR>
> Some thoughts about a 'quality' system.<BR>
<snip><BR>
> I dont want you to squeeze more<BR>
> performance out of a given TL, but I think you should be able to trade down<BR>
> performance or price for more reliability.<BR>
<BR>
If performance is defined as engine specific power, say (W/kg or W/L)<BR>
then you can squeeze out more 'grunt', up to a point - compare a model<BR>
aircraft petrol engine to that of a motorcycle, standard car, or purpose<BR>
built racer. <BR>
<BR>
Preliminary thoughts, using Marc's T5 draft item attribute system :-<BR>
* Reliability<BR>
I relate this to recommended maintenance interval.<BR>
E.g.<BR>
- - A Formula 1 car has low reliability (-5) since it needs to be<BR>
thoroughly serviced after a two hour race.<BR>
- - A starship has high reliability (4 or 5) since it only needs annual<BR>
maintenance to safely operate.<BR>
<BR>
I was thinking about using a log time scale or number of 'uses' for<BR>
this.<BR>
<BR>
Reliability  -5  -4  -3  -2  -1  0  1  2  3  4  5<BR>
#uses         1   10  100, etc...<BR>
<BR>
Reliability score affects the frequency of malfunction checks and also<BR>
affects Hazard (qv.)<BR>
<BR>
* Ease of Use<BR>
This is divided into operational (crew station ergonomics) and repair<BR>
(how easy is it to get at the primary jump coil?).<BR>
The same +/-5 score range applies, and acts as a DM on the relevant<BR>
tasks.<BR>
<BR>
More advanced control systems and roomier crew positions get +DMs (the<BR>
latter especially with fatigue checks).<BR>
<BR>
Squashing components together may help save volume (with the benefit of<BR>
increased engine power density, say), but worsens Ease of Use and<BR>
Hazard.<BR>
<BR>
* Hazard<BR>
Refers to the likelihood of a malfunction damaging the operator, or<BR>
nearby people and objects.<BR>
<BR>
Safety systems like compartmentalisation, airbags, crash webs, ABS<BR>
brakes, inertial compensation, and 'crumple zones' reduce Hazard.<BR>
<BR>
Faster moving, heavily armoured or disproportionately fuelled (a jump-6<BR>
ship or conventional rocketry, say?) have Hazard penalties.<BR>
<BR>
* Quality<BR>
'a measure of the workmanship of a piece of equipment'.<BR>
Lower values - save money, but have penalties on other attribute checks<BR>
Higher values - more expensive, but can apply Quality points as<BR>
favourable DMs on Reliability, etc. checks.<BR>
<BR>
* Burden (for completeness)<BR>
How difficult it is to lug the item around. A rough idea :-<BR>
Burden<BR>
(length ratio + mass ratio) X 6<BR>
(compared to 'standard man' 1.8m, 80kg)<BR>
<BR>
e.g. box of cigarettes : 0.1m, 0.05kg -> 0.3 (0)<BR>
large handgun : 0.225m, 2kg -> 0.9 ->1<BR>
rifle : 0.8m, 5kg -> 3<BR>
TV box : 0.5m, 20kg -> 3+1 = 4 (square)<BR>
squad support weapon : 1.3m, 20kg -> 6<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 09:40:36 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Eris Reddoch wrote :-<BR>
<BR>
> 2.  David Golden, et al. began work on something like this with<BR>
> Marc's approval a long time ago.  That effort produced some things<BR>
> that shouldn't have to be duplicated.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Are you referring to the GDW-beta (later Trav-Tech) list?<BR>
<BR>
John Raynor wrote :-<BR>
> I have a couple of additional wishes/suggestions for the next <BR>
> version of "Fire, Fusion, and Steel":<BR>
> <BR>
> I wish that practical reaction drives became available slightly earlier,<BR>
> (at Tech Level 9) became obsolete slightly later (at Tech Level 12, or<BR>
> perhaps even 13).<BR>
<BR>
Solid core fission rockets TTL 6-7<BR>
Nuclear salt water rockets TTL 7+<BR>
Orion TTL 6+<BR>
Ion rockets TTL 6-7+<BR>
Solar sails TTL 6+<BR>
Magsails TTL 7+<BR>
Mini-magnetospheric plasma propulsion TTL 8-9+<BR>
Gasdynamic mirror fusion rockets TTL 9+<BR>
Laser propulsion TTL 9+<BR>
Inertial confinement fusion TTL 9+<BR>
Antimatter catalysed fusion TTL 9+ (need a reasonable supply of<BR>
antiprotons).<BR>
Bussard diluted fusion product (DFP) drives (HePLAR, effectively) TTL 9+<BR>
<BR>
Specific impulses should be capped at about 10^6 seconds or so (upper<BR>
bound of theoretical efficiency for DFP rockets).<BR>
I suppose neutrino drives and high thrust photon rockets (?!) could<BR>
represent the limits of reaction drive tech at the higher TTLs.<BR>
<BR>
Miscellaneous thoughts :<BR>
Water vehicles : supercavitation drives (5000km/h underwater? Oh yeah!),<BR>
smart skin (TTL 9+)<BR>
Water/air : retain wing-in-ground design option...<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 16:58:33 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Update to my trade maps<BR>
<BR>
I changed the display slightly, allowing me to fit in full world names rather than just the first 7 characters.  I have also uploaded a reformation coalition map (based on the missouri archives data, which per comments is considered a bit dubious in some areas, but oh well).<BR>
<BR>
As always, http://maps.grandsurvey.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 01:07:55 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
> You are sick, sick people... I hope I'm there to see it <g><BR>
<BR>
I'll try and persuade him to bring it.<BR>
<BR>
> BTW does anyone know how much accommodation is left, as I'm going to be<BR>
> sending off a cheque next week when my paycheque clears?<BR>
<BR>
No idea. I only sent off three days ago; so I'm hoping they've still got<BR>
rooms...<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:03:03 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote :-<BR>
>With extremely hot radiators (which are very inefficient -- they<BR>
>are consuming 4 MW power per MW of heat removed) this could drop<BR>
>down to about 1 M^2 of radiator per megawatt of heat.<BR>
<BR>
I'd be in favour of calling this the floor limit (1MW/m^2), but increase<BR>
the efficiency of the radiators with increased TL, up to 75-80%.<BR>
<BR>
We could hide radiator inefficiency in the plant's power output to<BR>
simplify accounting.<BR>
<BR>
Eris wrote :-<BR>
> Take TL 9,<BR>
<snip><BR>
> so the radiators are removing 0.23 MW per M^2, or 4.4 M^2 per MW.<BR>
> Can we extrapolate improvements from there?<BR>
<BR>
Moving belts? laser radiators? Liquid drop systems?<BR>
<BR>
A worthwhile set of posts for those who don't have them can be found on<BR>
the trav-tech list (trav-tech@quark.qrc.com or qrc.com) :-<BR>
<BR>
e.g. Digest 157 :-<BR>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 1998 02:29:51 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: radiator materials<BR>
<BR>
The thread ran approximately from Digests 150-157, and talks a bit about<BR>
candidate radiator materials, and the Definitive Sensor Rules.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:27:13 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Traveller Technical Architecture (was Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/29/00 at 09:40 AM,  "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Eris Reddoch wrote :-<BR>
<BR>
>> 2.  David Golden, et al. began work on something like this with<BR>
>> Marc's approval a long time ago.  That effort produced some things<BR>
>> that shouldn't have to be duplicated.<BR>
<BR>
>Are you referring to the GDW-beta (later Trav-Tech) list?<BR>
<BR>
No, I'm not.  This was the Traveller Technical Architecture list.<BR>
It was a private forum for editing, fixing, and expanding the<BR>
Traveller Technical Architecture, ie FFS.  David Golden was/is list<BR>
owner and this was with the knowledge of, and occasional input from,<BR>
Marc Miller.  If you want more information you'll have to talk to<BR>
David or Marc.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 11:27:38 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
Larry Niven (again) ... fun with ringworlds...a superconducting grid in the floor<BR>
of the ringworld would allow you to fool around with the magnetic field of the<BR>
sun at the centre (btw...no mention of what the fields would do to the sophs on<BR>
the ringworld...lotsa scrambled brains i think)...once your sun is out of fuel<BR>
you *should* be at ramming velocity and the only problem would be stopping...<BR>
<BR>
Other Rob<BR>
<BR>
Thing wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >Rather than move the asteroid, why not move the planet.  Sure,<BR>
> >it is a "tad" larger, but everyone is already on it and if<BR>
> >you could just get them to all get on one side and "push"....<BR>
><BR>
> This reminds me...<BR>
><BR>
> I remember some scientist or someone in a magazine advocating interstellar<BR>
> journies by moving the sun.  Inducing and keeping a large flare to move the<BR>
> sun towards the system you want to visit and having it take the planets with<BR>
> it.  You get the convienence of not having to leave your home but you end up<BR>
> buring off 15-40% of the suns mass in the increased fusion needed to produce<BR>
> this huge drive plume.<BR>
><BR>
> I could see some culture developing this form of interstelar drive as a<BR>
> varient of the Darrian star trigger technology and coming to pay the Imperium<BR>
> a visit.<BR>
><BR>
> G.D.D.<BR>
> ThingUnderTheStairs.<BR>
> =====================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:34:55 -0500<BR>
From: Richard Wilson <rtwilson@rollanet.org><BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
At 08:53 AM 7/28/00 -0400, you wrote:<BR>
>On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> > Just keep in mind that asteroids move *relative to each other*. Except<BR>
> > for asteroids that are actually orbiting each other, they'll all have<BR>
> > different orbits, which means that your neighbors this month (if you<BR>
> > can call something tens to hundreds of thousands of km away a<BR>
> > "neighbor" will be *millilions* of km away next month.<BR>
><BR>
>I believe Larry Niven addresses this issue (the politics of "variable<BR>
>geography" in an inhabited asteroid belt) in the sequel to "The Mote in<BR>
>God's Eye" (whose title has, unfortunately, slipped my mind).<BR>
><BR>
>                                                             - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
The Gripping Hand.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Richard Wilson<BR>
<BR>
rtwilson@rollanet.org<BR>
<BR>
========================================================================<BR>
Humanity is not something we should aspire to. It is something we should<BR>
strive to overcome.<BR>
========================================================================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 22:15:13 EDT<BR>
From: GhanII@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
> > > Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. <BR>
> ><BR>
> > Where do you get those things?<BR>
><BR>
  The Toy Vault, Inc. booth at the San Diego Comic-Con had one (plush <BR>
Cthulhu) on display. I didn't pick up their pricing list.<BR>
<BR>
  Doug Snyder <BR>
      Who should post a message about the Spoof shown that combines The Real <BR>
World and The Phantom Menace and some of the skits at the Costume Contest.<BR>
   <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:13:21 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 vehicles<BR>
<BR>
The first thing is that we're going back to the Striker methodology of<BR>
armour-per-face.<BR>
<BR>
The second thing is that we're going to have an 'open' class of vehicle, to<BR>
deal with ride-on things.<BR>
<BR>
The third thing is that control systems needed are going to be related to<BR>
the mass and maximum speed of the vehicle. Every x% you are out by gets you<BR>
'Difficult to Operate', then up to 'Hard to Operate', the 'Impossible to<BR>
Operate'.<BR>
<BR>
As an example, the FS Jet Bike goes into the third category (a 1000 kmh-1<BR>
open-cockpit jet bike with mechanical controls ... ick).<BR>
<BR>
The fourth thing is I want is better maximum speeds. Can someone build me a<BR>
Volkswagon Beetle, a Maserati, a M113 and a Abrams under FFS2, and tell me<BR>
what numbers we need to make maximum speeds work.<BR>
<BR>
Combat vehicles should also get an 'agility' rating, which would be a<BR>
Driving DM when trying to dash from behind this building to behind that<BR>
hill.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 22:47:00 -0400<BR>
From: Joseph J Alberti Jr <albertijjr@juno.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Sector Maps<BR>
<BR>
Joseph J Alberti Jr <albertijjr@juno.com> writes:<BR>
> I am looking to create a sector map of Corridor Sector using Corridor<BR>
> Sector data.  Does a program exist that takes sector data and creates <BR>
> a sector map which cab be printed out?  I have seen sub-sector map<BR>
> creators, but have not found one that makes sector maps.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Many thanks to all of you who have given me help on this matter.  I will<BR>
try each of your suggestions over the weekend to determine which suits me<BR>
best (probably the one requiring the least programming skills, as a <BR>
historian by education, I have no practical experience in computer<BR>
programming of any sort; well ,come to think of it, I did learn FORTRAN<BR>
about 10 years ago, but have forgotten all of it, I do think it is even<BR>
used anymore.)<BR>
<BR>
To John Wood:  I like your idea of color coding the star systems within<BR>
the individual hexagon to give a clue to planetary characteristics.  I do<BR>
not have CC2, where is the best place to download it?<BR>
<BR>
Joe Alberti<BR>
"Long Live Emperor Dulinor!" <BR>
________________________________________________________________<BR>
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!<BR>
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!<BR>
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:<BR>
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:00:51 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: a campaign seed<BR>
<BR>
>All this talk of deep meaning behind Starship Troopers: The Movie (besides<BR>
>Verhoven having the military sense of a BoleWeeve) reminded me of a short<BR>
>story in Bruce Stirling's latest collection (another Leggy Starlitz<BR>
story!).<BR>
<BR>
Was it a Leggy Starlitz story? For some reason, I don't remember him making<BR>
an appearance. I'll have to reread it (it's about time I reread "A Good Old<BR>
Fashioned Future" anyway).<BR>
<BR>
(However, I've heard a rumor that Mr. Sterling wants to do a Leggy Starlitz<BR>
novel! Happy, Happy! Joy, Joy!)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2833<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za05.mx.aol.com (rly-za05.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.101]) by air-za03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:06:19 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:05:47 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id AAA04604;<BR>
	Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:05:35 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:04:30 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id AAA04546<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:04:30 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:04:30 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007290404.AAA04546@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2833<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2834</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/29/00 3:14:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, July 29 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2834<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
Re: FFS3 vehicles<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Testing....MIME slaying<BR>
Re: Testing - MIME slayingII<BR>
Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
Re: UPP lists, including TL mods<BR>
Alien vision (was Re: Imperial Army Uniform)<BR>
Re: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 21:56:31 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Army Uniform<BR>
<BR>
In mail, traveller@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com> wrote<BR>
><BR>
>>>> The armies of the Imperium are hundreds of separate forces, made<BR>
>>>> up of thousands of combat regiments, non-regimental support units,<BR>
>>>> high-level command groups..  So the standard Army color has to be<BR>
>>>> fairly neutral.  I chose gray.  Combat regiments have their own<BR>
>>>> dress uniforms, which can get quite colorful.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> <just to cause trouble> but what gray? Light, dark?  How about<BR>
>>> feldgrau (sp?)<BR>
>> <BR>
>> I believe I specified a dark gray.  <BR>
><BR>
> Are gray Imperial uniforms gray in the ultra violet and/or <BR>
> infra red colors that some aliens can see?<BR>
<BR>
Good question. One thing is for sure, *whatever* color they are, it<BR>
*will* be uniformly colored in *all* wavelengths used by known races.<BR>
As I understand it many "solid color" garments are anything *but*<BR>
uniformly colored at IR or UV wavelengths.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:11:00 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 vehicles<BR>
<BR>
On 29 Jul 00, at 10:13, Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> The first thing is that we're going back to the Striker methodology of<BR>
> armour-per-face.<BR>
<BR>
And Striker Turrets (boxes on boxes) rather than the silly FFS (one big box <BR>
and cut away).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:48:39 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Firstly, to weigh into the "canon" side of the battledress argument:<BR>
<BR>
The simple way of dealing with any battle dress design is to assume that the<BR>
"hard" parts of the suit are mainly for the powered exo-skeleton, because<BR>
that requires some rigidity to lift things.<BR>
<BR>
There is no need for skirts or special armour for joints because at TL12 (or<BR>
thereabouts) SuSAg invented a form of lycra/nylon that is 1000 times more<BR>
efficient than sorbothane at absorbing kinetic energy, and when mixed into a<BR>
weave with a carbon-fibre nano-tube mesh (insert similar sounding<BR>
techno-babble if you don't like CFNT's) configured as a room-temperature<BR>
superconductor , also provides similar levels of protection from energy<BR>
weapons.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, carbon-fibre nano-tubes are also a good way of explaining how the<BR>
chameleon suit works(as they are currently being used to create large size<BR>
colour "LCD" screens that can be folded or rolled).<BR>
<BR>
This also explains why the RCES "skin-suit" has an armour value, it's a just<BR>
a cheaper and much thinner weave of the same material.<BR>
<BR>
To explain the much higher armour value of battle-dress and the fact that<BR>
battle dress does (canonically) have "plates" on it, the nylon material,<BR>
while providing most of the protection, can still overload and become<BR>
brittle, at which point it can crack and thus be unusable. So the outer<BR>
plates are designed merely to spread the impact over the underlying layer of<BR>
nylon armour in attempt to prevent localized impact point failure of the<BR>
nylon armour.<BR>
<BR>
This means that the joints are still weaker than the plates, but not<BR>
significantly so, the plates just make the armour last longer.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
To continue a discussion about non-cannoical battledress :<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :<BR>
> My arguments above have *nothing to do with how the user's movements<BR>
> are conveyed to the suit. They have to do with the purely geometrical<BR>
> problem of fitting the user and the suit together.<BR>
<BR>
No, your arguments are about movement.<BR>
See, in the next three paragraphs you talk about movement all the time :<BR>
<BR>
> And unless the armor *and* the "drivers" for moving it are thin as<BR>
> cloth, you'll have to have cutouts for movement. Heck, if you've ever<BR>
> worn a heavy coat with old style insulation (batton padding and the<BR>
> like), you'll have had it bunch up on the inside if the elbow.<BR>
><BR>
> Also, consider that the absolute limit on the motion of your foream is<BR>
> when it touchs your biceps. In armor, the limit is reached sooner<BR>
> because of when the armor over your forearm touches the armor over your<BR>
> biceps.<BR>
><BR>
> The farther from the elbow you cut back the armor, the closer to a<BR>
> "normal" range of motion you'll get. Alas, that also means you get less<BR>
> protection near the elbow.<BR>
<BR>
And, you're talking about how the _user_ has to move, not how the _suit_<BR>
has to move.<BR>
<BR>
As long as the body and head of the suit is large enough to contain all or<BR>
most of the user,<BR>
where and how the legs and arms of the suit move, and even if the suit has<BR>
legs or arms, are irrelevant to how, or whether, the user can move.<BR>
<BR>
Frankly, once you have grav there is no conceptual difference between<BR>
battledress and a grav tank, other than the number of crew.<BR>
<BR>
Battledress is too heavy to move without power anyway, and it's almost<BR>
certainly less efficient to operate limbs than to float on grav and thrust,<BR>
so why even bother with the legs?<BR>
<BR>
Even if the suit does have legs, they do not _have_ to move when or where<BR>
the user's legs do.<BR>
<BR>
Consider a suit where the suit can run at high speed in one direction while<BR>
the user, and the weaponry are facing the other way, like a tank can, except<BR>
with legs. The suit is told to start running toward a certain location<BR>
identified either by co-ordinates or visual designation by the pilot, and<BR>
then the upper torso revolves 180 degrees and the pilot concentrates on<BR>
firing, his legs doing nothing.<BR>
<BR>
The same arguments apply to arms.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:13:11 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Testing....MIME slaying<BR>
<BR>
No it wasn't.<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Rodney Basler<BR>
Sent: Saturday, 29 July 2000 10:10<BR>
To: 'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
Subject: Testing....MIME slaying<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Just testing - plain text format<BR>
        Rod Basler, COFIT<BR>
- --------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Disclaimer - they just pay me; it's not their fault<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 02:35:48 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Testing - MIME slayingII<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 15:12:21 -0700<BR>
>From: Rodney Basler <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand<BR>
>this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Unfortunately the MIME remains unslayed.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 02:41:13 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 19:54:17 -0700<BR>
>From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
><BR>
>> Could someone with FF&S2 please open it to page 70?<BR>
>><BR>
>> If could do that, then I have a problem.  As someone who loves his FF&S,<BR>
>I<BR>
><BR>
>Err, I'm afraid I have just opened mine to P70, to be greeted by the sight<BR>
>of two people playing The What's In This Bottle Game. Which was slightly<BR>
>surreal, but doesn't seem to appear anywhere else in the book.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Splort!<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 01:23:18 -0700<BR>
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: UPP lists, including TL mods<BR>
<BR>
Peter Newman wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
><BR>
> > Here's a list of all possible UPP stats, with TL mod and how<BR>
> > many times the combo appears (out of 46,656).<BR>
><BR>
> Very nice work Leonard, now can you compile them into a<BR>
> percentile table so that we will simply have to roll<BR>
> 2d46,656 to generate a UPP?<BR>
><BR>
> Then all we will need are 1d36 for the starport & 1d6 for<BR>
> the tech level and we will be set, although we may need<BR>
> 2d36 to roll for Scout and naval bases.<BR>
><BR>
> OTOH if each face of our die 46,656 has an area of 1 sq. cm<BR>
> than our die (if roughly spherical) will be what about 80<BR>
> cm high? If we make them I am sure some gamers will buy<BR>
> them. :)<BR>
<BR>
Hey I missed this list?<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Evyn...<BR>
<BR>
C-Space home http://home.att.net/~wmacdude/<BR>
<BR>
When Spring comes back with rustling shade,<BR>
And apple blossoms fills the air,<BR>
I have a rendezvous with Death,<BR>
When spring brings back blue days and fair.<BR>
 Legionnaire Alan Seeger, KIA the Somme.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 22:02:35 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Alien vision (was Re: Imperial Army Uniform)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Technically I don't think colours in the IR/UV ranges can be compared to<BR>
> colours in the visible spectrum, but for simplicities sake let's say yes :).<BR>
> It's the old philosophiccal question, do you and I see the same thing when<BR>
> we look at something blue?<BR>
<BR>
"Black", "white", and "gray" are definiable regardless of spectrum.<BR>
<BR>
Black: near zero reflectivity at all (visible) wavelengths<BR>
<BR>
White: near total *diffuse* reflectivity at all (visible) wavelengths<BR>
        (diffuse, because if it wasn't diffuse, it'd be a mirror :-)<BR>
<BR>
Gray: equal, diffuse reflectivity at all (visible) wavelengths.<BR>
<BR>
Non-"grayscale" stuff rapidly gets weird. For one thing, even two races<BR>
that have the same upper and lower limits on their visual range, and<BR>
can both see colors, may *not* see the same colors. <BR>
<BR>
You see, color vision requires at least two sets of receptors with<BR>
notably *different* response curves to differing wavelengths. We use<BR>
three (I think). Folks with one missing set of receptors are partially<BR>
color blind. They can see colors, but to them colors we consider<BR>
different look the same (for example, red & green).<BR>
<BR>
So aliens with more receptors will draw distinctions we'll be unable to<BR>
see. And we'll draw distinctions that aliens with fewer receptors won't<BR>
see.<BR>
<BR>
Worse yet, if the aliens use *different* visual pigments than we do,<BR>
they'll experience colors differently than we do. At a guess, what we<BR>
see as differing "shades" of a particular color they might see as<BR>
unrelated colors. And vice versa. <BR>
<BR>
Now consider that color displays are designed around the sensitivy<BR>
curves of *human* visual pigments. They mix red, green and blue light<BR>
to produce a *sensation* the same as a particular color. But to an<BR>
alien with different visual pigments, the "color balance" (hue &<BR>
chroma?) is likely to be *way* off. <BR>
<BR>
This means problems with color displays in starports. Or any time one<BR>
species tries to use color displays set up for another species.<BR>
<BR>
Thankfully, since you'd likely need to have displays in different<BR>
languages in port facilities, you might as well have them on seperate<BR>
monitors, adjusted appropriately for the species in question.<BR>
<BR>
Interior decor could get interesting as well. Colors that seem muted to<BR>
one species may be "neon" to another. Likewise, colors that "go<BR>
together" are apt to be *very* species dependent.<BR>
<BR>
That nicely co-ordinated burgundy and dark blue outfit may be horribly<BR>
clashing in the eyes of some other species. And you'll want to avert<BR>
your eyes at the screaming red and green pattern on their clothes. <BR>
<BR>
BTW, there's a nice article in the Septemember Analog that mentions<BR>
some stuff about just *how* differently aliens could be, simple due to<BR>
differences in brain sctructure or how their visual system (and other<BR>
senses) are "wired". <BR>
<BR>
My examples assume that their brains and eyes work *just* like ours,<BR>
except that they sense colors differently at the *physical* level. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 22:32:47 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Martian Metals grav tank<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Another item from GDW was a black plastic three-ring notebook binder with<BR>
> the Traveller logo on it. These were sold directly from GDW in the very<BR>
> early 80's.<BR>
<BR>
I'd *love* to have one of those. Except I'd be afraid to use it. <BR>
<BR>
Sounds like something for Far Future Enterprises or SJG to re-issue.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 22:36:13 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
><BR>
>> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>>> The movie plot and script aside, I thought that Starship Troopers handled<BR>
>>> the space station rather well.  The ships could dock to the edge of the<BR>
>>> station as well as land on the upper hull, as many did after getting <BR>
><BR>
>> Haven't seen it. Not likely to either.<BR>
><BR>
> What you have a problem with a movie that features characters<BR>
> _outrunning_ the blast from a nuclear weapon? A movie that <BR>
> features the destruction of BA by an asteroid launched many <BR>
> light years away. A movie whose troopers are less combat <BR>
> equipped than a WW I infantry unit. Etc.<BR>
><BR>
> Forget about all that and go rent it anyway, not only is it<BR>
> funny in a MS2K way but it features both Casper van Diem (drool)<BR>
> in a shower scene and Denise Richards (drool) as well as one of <BR>
> the funniest scenes in any movie: Neil Patrick Harris as a <BR>
> psychic  and wearing a _very_ campy Doogie Houser: SS kind of <BR>
> uniform.<BR>
<BR>
Not this month. I watched "Event Horizon" on Fox last night. It was bad<BR>
enough. Let's see:<BR>
<BR>
No, thirty gees *won't* "liquefy your skeleton". <BR>
<BR>
Why did it take 56 days to get to Neptune if they can do thirty gees<BR>
long enough to need those damn tanks?<BR>
<BR>
While the explosive charges to seperate the two parts of the ship<BR>
*were* a reasonable idea (*I* would certainly want to be able to<BR>
jettison a drive section that used an "artifical black hole" :-),<BR>
explosive bolts work just fine, and can't be used as demolition charges<BR>
by crazy crew members.<BR>
<BR>
We won't discuss the ship just *floating* in Neptunes atmosphere.<BR>
<BR>
More obscure mistakes.<BR>
<BR>
If there was air, the tools etc would have quit spinning long ago. Air<BR>
friction will take a long time to do it, but it *will* slow the spins.<BR>
<BR>
Likewise, *internal* friction will damp out the gryrations of liquid<BR>
globules. In *minutes*. Hours at most.<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav:<BR>
<BR>
This is neat detail to spring on a party. Have an NPC comment on the<BR>
fact that the stuff in the abandoned ship must have been disturbed<BR>
*recently* or it wouldn't be moving this way. <BR>
<BR>
Heck, it could be a forensic technique. Introduce an optical fiber<BR>
connected to a camera (to reduce the amount of disturbance, and record<BR>
the motions of object. Then a computer can intergrate the motion with<BR>
temp & pressure data to figure out what the possible combinations of<BR>
disturbing force and time since disturbance are.<BR>
<BR>
Even the simple visual observations would be fun:<BR>
<BR>
"Hold it. There's someone around."<BR>
<BR>
"What makes you think that?"<BR>
<BR>
"See those globs of blood floating over there? They wouldn't be<BR>
wiggling like that if it had been more than 15-30 minutes since that<BR>
poor guy bled out. And the surface would be partially dried. So, since<BR>
it took us an hour to match orbits, and nothing left this ship during<BR>
that time, whoever or whatever killed him is still here..."<BR>
<BR>
"<censored><censored><*CENSORED*>"<BR>
<BR>
<eg><BR>
<BR>
Ain't it fun playing with players' minds?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 22:54:29 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
>> If anyone else thinks they can write a better set of design rules than<BR>
>> who I've asked to do it, please feel free to chip in.<BR>
><BR>
> I have a couple of additional wishes/suggestions for the next <BR>
> version of "Fire, Fusion, and Steel":<BR>
><BR>
> I wish that practical reaction drives became available slightly earlier,<BR>
> (at Tech Level 9) became obsolete slightly later (at Tech Level 12, or<BR>
> perhaps even 13).  I have no problem with reactionless drives being<BR>
> absolutely dominant at very high Tech Levels (14 or better), but at Tech<BR>
> Levels 11, 12, and perhaps even 13, reactionless drives should still "have<BR>
> plenty of room for improvement," while HEPlaR should be mature and "fully<BR>
> optimized."  It might be nice if there was an "inferior HEPlaR-like<BR>
> reaction drive" available at Tech Level 9, "standard HEPlaR" available at<BR>
> Tech Levels 10 and 11, and "superior HEPlaR" available at Tech Level 12.  <BR>
> Likewise, it would be nice if "inferior Thruster Plates" become available<BR>
> at Tech Level 11 or 12, with the introduction of "standard Thruster<BR>
> Plates" being delayed until Tech Level 13 or so...<BR>
><BR>
> I love reaction drives.  I wish that a "high tech" reaction drive was<BR>
> available to replace "superior HEPlaR" (see above) at Tech Level 13, and<BR>
> give Thruster Plates some serious competition at Tech Levels 14 or 15.<BR>
> Perhaps something involving antimatter?  Big, hideously expensive to<BR>
> keep supplied with fuel, fragile, and generally dangerous, but still<BR>
> effective... Perhaps the *Imperium* thinks such a drive isn't suitable for<BR>
> installation aboard its warships, but I can see wacky and/or suicidal<BR>
> Vargr riding antimatter rockets...<BR>
<BR>
Well, one thing that'd help would be if someone came up with a way to<BR>
stabilize monoatomic hydrogen (ie H, rather than H2). As I recall, this<BR>
gives a *chemical* rocket with an ISP approaching the preliminary NERVA<BR>
designs ( 2H -> H2 yiels a *lot* of energy, and the exhaust is about as<BR>
low a molecular weight as you can get).<BR>
<BR>
Anybody know what the Isp of "single-H" is?<BR>
<BR>
Antimatter is neat for a drive in that you can design a constant<BR>
mass-ration into the ship, and just alter the ratio of antimatter to<BR>
reaction mass to get a *wide* range of Isp.<BR>
<BR>
>> Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants from<BR>
>> TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant, that<BR>
>> basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of <BR>
> plutonium.<BR>
>> Note that if we keep the 'big' TL9-11 fusion plants, then many Interstellar<BR>
>> Wars/Long Night/Lo-tech el-cheapo starships are going to run on fission, so<BR>
>> (say) a better TL10 fission plant will have a big impact. Many belters etc<BR>
>> would also probably have a small fission plant stashed away, just in case<BR>
>> something goes wrong with the main power plant.<BR>
><BR>
> Yes!  Absolutely, positively, yes, please!  <BR>
<BR>
Yeah, I'm fond of fission rockets of the type from Heinlein stories and<BR>
the like. I've got to design a Free Trader than has a fision power<BR>
plant and a seperate fission rocket for propulsion. Just the thing for<BR>
someone knocking about on the fringes, because it can last a lot longer<BR>
on simple maintenace, and the hydrogen doesn't need "filtering" before<BR>
going thru the rocket. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:01:16 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> <sigh> and then there's tensors to deal with...<BR>
><BR>
> <whirBLAMBLAMBLAM><BR>
><BR>
> Sorry guys, he mentioned the evil T-word. My point defence is programmed to<BR>
> respond autonomously. <wags finger> Naughty boy, now don't say it again.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, but would you answer a question for me? <BR>
<BR>
Scalars have just a magnitude. <BR>
Vectors have a magnitude and direction.<BR>
T*ns*rs have a magnitude (or is it magnitudes?) and *two* directions.<BR>
<BR>
Is there a "next step"? If so, would it be of any use in describing<BR>
phenomena in a 4d (space & time) universe?<BR>
<BR>
Hmmm. Maybe that "next step" is used in jump calcs...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:09:01 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Solid core fission rockets TTL 6-7<BR>
> Nuclear salt water rockets TTL 7+<BR>
> Orion TTL 6+<BR>
> Ion rockets TTL 6-7+<BR>
> Solar sails TTL 6+<BR>
> Magsails TTL 7+<BR>
> Mini-magnetospheric plasma propulsion TTL 8-9+<BR>
> Gasdynamic mirror fusion rockets TTL 9+<BR>
> Laser propulsion TTL 9+<BR>
> Inertial confinement fusion TTL 9+<BR>
> Antimatter catalysed fusion TTL 9+ (need a reasonable supply of<BR>
> antiprotons).<BR>
> Bussard diluted fusion product (DFP) drives (HePLAR, effectively) TTL 9+<BR>
><BR>
> Specific impulses should be capped at about 10^6 seconds or so (upper<BR>
> bound of theoretical efficiency for DFP rockets).<BR>
<BR>
An Isp of 1e6 means an exhaust velocity of 1/30th of c. <g><BR>
<BR>
> I suppose neutrino drives and high thrust photon rockets (?!) could<BR>
> represent the limits of reaction drive tech at the higher TTLs.<BR>
<BR>
A photon rocket that gives noticable thrust is going to be a weapon<BR>
capable of carving up planets if it's focused, or frying them if it<BR>
isn't.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:21:02 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 01:52 PM 7/28/2000 +0100, you wrote:<BR>
>>The Mote in Murcheson's Eye<BR>
><BR>
> That was the original title for MiGE.  The sequel is "The Gripping Hand".<BR>
<BR>
On *this* side of the Atlantic. The title is different in the UK. And<BR>
rather similar to the one you quote from the previous poster.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:25:45 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Here's another proposal for eliminating Really Big Ships:<BR>
><BR>
> Tie the amount of thrust produced by a reactionless drive to its<BR>
> *surface area*, rather than to its *volume* (they're called<BR>
> "thruster PLATES" for a reason...)<BR>
>                                                      - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
I *like* it. And tie it to TL as well. But be sure that the progession<BR>
is *not* straight line. Because at *some* point, such progressions<BR>
always turn into nightmares. Maybe an asymptotic curve? <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:14:04 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>> Just keep in mind that asteroids move *relative to each other*. Except<BR>
>> for asteroids that are actually orbiting each other, they'll all have<BR>
>> different orbits, which means that your neighbors this month (if you<BR>
>> can call something tens to hundreds of thousands of km away a<BR>
>> "neighbor" will be *millilions* of km away next month. <BR>
><BR>
> I believe Larry Niven addresses this issue (the politics of "variable<BR>
> geography" in an inhabited asteroid belt) in the sequel to "The Mote in<BR>
> God's Eye" (whose title has, unfortunately, slipped my mind).<BR>
<BR>
More likely Pournelle. He did a fact article *long* ago (collected with<BR>
others in "A Step Farther Out") that had a title something along the<BR>
lines of "Those Pesky Belters and their <something> drives". He did a<BR>
pretty good job of showing that the typical "Belter" society of many an<BR>
SF story just wouldn't work. By the time drives are good enough to make<BR>
hopping around the belt simple, it's ridiculously easy to lift stuff<BR>
out of gravity wells.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:45:31 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> So I say we should be crippling the big ships, not making them illegal.<BR>
> Radiators were a good suggestion, and there have been others.<BR>
<BR>
Don't forget that radiators *also* make it possible to cripple a ship<BR>
without destroying it. <BR>
<BR>
One item that needs to go in is efficiency of pwer plants. That is, how<BR>
many MW of heat does it produce for every *useful* MW it produces. At<BR>
90% efficiency, you get .9 MW of power and .1 MW of heat. At 99%, you<BR>
get .99 MW and .01 MW heat. Or in a more useful form, for each MW of<BR>
useful power you get (1/efficiency)-1 MW of heat.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, power *storage* devices, such as batteries have an input<BR>
efficiency (ie how many MW do you have to feed in to get an MW out,<BR>
with the difference being heat). They also have an output efficiency,<BR>
but I think we can just call them the same for design purposes.<BR>
<BR>
Other systems need a heat output figure based on the power they are<BR>
using. <BR>
<BR>
As TLs go up, efficiency increases. With 100% being the (usually<BR>
unobtainable) ideal. <BR>
<BR>
At 100%, you generate no "waste heat". On the other hand, the energy<BR>
that goes into everything but radios and weapons will eventually wind<BR>
up as heat anyway. <BR>
<BR>
For example, a 100% efficient light bulb will convert all the energy<BR>
fed to it to light. But that light turns into heat as it's absorbed by<BR>
the walls, people, etc.<BR>
<BR>
I think we can skip detailing this, and just roll it into the power<BR>
requirements of the systems. The higher TL will result in less power<BR>
required, but all the power winds up as heat. That's likely easier to<BR>
work with and to explain.<BR>
<BR>
An exception *could* be made for radios, radar, and beam weapons, but I<BR>
don't know if it's worth the hassles. Opinions?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:06:52 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/27/00 at 10:41 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
><BR>
>>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>>> Hum, that's an idea.  You don't need Superdense or Bonded Superdense<BR>
>>> to build hulls for civilian ships, but if you want really thick<BR>
>>> armor that's the way to go.  Maybe making the Superdense materials<BR>
>>> much more expensive would help?<BR>
><BR>
>>Well... Ships, even civilian ones, need *heavy* shielding against stellar<BR>
>>flares.<BR>
><BR>
> Crystal Iron won't do?  <g> <BR>
<BR>
Unless it's a lot *denser* than regular iron, no, it won't. You'd need<BR>
several *meters* to provide adequate shielding, if I recall correctly.<BR>
<BR>
> Civilian ships don't *need* superdense, and certainly not bonded or<BR>
> enhanced bonded superdense to be shielded. <BR>
<BR>
Superdense would help, simply by getting more mass into less space.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2834<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (rly-zd01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.225]) by air-zd05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 06:14:24 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 06:13:35 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id GAA19577;<BR>
	Sat, 29 Jul 2000 06:13:26 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 29 Jul 2000 06:13:08 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id GAA19353<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 06:13:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 06:13:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007291013.GAA19353@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2834<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2835</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/29/00 9:35:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, July 29 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2835<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Adventure ideas<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Re: Scales<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
Murchison's Eye (Was: Balkanized systems)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
Re: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
Re: Sector Maps<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Traveller Links<BR>
Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:27:20 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Adventure ideas<BR>
<BR>
For those of you with players who didn't grow up reading Andre Norton's<BR>
SF stuff, here are a few of her novels that you should be able to find<BR>
easily and convert into adventures. Note that her Forerunners are not<BR>
incompatible with the Ancients, but would be (several!) seperate races.<BR>
<BR>
"The Beast Master" War vet can't return home, because the war destroyed<BR>
the planet. He and his team (animals in the book, could be changed to a<BR>
player party without too much trouble) try to settle on a sparsely<BR>
populated planet (a major industry is more or less equivalent to cattle<BR>
ranching). He doesn't fit in well, and stumbles into a combo of<BR>
rustlers and some forerunner artifacts. There's a sequel "Lord of<BR>
Thunder" that I don't recall much about.<BR>
<BR>
"Night of Masks", a refugee (from the "Dipple" a displaced persons<BR>
"camp") is recruited to impersonate the imaginary friend of a rich<BR>
man's son to aid in kidnapping him. He and the boy are taken to a<BR>
planet with an "infrared sun" (use a brown dwarf). An escape attempt<BR>
when he has a change of heart involves a lot of encounters with the<BR>
local terrain and lifeforms, all while dependent of IR goggles to be<BR>
able to see anything.<BR>
<BR>
"Catseye". Another refugee (Norton used a lot of them). Alien ruins,<BR>
geneticaly engineered cats (psionic), the Theives Guild<BR>
<BR>
Just a small sample. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:09:10 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/28/00 at 08:20 PM,  "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> <BR>
> said:<BR>
><BR>
>>> Crystal Iron won't do?  <g><BR>
>>><BR>
>>> Civilian ships don't *need* superdense, and certainly not bonded or<BR>
>>> enhanced bonded superdense to be shielded.<BR>
><BR>
>>Yeah they do. Superdense is a lot cheaoer. It's thinner for any given<BR>
>>protection. The material itself is cheaper (IIRC) and the savings it<BR>
>>hands on to M-drive, power plant and (if you use HEPlaR) fuel tankage<BR>
>>eating into cargo space are greater still.<BR>
><BR>
> Nick, that's right as things stand now, but that wasn't my point.<BR>
> If you make the dense materials more expensive..a *lot* more<BR>
> expensive...then civilian ships won't use it.  It might still be<BR>
> worthwhile for military ships where you want high protection/high<BR>
> velocity.  This would keep civilian ships smaller and no more<BR>
> expensive while letting military ships be larger but a whole lot<BR>
> more expensive.<BR>
<BR>
I'm reminded of the program I saw lthe other night. It was about huge<BR>
skyscrapers. The comment I recall was a designer discussing how he<BR>
settled on the material for some parts of the building.<BR>
<BR>
He didn't like the look of stainless steel. He found that titanium<BR>
looked nice (it does! it looks like silver, rather than steel). Then he<BR>
found out that it was 4 times as expensive as stainless steel. then he<BR>
found out that because it was lighter and stronger he could use half as<BR>
much.<BR>
<BR>
If superdense can provide better shielding than the same mass of<BR>
crystal iron (or whatever), then it's better for the job. If it's also<BR>
*stronger* that's even better.<BR>
<BR>
So the cost has to be high enough to offset *both* factors. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 00:17:50 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Scales<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> One possibility would be making "plaster" casts of the master, then<BR>
>> using that to make wax figures, which can then be used for high detail<BR>
>> lost wax castings.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> But this takes extra time and effort. <BR>
><BR>
> Actually, the waxes would be poured into the same rubber mold.<BR>
<BR>
Depends. The post I was replying to claimed that the rubber didn't<BR>
reproduce fine detail well.<BR>
<BR>
> The wax pieces would then be covered in a plaster (called<BR>
> "investment"), burned out, then cast.<BR>
<BR>
I know. I was apprenticed to a jeweler for a while. We did a number of<BR>
these using an improvised "steam casting" system (you pour the metal<BR>
into the molded in "funnel" in the top of the mold, then slap the flat<BR>
end of a raw potato onto it. the resulting steam pushes the metal into<BR>
the fine details better than even a centrifugal casting setup)<BR>
<BR>
> If you used silver you could get decent detail, but the lost wax<BR>
> process also involves shrinkage (in both the wax, and the metal<BR>
> casting).<BR>
<BR>
Type metal (quite close to the alloys that used to be used for<BR>
miniatures) *expands* slightly as it cools, forcing it into the fine<BR>
details of the mold. Which gave nice *sharp* type on Linotype units.<BR>
<BR>
> Resin will give best detail every time (not counting those crappy<BR>
> casts with bubbles, that's just sloppy work by people who don't know<BR>
> what they're doing).<BR>
<BR>
Type metal should do as well if not better, and avoid bubbles nicely. <BR>
<BR>
But I'm not sure what the new laws about lead content might have to say<BR>
about selling such minatures. :-(<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:35:59 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/28/00 at 12:31 PM,  "Brian Jenkins" <BR>
> <Brian.Jenkins@grpwise1.westek.com> said:<BR>
><BR>
>>Sorry, I just have to put my .02 credit in.<BR>
><BR>
>>As usual I am outta my depth in the technical discussions but I do know<BR>
>>one reason that I liked smaller ships, and still do.<BR>
><BR>
>>I think they make for better adventures!<BR>
><BR>
> I agree with you, and that's why I'm harping on this. <g><BR>
><BR>
>>Ok, go back to intelligent discussion now.<BR>
>                                  <BR>
> Okay, so radiator surfaces.....<BR>
><BR>
> Right now, FFS2 gives the following for fusion power plants.<BR>
><BR>
>        Area      Area Needed for         Area Needed for a<BR>
>  TL  (m^2/MW)     a 2,000 MW PP    40,000 EP (30,000,000 MW PP)<BR>
>  --------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
>   9    1.0          2,000              30,000,000  impossible<BR>
>  10    0.1            200               3,000,000  impossible<BR>
>  11    0.1            200               3,000,000  impossible<BR>
>  12    0.01            20                 300,000  impossible<BR>
>  13    0.01            20                 300,000  impossible<BR>
>  14    0.001            2                  30,000     14%<BR>
>  15    0.001            2                  30,000     14%<BR>
>  16    0.001            2                  30,000     14%<BR>
>  <BR>
> One thousand MW per meter!  Does it strike anyone as even remotely<BR>
> reasonable?  It looks like magic radiators arrive at TL 14, and<BR>
> suddenly make huge ships possible to me. <BR>
><BR>
> Shadow suggested using "more reasonable" area requirements.  So,<BR>
> Leonard, do you want to make a concrete suggestion as to what might<BR>
> be more reasonable?<BR>
<BR>
Not until I can dig up the formula that relates "MW/m^2" to "temp". <BR>
<BR>
I could also use the formula that takes the "input" and "exhaust" temps<BR>
of a heat engine and gives the amount of energy that can be produced. I<BR>
intend to use it to calculate power requirements for refrigeration/heat<BR>
pumps.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 11:41:22 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
> Don't forget that radiators *also* make it possible to cripple a ship<BR>
> without destroying it.<BR>
<BR>
No, it's even better than that. External sensor antennae make it possible<BR>
to cripple a ship by blinding it. External radiators slowly reduce the<BR>
power available to the ship as he takes light damage. He still has the<BR>
power available, but daren't operate the reactors at full power because he<BR>
can't get rid of the heat. I like the idea of ships having to juggle energy<BR>
as they lose radiator surfaces, and it makes fighters useful again. Sure,<BR>
we can't penetrate his armour, but we can force him to stop firing that<BR>
f**%*& meson gun...<BR>
<BR>
NB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 11:42:45 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller (Was: ... for Newbies)<BR>
<BR>
> If superdense can provide better shielding than the same mass of<BR>
> crystal iron (or whatever), then it's better for the job. If it's also<BR>
> *stronger* that's even better.<BR>
<BR>
That was exactly my point. But I concede I was talking slightly at cross<BR>
purposes to Eris.<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 14:41:46 +0400<BR>
From: "Andrew Long" <dyrnwynn@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Murchison's Eye (Was: Balkanized systems)<BR>
<BR>
As I recall, the UK title for 'The Gripping Hand' was 'The Moat around<BR>
Murchison's Eye'<BR>
<BR>
Andy<BR>
<BR>
========================================================<BR>
Andrew Long  eMail: Dyrnwynn@hotmail.com<BR>
c/o EPMTS  Phone: +971 2 681 3100<BR>
P.O. Box 46426  Fax: +971 2 681 3802<BR>
Abu Dhabi  GSM: +971 50 661 0254<BR>
United Arab Emirates<BR>
========================================================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 04:06:51 -0700<BR>
From: "J-Man" <j-man@iname.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Event Horizon was a thoroughly worthless movie.  I really felt cheated out<BR>
of my money when I went to see it at the theatre.<BR>
___________________________________________________________<BR>
 J-Man<BR>
 ICQ# 2843475<BR>
 Washington - U.S.A.<BR>
 Email : j-man@iname.com<BR>
 Home Page : http://www.gocsystems.com/<BR>
___________________________________________________________<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Leonard Erickson" <shadow@krypton.rain.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 11:36 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> ><BR>
> >> In mail you write:<BR>
> ><BR>
> >>> The movie plot and script aside, I thought that Starship Troopers<BR>
handled<BR>
> >>> the space station rather well.  The ships could dock to the edge of<BR>
the<BR>
> >>> station as well as land on the upper hull, as many did after getting<BR>
> ><BR>
> >> Haven't seen it. Not likely to either.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > What you have a problem with a movie that features characters<BR>
> > _outrunning_ the blast from a nuclear weapon? A movie that<BR>
> > features the destruction of BA by an asteroid launched many<BR>
> > light years away. A movie whose troopers are less combat<BR>
> > equipped than a WW I infantry unit. Etc.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Forget about all that and go rent it anyway, not only is it<BR>
> > funny in a MS2K way but it features both Casper van Diem (drool)<BR>
> > in a shower scene and Denise Richards (drool) as well as one of<BR>
> > the funniest scenes in any movie: Neil Patrick Harris as a<BR>
> > psychic  and wearing a _very_ campy Doogie Houser: SS kind of<BR>
> > uniform.<BR>
><BR>
> Not this month. I watched "Event Horizon" on Fox last night. It was bad<BR>
> enough. Let's see:<BR>
><BR>
> No, thirty gees *won't* "liquefy your skeleton".<BR>
><BR>
> Why did it take 56 days to get to Neptune if they can do thirty gees<BR>
> long enough to need those damn tanks?<BR>
><BR>
> While the explosive charges to seperate the two parts of the ship<BR>
> *were* a reasonable idea (*I* would certainly want to be able to<BR>
> jettison a drive section that used an "artifical black hole" :-),<BR>
> explosive bolts work just fine, and can't be used as demolition charges<BR>
> by crazy crew members.<BR>
><BR>
> We won't discuss the ship just *floating* in Neptunes atmosphere.<BR>
><BR>
> More obscure mistakes.<BR>
><BR>
> If there was air, the tools etc would have quit spinning long ago. Air<BR>
> friction will take a long time to do it, but it *will* slow the spins.<BR>
><BR>
> Likewise, *internal* friction will damp out the gryrations of liquid<BR>
> globules. In *minutes*. Hours at most.<BR>
><BR>
> ObTrav:<BR>
><BR>
> This is neat detail to spring on a party. Have an NPC comment on the<BR>
> fact that the stuff in the abandoned ship must have been disturbed<BR>
> *recently* or it wouldn't be moving this way.<BR>
><BR>
> Heck, it could be a forensic technique. Introduce an optical fiber<BR>
> connected to a camera (to reduce the amount of disturbance, and record<BR>
> the motions of object. Then a computer can intergrate the motion with<BR>
> temp & pressure data to figure out what the possible combinations of<BR>
> disturbing force and time since disturbance are.<BR>
><BR>
> Even the simple visual observations would be fun:<BR>
><BR>
> "Hold it. There's someone around."<BR>
><BR>
> "What makes you think that?"<BR>
><BR>
> "See those globs of blood floating over there? They wouldn't be<BR>
> wiggling like that if it had been more than 15-30 minutes since that<BR>
> poor guy bled out. And the surface would be partially dried. So, since<BR>
> it took us an hour to match orbits, and nothing left this ship during<BR>
> that time, whoever or whatever killed him is still here..."<BR>
><BR>
> "<censored><censored><*CENSORED*>"<BR>
><BR>
> <eg><BR>
><BR>
> Ain't it fun playing with players' minds?<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 08:01:02 -0400<BR>
From: michael stasica <stosh@sympatico.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
J-Man wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Event Horizon was a thoroughly worthless movie.  I really felt cheated out<BR>
> of my money when I went to see it at the theatre.<BR>
<BR>
I can understand that.  I felt unclean just having it play on my TV.<BR>
<BR>
Michael<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 03:45:02 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> To continue a discussion about non-cannoical battledress :<BR>
><BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote :<BR>
>> My arguments above have *nothing to do with how the user's movements<BR>
>> are conveyed to the suit. They have to do with the purely geometrical<BR>
>> problem of fitting the user and the suit together.<BR>
><BR>
> No, your arguments are about movement.<BR>
<BR>
Re-read what I said. I said they had nothing to do with *how* the<BR>
movements were conveyed to the suit. I was replying to a message that<BR>
totally ignored my comments about the effects of suit & user *geometry*<BR>
on movement and instead started talking about how the sensor/effector<BR>
stuff worked. Which was *completely* irrelevant to what I had said.<BR>
<BR>
> See, in the next three paragraphs you talk about movement all the time :<BR>
<BR>
Yes. but I didn't say "movement". I said "how the user's movements are<BR>
conveyed to the suit". *That* is the subject of the sentence.<BR>
<BR>
And the paragraphs you quoted say *nothing* about that.<BR>
<BR>
>> And unless the armor *and* the "drivers" for moving it are thin as<BR>
>> cloth, you'll have to have cutouts for movement. Heck, if you've ever<BR>
>> worn a heavy coat with old style insulation (batton padding and the<BR>
>> like), you'll have had it bunch up on the inside if the elbow.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Also, consider that the absolute limit on the motion of your foream is<BR>
>> when it touchs your biceps. In armor, the limit is reached sooner<BR>
>> because of when the armor over your forearm touches the armor over your<BR>
>> biceps.<BR>
>><BR>
>> The farther from the elbow you cut back the armor, the closer to a<BR>
>> "normal" range of motion you'll get. Alas, that also means you get less<BR>
>> protection near the elbow.<BR>
><BR>
> And, you're talking about how the _user_ has to move, not how the _suit_<BR>
> has to move.<BR>
<BR>
> As long as the body and head of the suit is large enough to contain<BR>
> all or most of the user, where and how the legs and arms of the suit<BR>
> move, and even if the suit has legs or arms, are irrelevant to how,<BR>
> or whether, the user can move.<BR>
<BR>
Can't *anyone* on this list *read*?<BR>
<BR>
My post was *specifically* about the problems with HUMAN SIZED battle<BR>
dress. I even *said* that there was no problem if you made the suit big<BR>
enough to hold the user inside the body (though then there are other,<BR>
*different problems. Mainly in being a *big* target)<BR>
<BR>
I'm getting a bit tired of going into great detail to make it very<BR>
clear what I mean only to have people make replies that indicate they<BR>
didn't *read* any of it. Or that if they did, they didn't understand<BR>
it.<BR>
<BR>
Why should I even bother making the effort? I don't get paid for this.<BR>
I do it because I enjoy discussing stuff and sharing the stuff I know.<BR>
But if people aren't going to pay attention, I might as well save<BR>
myself a *lot* of time and something more useful.<BR>
<BR>
Yes, this is a rant. It's at least the third time in two dys that I've<BR>
had this happen.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 09:33:15 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
At 04:09 PM 7/28/00, you wrote:<BR>
>Terry Carlino <carlino@home.com> wrote,<BR>
> > I just read the article in the latest SJGames JTAS issue and it<BR>
> > strikes me that while canon talks about balkanized worlds I don't<BR>
> > recall any mention of balkanized systems, a situation I consider much<BR>
> > more likely. As a matter of fact it seems to me that interplanetary<BR>
> > matters are very much ignored by Traveller. Systems are named after<BR>
> > the main world, where the major starport is. The PC's, if they have<BR>
> > their own ship, typically travel strait there from the jump point, and<BR>
> > strait to the jump point when they leave. Gas giants are refuel points<BR>
> > and pirates lurk in the system's dark corners. It's no wonder the PC's<BR>
> > don't get around to the rest of the systems.<BR>
><BR>
>Agreed - I have the bones of an article to submit to JTAS on<BR>
>the rest of the system (other than the mainworld), though it's currently<BR>
>on hold until _101 Corporations_ is finished. I hadn't thought about<BR>
>balkanised systems explicitly, but did list disagreements with the<BR>
>mainworld government as a reason for colonising other worlds.<BR>
><BR>
>John<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
         I did an MT scenario sometime ago involving a binary star-system <BR>
where there were three distinct polities...  the main world of each of the <BR>
companions were at war with each other, and the extensive asteroid-belts <BR>
between the two were neutrals...  of course, the easiest way for each side <BR>
to shoot at each other was to drive through the Belts.  Which meant both <BR>
sides tended to fire at anything that wasn't theirs in the Belts.<BR>
<BR>
         The players and their hot-rodded Privateer Patrol Cruiser get <BR>
hired to protect a large mining camp for the space of about two weeks while <BR>
the orbit of the asteroid passes through the "straight line" flight-path <BR>
between the two enemies.<BR>
<BR>
         The players hated it.  They took a look at the whole situation, <BR>
stuck around for a couple of days until the first scrap happened that they <BR>
nearly got mixed up in, and defaulted the contract.  <shrug>  Which was <BR>
irritating, as I had put a lot of work into detailing that system.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:13:50 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Puny Ships of the Classic Imperium<BR>
<BR>
At 11:23 PM 7/27/00, you wrote:<BR>
> >>If you get paid a flat 'loading fee', plus an amount per parsec, plus a<BR>
>risk<BR>
>premium, then you are in business.<<<BR>
><BR>
>Yah, you were talking about this a while ago. Did you have a system for<BR>
>this? Would you mind reposting it, if you have already? I'd be interested in<BR>
>seeing something like this.<BR>
<BR>
         Check my TNEC website for my version of <BR>
it.  http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/traveller  [Milieu] button, I believe.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:20:20 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Sector Maps<BR>
<BR>
At 11:47 PM 7/28/00, you wrote:<BR>
>To John Wood:  I like your idea of color coding the star systems within<BR>
>the individual hexagon to give a clue to planetary characteristics.  I do<BR>
>not have CC2, where is the best place to download it?<BR>
><BR>
>Joe Alberti<BR>
<BR>
         The viewer and/ or demo of this excellent product is at <BR>
http://www.profantasy.com<BR>
<BR>
         Check out the _Fractal Terrains_ product description while you are <BR>
there...  does this scream TRAVELLER or what?<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:29:02 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 12:35 PM 7/28/00, you wrote:<BR>
         [snip]<BR>
>Now all we need is a handwave reducing the maximum<BR>
>firing ranges and tracking ranges at these TL's<BR>
>and we have a 'feel' that is much more WW IIish and<BR>
>we can have fighters. Maybe operating a Thruster plate<BR>
>interferes with sensor use because [handwave on] the<BR>
>Thruster plate is 'actually pushing on jumpspace'<BR>
>(ala stuterwarp perhaps) this causes the normal universe<BR>
>to _slightly_ blur around the ship thus making long range<BR>
>tracking and firing _more_ difficult than it is today.<BR>
>Since the ship and the universe actually are slightly<BR>
>blurred with respect to one another this effects _all_<BR>
>sipboard sensors.<BR>
><BR>
>This might also help the defender of a system, the<BR>
>defender could monitor the system with dumb telescopes<BR>
>to track the enemy ships and help fire on them while<BR>
>the intruder would be relying on the (blurred) sensor<BR>
>picture they could pick up.<BR>
<BR>
         USe GUNDAM's approach to the problem.  A high-energy particle that <BR>
is easily createable in mass quantities that is *opaque* to RADAR <BR>
energies.  Result:  all combats in the GUNDAM universe are fought at <BR>
*visual* ranges (albeit, optically enhanced visual) since *nobody* can get <BR>
a fire-control lock on *anybody* and anything more than a few dozen KM at <BR>
most...  far enough for PD to work, but that is *it*.<BR>
<BR>
         Hey, if we are going to keep meson guns knowing how little it <BR>
behaves like real mesons, why is *that* such a stretch?<BR>
<BR>
         Alternately, if that is too much to swallow, just say that EM <BR>
warfare is so effective that you can jam the bleepers out of anything you <BR>
want to.  Same result.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:51:37 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Links<BR>
<BR>
At 03:31 PM 7/28/00, you wrote:<BR>
>Hi all.<BR>
><BR>
>Does anyone have a well-organized list of Traveller links?  Everytime I<BR>
>start randomly cruising for Trav sites, I get the awful feeling I'm<BR>
>missing tons of good stuff.<BR>
<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin's Freelance Traveller Site @ http://come.to/FreelanceTraveller<BR>
http://www.downport.com/<BR>
Beowulf Down Starport(The Definitive Traveller Websites Listing) @ <BR>
http://www.tip.net.au/~davidjw/<BR>
<BR>
My own site, which has links to all of these is  @ <BR>
http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/traveller<BR>
<BR>
>On a related note, who's in charage of the HIWG site?  It has a number of<BR>
>broken links...<BR>
<BR>
         Sorry, I don't know.<BR>
<BR>
>Thanks,<BR>
>Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 07:39:23 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
> I wish that practical reaction drives became available slightly earlier,<BR>
> (at Tech Level 9) became obsolete slightly later (at Tech Level 12, or<BR>
> perhaps even 13).<BR>
<BR>
Fusion rockets are pretty practical. They're nuisances to use, but<BR>
that gives them flavour - which I think is important. If ships can get<BR>
HEPLAR like reaction drives with good efficiency and no side<BR>
effects at TL9, that removes any feeling of difference between TL9<BR>
and TL10. I think we don't want to smooth the tech curve but want to<BR>
make the early TLs as distinct as possible. So TL9 ships with fusion<BR>
rockets can't land on planets; that's kind of fun.<BR>
<BR>
>Solid core fission rockets TTL 6-7<BR>
>Nuclear salt water rockets TTL 7+<BR>
>Orion TTL 6+<BR>
>Ion rockets TTL 6-7+<BR>
>Solar sails TTL 6+<BR>
>Magsails TTL 7+<BR>
These all seem low; I know that these are the TLs all these ideas<BR>
were proposed at, but that doesn't mean someone could really build a<BR>
NSTR in the 1980s, without 1990s-quality computer modelling,<BR>
for example. The approach that was taken with the actual rocket<BR>
rockets in FFS2 (the chemical ones), one should note, is to generally<BR>
put them at a fairly high TL (eg the Space Shuttle Main Engines are<BR>
TL8) on the assumption that the actual fielded models only count as<BR>
prototypes one TL early (eg the SSMEs are so cranky they need to<BR>
be rebuilt every flight, so they're TL7 prototypes of TL8 rockets.)<BR>
In that case, things like NTRs should probably stay where they are.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 07:55:41<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 05:48 PM 7/29/2000 +1200, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>As long as the body and head of the suit is large enough to contain all or<BR>
>most of the user, where and how the legs and arms of the suit move, and even <BR>
>if the suit has legs or arms, are irrelevant to how, or whether, the user <BR>
>can move.<BR>
<BR>
*sigh*<BR>
<BR>
Canonical battledress in Traveller, going back to the earliest sources I<BR>
could find, all describe it as man-sized.  All the illustrations show suits<BR>
of not more than large-human proportions.<BR>
<BR>
In other words, you are not discussing canonical battledress, but some<BR>
personal idea on the subject.  Care for some citations?<BR>
<BR>
Supplement 5 mentions that Marines in BD stand guard on the Bridge deck,<BR>
and several of the scernarios have BD-equipped troops moving through<BR>
standard-sized doors and hatches.<BR>
<BR>
In Adventure one, the BD-equipped Marines aboard the Kinunir use drop<BR>
capsules that are 1.5m circles on the deck.  This implies man sized suits.<BR>
<BR>
None of the weaponry designed for battledress is outsized.<BR>
<BR>
>Even if the suit does have legs, they do not _have_ to move when or where<BR>
>the user's legs do.<BR>
><BR>
>Consider a suit where the suit can run at high speed in one direction while<BR>
>the user, and the weaponry are facing the other way, like a tank can, except<BR>
>with legs. The suit is told to start running toward a certain location<BR>
>identified either by co-ordinates or visual designation by the pilot, and<BR>
>then the upper torso revolves 180 degrees and the pilot concentrates on<BR>
>firing, his legs doing nothing.<BR>
><BR>
>The same arguments apply to arms.<BR>
<BR>
There are wonderful games out there, Heavy Gear, Jovian Chronicles,<BR>
Battletech, that have just these types of vehicles.  These things are *not*<BR>
part of Traveller however.  I think the only "mecha" I've seen was in DGP's<BR>
_101 Vehicles_.<BR>
- --<BR>
<BR>
Duugirashir Irebamenagiin  gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
  http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/sylea.html<BR>
Inquisitor Maximus, Reformed Canon Church of Sylea<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 09:34:33 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
Accually -<BR>
<BR>
Both books (Gripping Hand/Moat and Mote in God's Eye) were a collaboration<BR>
between the two masters<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Leonard<BR>
Erickson<BR>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2000 12:14 AM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>> Just keep in mind that asteroids move *relative to each other*. Except<BR>
>> for asteroids that are actually orbiting each other, they'll all have<BR>
>> different orbits, which means that your neighbors this month (if you<BR>
>> can call something tens to hundreds of thousands of km away a<BR>
>> "neighbor" will be *millilions* of km away next month.<BR>
><BR>
> I believe Larry Niven addresses this issue (the politics of "variable<BR>
> geography" in an inhabited asteroid belt) in the sequel to "The Mote in<BR>
> God's Eye" (whose title has, unfortunately, slipped my mind).<BR>
<BR>
More likely Pournelle. He did a fact article *long* ago (collected with<BR>
others in "A Step Farther Out") that had a title something along the<BR>
lines of "Those Pesky Belters and their <something> drives". He did a<BR>
pretty good job of showing that the typical "Belter" society of many an<BR>
SF story just wouldn't work. By the time drives are good enough to make<BR>
hopping around the belt simple, it's ridiculously easy to lift stuff<BR>
out of gravity wells.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2835<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb04.mx.aol.com (rly-yb04.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.4]) by air-yb04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:35:48 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:35:18 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id MAA32451;<BR>
	Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:35:09 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:34:48 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id MAA32412<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:34:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:34:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007291634.MAA32412@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2835<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2836</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/29/00 2:32:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, July 29 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2836<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
FFS2<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
Re : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3 (longish)<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
Greg Aldridge<BR>
Re: Traveller Links<BR>
Trav-Tech Mailing list (was Re: Ship Size limits)<BR>
Re: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
Alternative scientific chargen for CT<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:24:38 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: FFS2<BR>
<BR>
With my exams and all out of the way I'm starting (for my sins) to learn<BR>
the FFS2 design sequence. I'm trying, really hard, and I can see that<BR>
there's a lot of really good stuff in there, but I'm finding it almost<BR>
impossible to break through the bizarre arrangement of the book. Tables<BR>
seem to be mislabelled (To convert sensor ranges from previous FFS1 rules,<BR>
use Table 204: LIDAR volume?)<BR>
<BR>
I'm also at a serious loss with the sensor systems. I've used T4 before,<BR>
but not for stuff in space - I always kept Brilliant Lances for that - so I<BR>
really don't get the sensitivity ratings. Particularly since the only<BR>
example refers to a scout with sensitivity 6, and you can't seem to buy<BR>
sensors below sensitivity 13. I'm confused. Is there an explanation (or<BR>
re-write, or errata) available somewhere?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
(miserable and confused gearhead)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:32:23 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>          USe GUNDAM's approach to the problem.  A high-energy particle<BR>
that<BR>
> is easily createable in mass quantities that is *opaque* to RADAR<BR>
> energies.  Result:  all combats in the GUNDAM universe are fought at<BR>
> *visual* ranges (albeit, optically enhanced visual) since *nobody* can<BR>
get<BR>
> a fire-control lock on *anybody* and anything more than a few dozen KM at<BR>
> most...  far enough for PD to work, but that is *it*.<BR>
<BR>
So the cloud's not opaque to visual light? Then why can't I build a big<BR>
LIDAR, or a high-resolution telescope linked to a CCD and a computer, and<BR>
use those just like I'd use radar?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 14:34:15 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 10:32 PM 7/29/00, you wrote:<BR>
>So the cloud's not opaque to visual light? Then why can't I build a big<BR>
>LIDAR, or a high-resolution telescope linked to a CCD and a computer, and<BR>
>use those just like I'd use radar?<BR>
><BR>
>Nick<BR>
<BR>
         Both of those are point systems, not "sweepers".  You are right, <BR>
once you *know* where the target is, finding him with LIDAR for a weapons <BR>
lock isn't bad.  What happens is your *detection* ranges get beaten to <BR>
shit.  To quote _Armageddon_ "...and its an awfully big-assed sky, mister <BR>
President..."  So instead of automatically seeing the target at 50,000+ km, <BR>
maybe you are down to a dozen megametres...  at "real space speeds(tm)", <BR>
you'll run out of those in a hurry.<BR>
         Sorta like WW2 warfare.  Which is what someone said they <BR>
wanted.  Once you were "this side of the horizon", the question was who had <BR>
better look outs.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:01:39 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
<BR>
At 18:12 -0400 28/7/00, Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > Directed, but not written.  And anyone who knows Paul Verhoeven's other<BR>
> > work should know that all of the cheesiness in Starship Troopers <BR>
>(well, maybe not science stuff, but certainly <BR>
>plot/character/dialogue stuff) is entirely intentional.  Verhoeven <BR>
>(who grew up in Nazi-occupied Holland) was doing a deliberate <BR>
>hatchet-job on what he perceived as a pro-fascist book, and the <BR>
>level of irony, both subtle and not, is extremely high throughout.<BR>
><BR>
>Which is a significant chunk of the problem with the movie.  Someone <BR>
>who dislikes a book shouldn't be the person to make a movie about it <BR>
>(clearly, the movie he should have made was an adaptation of John <BR>
>Steakley's 'Armor')<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
http://www.kentaurus.com/troopers.htm<BR>
<BR>
has a very good analysis in the flaws of the adaption of Starship Troopers.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, we have had a flamewar on this before ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:23:19 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3 (longish)<BR>
<BR>
At 0:04 -0400 29/7/00, "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au> wrote:<BR>
>RTGs should be included ; batteries need to be tweaked a little.<BR>
>Nuclear isomer 'batteries' look promising at higher TLs ; there's a<BR>
>stable (half life ~10^15yr) tantalum isomer with an energy density of<BR>
>several MJ/g...<BR>
<BR>
You may want to look at some of the current flywheel technology <BR>
available commercially at http://www.TheFlywheel.com/ or <BR>
http://www.urenco.com/ under the brand name 'PQ Flywheel'.<BR>
<BR>
I used to work on this and I know that they are currently running it <BR>
slow to ensure that the system isn't pushing the envelope.<BR>
<BR>
And don't forget to consider a way to build an abstracted design <BR>
sequence like High Guard for those of us who'd like to design ships <BR>
quickly (and QSDS did not fit this option - too small and too <BR>
complex).<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:24:52 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
At 0:04 -0400 29/7/00, "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
> > BTW does anyone know how much accommodation is left, as I'm going to be<BR>
> > sending off a cheque next week when my paycheque clears?<BR>
><BR>
>No idea. I only sent off three days ago; so I'm hoping they've still got<BR>
>rooms...<BR>
<BR>
I'm hoping that there are rooms left as my application goes this week.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 11:55:14 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
After a long time and several restarts the Spinward Marches <BR>
trade map is complete. (Thank Ghu!).<BR>
<BR>
Please give it a look and tell me what you think.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.ghg.net/tmixon/Trade<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for all the input over the last year and all the patience <BR>
with the slow pace. All comments (good or bad) welcome. However, <BR>
if you think I need to start over, I shall have to decline. If you <BR>
think I have made an error though, let me know. I never make <BR>
mistakes but the elves that transcribe my work from sanscript <BR>
have been known to make errors and oversights. <BR>
<BR>
Terry  <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:35:03 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Greg Aldridge<BR>
<BR>
Apologies for the waste of bandwidth but I'm getting bounces from <BR>
Greg's address:<BR>
<BR>
Greg,<BR>
<BR>
Many thanks for the information you sent me, it has helped me locate <BR>
the books I was after.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:11:55 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Links<BR>
<BR>
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000 12:34:48 -0400 (EDT), Michel Vaillancourt<BR>
<misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>At 03:31 PM 7/28/00, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>>Hi all.<BR>
<BR>
>>Does anyone have a well-organized list of Traveller links?  Everytime I<BR>
>>start randomly cruising for Trav sites, I get the awful feeling I'm<BR>
>>missing tons of good stuff.<BR>
<BR>
>Jeff Zeitlin's Freelance Traveller Site @ http://come.to/FreelanceTraveller<BR>
>http://www.downport.com/<BR>
<BR>
... and follow the links for Information Center, Traveller On The Internet,<BR>
and World Wide Web Links.  They're not really _organized_, but there are a<BR>
lot of them.  If any of them are broken, let me know.<BR>
<BR>
On a diverging thread: Does anyone have any good ideas about just how to<BR>
"organize" or "classify" web links?  I really _would_ like to have some<BR>
sort of useful way of allowing the user to focus on links that are more<BR>
likely to have info of interest to the visitor, but I can't think of any<BR>
right now.<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:24:02 -0400<BR>
From: Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net><BR>
Subject: Trav-Tech Mailing list (was Re: Ship Size limits)<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:03:03 +1000<BR>
> From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
> Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
> <BR>
> Anthony Jackson wrote :-<BR>
> >With extremely hot radiators (which are very inefficient -- they<BR>
> >are consuming 4 MW power per MW of heat removed) this could drop<BR>
> >down to about 1 M^2 of radiator per megawatt of heat.<BR>
> <BR>
> I'd be in favour of calling this the floor limit (1MW/m^2), but increase<BR>
> the efficiency of the radiators with increased TL, up to 75-80%.<BR>
> <BR>
> We could hide radiator inefficiency in the plant's power output to<BR>
> simplify accounting.<BR>
> <BR>
> Eris wrote :-<BR>
> > Take TL 9,<BR>
> <snip><BR>
> > so the radiators are removing 0.23 MW per M^2, or 4.4 M^2 per MW.<BR>
> > Can we extrapolate improvements from there?<BR>
> <BR>
> Moving belts? laser radiators? Liquid drop systems?<BR>
> <BR>
> A worthwhile set of posts for those who don't have them can be found on<BR>
> the trav-tech list (trav-tech@quark.qrc.com or qrc.com) :-<BR>
> <BR>
	<BR>
	Are you sure these address's are correct?<BR>
	I'd love to subscribe, but I keep getting errors when trying to get tp<BR>
them.<BR>
- -- <BR>
    Thomas Jones-Low<BR>
    tjoneslo@together.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:49:56 -0400<BR>
From: "Mike Peters" <Travelleri@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
<BR>
Michael,<BR>
<BR>
 I'd love to see the pages done on glossy paper, but would be very happy<BR>
with a good substitute such as 24 lb., pH neutral, ultra white paper. I love<BR>
the idea of spiral bound idea! Too many of my art books are perfect bound,<BR>
or should I say were, since they've long been falling apart from being over<BR>
opened, and the edge covers are mostly totally gone. I'd say keeping the<BR>
cost down is a good thing, lower prices equal wider audience which could<BR>
lead to more sales.You might consider a short run on glossy paper, as a<BR>
"special", autographed by "da man hisself".<BR>
<BR>
Size of page is up in the air, 8.5"x11" vs. 8.5"x14", the ratio seems to be<BR>
off for most of the art I've seen on Jesse's page. Now 11"x17"... ah, you'd<BR>
probably loose sales at that size. I'd say go with the size that best fits<BR>
the size ratio of the art. I'd rather see a smaller page than one with a lot<BR>
of open area around the picture. I sure don't want to see them stretched and<BR>
distorted to fit a page size ratio that they weren't designed for.<BR>
<BR>
Mike<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
To: <traveller@mpgn.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 6:51 AM<BR>
Subject: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Several people have repeatedly commented they'd like to see a book of<BR>
> Jesse DeGraff's 3D artwork published.  I have been talking with Jesse and<BR>
> doing the legwork on a print run of material.<BR>
><BR>
> There are essentially two options.  One is a professional print house<BR>
> job.  Perfect bound, 8.5x14 glossy pages, 15 pages, etc.  Delivered price,<BR>
> FOB my front door, would be $~110CAD per copy, presuming a 100-copy run.<BR>
><BR>
> Option two is an "in house" job using personal resources.  8.5x11 pages,<BR>
> matte cover, spiral bound, 15 pages.  Delivered price, FOB my front door,<BR>
> would be $~20CAD per copy, presuming a 50-copy run.<BR>
><BR>
> So.  The Question:  Which would you prefer...  more quality and the bigger<BR>
> price, or is the "in house" job sufficient for your tastes?<BR>
><BR>
> Please reply to me off-list (or at least CC me off-list) and change the<BR>
> subject to either:<BR>
><BR>
> TJAB - Pro Job<BR>
> TJAB - In-House<BR>
><BR>
> ...so that my software can sort out the count.  I'll need at least 50<BR>
> replies to even bother going ahead with the project to the layout<BR>
> phase.  We would then need payment in advance of shipping to ensure that<BR>
> Jesse and I don't get stuck with a stack of books we can't get rid of.<BR>
><BR>
> Any ideas or suggestions you might have are also welcome.  Thanks for your<BR>
> time.<BR>
> -+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
>     NET-City Communications....<BR>
>          Providing "Solutions for the Common Company"<BR>
> -+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
> http://www.atlantic-online.ns.ca/net-city<BR>
> sales@atlantic-online.ns.ca<BR>
> -+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
> ***REMEMBER - Always virus-check your emails ***<BR>
> -+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=+-<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:05:11 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 11:45 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> So I say we should be crippling the big ships, not making them illegal.<BR>
>> Radiators were a good suggestion, and there have been others.<BR>
<BR>
>Don't forget that radiators *also* make it possible to cripple a ship<BR>
>without destroying it. <BR>
<BR>
And a good thing that is too!  <g> Imagine damage control crews busily<BR>
replacing destroyed radiators so the ship can get it's perfectly<BR>
functional, but currently useless, weapons, drives, and power plant<BR>
back on line.<BR>
<BR>
>One item that needs to go in is efficiency of pwer plants. That is, how<BR>
>many MW of heat does it produce for every *useful* MW it produces. At 90%<BR>
>efficiency, you get .9 MW of power and .1 MW of heat. At 99%, you get .99<BR>
>MW and .01 MW heat. Or in a more useful form, for each MW of useful power<BR>
>you get (1/efficiency)-1 MW of heat.<BR>
<BR>
Yes, but, as I'm sure you remember, 100% of those MW still<BR>
eventually end up as heat that has to be radiated away...or gotten<BR>
rid of somehow anyway.<BR>
<BR>
>BTW, power *storage* devices, such as batteries have an input efficiency<BR>
>(ie how many MW do you have to feed in to get an MW out, with the<BR>
>difference being heat). They also have an output efficiency, but I think<BR>
>we can just call them the same for design purposes.<BR>
<BR>
>Other systems need a heat output figure based on the power they are<BR>
>using. <BR>
<BR>
>As TLs go up, efficiency increases. With 100% being the (usually<BR>
>unobtainable) ideal. <BR>
<BR>
>At 100%, you generate no "waste heat". On the other hand, the energy that<BR>
>goes into everything but radios and weapons will eventually wind up as<BR>
>heat anyway. <BR>
<BR>
Exactly my point from above.  <g><BR>
<BR>
>For example, a 100% efficient light bulb will convert all the energy fed<BR>
>to it to light. But that light turns into heat as it's absorbed by the<BR>
>walls, people, etc.<BR>
<BR>
>I think we can skip detailing this, and just roll it into the power<BR>
>requirements of the systems. The higher TL will result in less power<BR>
>required, but all the power winds up as heat. That's likely easier to<BR>
>work with and to explain.<BR>
<BR>
>An exception *could* be made for radios, radar, and beam weapons, but I<BR>
>don't know if it's worth the hassles. Opinions?<BR>
<BR>
Probably not.  Just requiring radiators for 100% of the energy the pp<BR>
produces gets close enough for game purposes.  I mean if we were<BR>
getting really technical about this, we'd have to include the heat<BR>
generated by the metabolisms of the people aboard too. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:07:17 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/29/00 at 11:41 AM,  "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> Don't forget that radiators *also* make it possible to cripple a ship<BR>
>> without destroying it.<BR>
<BR>
>No, it's even better than that. External sensor antennae make it possible<BR>
>to cripple a ship by blinding it. External radiators slowly reduce the<BR>
>power available to the ship as he takes light damage. He still has the<BR>
>power available, but daren't operate the reactors at full power because<BR>
>he can't get rid of the heat. I like the idea of ships having to juggle<BR>
>energy as they lose radiator surfaces, and it makes fighters useful<BR>
>again. Sure, we can't penetrate his armour, but we can force him to stop<BR>
>firing that f**%*& meson gun...<BR>
<BR>
A. you'll lose a lot of fighters doing it and B. he'll be repairing his sensors and radiators even while you are shooting them up.  It'll be a race...races are fun! <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:20:53 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 10:54 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>Well, one thing that'd help would be if someone came up with a way to<BR>
>stabilize monoatomic hydrogen (ie H, rather than H2). As I recall, this<BR>
>gives a *chemical* rocket with an ISP approaching the preliminary NERVA<BR>
>designs ( 2H -> H2 yiels a *lot* of energy, and the exhaust is about as<BR>
>low a molecular weight as you can get).<BR>
<BR>
I can't think of a handwave for this one.  I agree it would be a<BR>
*neat* effect..remember "Salvage One" <g>...but how you could *do*<BR>
it??  No idea.<BR>
<BR>
There was a design, contemporay with NERVA, that looked very nice.<BR>
It couldn't be built then because it involved creating parts with<BR>
microgroves and pin holes in quantity.  I think it was called Dumbo,<BR>
but I could be mis-remembering..anyway there was a writeup about it<BR>
in Analog back in the mid-seventies if you want to go look it up.<BR>
<BR>
Now, my favorite under utilized power plant idea is Boron cycle<BR>
thermo-nuclear fission.  The radiation is weak enough to be blocked<BR>
with low weight shielding, the power density is good, it requires<BR>
the use of "purified hydrogen" or you get bad, unwanted results, and<BR>
the PC's would have to fuel up with, compaired to hydrogen, rare<BR>
boron every few weeks.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:25:03 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 11:25 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> Here's another proposal for eliminating Really Big Ships:<BR>
>><BR>
>> Tie the amount of thrust produced by a reactionless drive to its<BR>
>> *surface area*, rather than to its *volume* (they're called<BR>
>> "thruster PLATES" for a reason...)<BR>
>>                                                      - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
>I *like* it. And tie it to TL as well. But be sure that the progession is<BR>
>*not* straight line. Because at *some* point, such progressions always<BR>
>turn into nightmares. Maybe an asymptotic curve? <BR>
<BR>
Give me a formula! <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 14:27:54 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: "Neal C. Oldham" <nco@its.caltech.edu><BR>
Subject: Alternative scientific chargen for CT<BR>
<BR>
Hello,<BR>
<BR>
Although I am aware that another system better than this may return to<BR>
print when Challenge 29 is reprinted (just haivng received the _beautiful_<BR>
CT reprints 1 and 2), I thought this might be useful to players awaiting<BR>
the reprint, or as an alternative.<BR>
<BR>
The scientist career, as a conceive of it here, is a "cluster career" with<BR>
three distinct paths:  Technicians, basically following the<BR>
"scientist" career in CT Supplement 4, teaching-oriented scholars<BR>
(Academics), and research-oriented scholars (Investigators).<BR>
<BR>
College education (awards baccalaureate degree):  1 term, as per Book 6<BR>
<BR>
Admission  9+ , DM+2 if Edu 9+<BR>
Success 7+, DM+2 if Int 8+<BR>
Education 1D6 - 2 , DM+1 if Int 9+<BR>
Honors 10+ , DM+1 if Edu 10+<BR>
<BR>
Graduate school (awards doctoral degree):  1 term<BR>
<BR>
Admission auto if honors grad, otherwise 7+, DM+2 if Edu 10+<BR>
Success 8+, DM+1 if End 8+, DM+2 if Int 10+<BR>
Education 1D6-3, DM+1 if Int 10+<BR>
<BR>
Admission:<BR>
<BR>
Technician:  6+, DM+1 if Int 9+, DM+2 if Edu 10+<BR>
<BR>
Academic:  Requires doctoral degree, 8+, DM+1 if Edu 11+, DM+2 if Soc 8+<BR>
<BR>
Investigator:  Requires doctoral degree, 7+, DM+1 if Edu 10+, DM+2 if Int<BR>
10+<BR>
<BR>
An academic or investigator must choose one of the following as a<BR>
specialty and another as a secondary interest:<BR>
<BR>
Medical, Computer (TL 5+), Ecology, Molecular Biology, Geology,<BR>
Paleontology, Literature, Linguistics, History, Legal, Chemistry (TL 0-8),<BR>
Economics (TL 1+), Sociology, Mechanics (TL 1+), Subatomic Physics (TL<BR>
6+), Molecular Physics (TL 5+), Nuclear Physics (TL 5+), Jumpspace Physics<BR>
(TL 9+), Optics (TL 3+), Astronomy, Theology, Number Theory, or Geometry.<BR>
<BR>
Gravitics are explored under Subatomic Physics; for game purposes, they<BR>
may be assumed to be crudely equivalent.  Astronomy is relevant to<BR>
Navigation; also for game purposes, equivalent to Navigation.  <BR>
"Mechanics" refers to the branch of physics dealing with dynamics of<BR>
bodies; "classical mechanics" may not be meaningful to non-Solomani.  If<BR>
strict CT skills are to be observed, limit choice of specialty to<BR>
Gravitics, Medical, Liaison, Legal, Survival, Navigation, and Computer.  <BR>
If a roll of "secondary interest" is made on a skill chart, treat it as<BR>
rolling a specialty skill.<BR>
<BR>
Assignment:<BR>
<BR>
1D6	Tech		Acad		Invest<BR>
1	Commercial	Educational	Commercial	<BR>
2	Commercial	Educational	Commercial<BR>
3	Commercial	Educational	Governmental<BR>
4	Governmental	Educational	Governmental	<BR>
5	Private		Educational	Private<BR>
6	Educational	Private		Educational<BR>
<BR>
Initial training (first year of first term) <BR>
Technician:  Electronics-1 (TL 5-7), Mechanical-1 (TL 0-4), Computer-1 (TL<BR>
8+) <BR>
<BR>
Academic:  Instruction-1<BR>
<BR>
Investigator:  Admin-1<BR>
<BR>
For technicians, the distinction is immaterial; all assignments will be<BR>
technical, but it may be of role-playing interest.  "Private" is basically<BR>
a non-profit organization of some kind (e.g. Sierra Club), but it may also<BR>
include noble sponsorship or other fields of employment.<BR>
<BR>
Duty:<BR>
<BR>
2D6	Commercial	Educational	Private		Governmental<BR>
2	Instruction	Authorship	Authorship	Authorship<BR>
3	Authorship	Authorship	Technical	Technical	<BR>
4	Technical	Instruction	Technical	Administration<BR>
5	Research	Research	Research	Instruction<BR>
6	Administration	Instruction	Administration	Research<BR>
7	Research	Instruction	Research	Research<BR>
8	Research	Research	Instruction	Administration<BR>
9	Administration	Administration	Instruction	Administration<BR>
10	Research	Instruction	Administration	Research<BR>
11	Administration	Administration	Special		Special<BR>
12	Special		Special		Special		Special<BR>
13	Transfer	Transfer	Transfer	Transfer<BR>
<BR>
DM:  +1 if Soc 9+ ; -1 if specialty or secondary skill is 4+.  Transfer is<BR>
to another assignment (e.g. educational to commerical) and may declined,<BR>
in which case reroll and ignore further transfer results.<BR>
<BR>
Percentage without modifiers (note there is some rounding):<BR>
Com:  Research 50%, Admin 31%, Tech 8% , Instruct 3%, Special 3%, Author <BR>
5%<BR>
<BR>
Edu:  Instruct 47%, Admin 17%, Author 8%, Research 25%, Special 3%<BR>
<BR>
Org: Author 3%, Tech 14%, Research 28%, Admin 22%, Instruct 25%, Special<BR>
8%<BR>
<BR>
Gov: Author 3%, Tech 5%, Instruct 19%, Research 39%, Admin 25%, Special 9%<BR>
<BR>
Special:<BR>
<BR>
1  Hazardous-duty training<BR>
2  Remote assignment  <BR>
3  Task force<BR>
4  Sabbatical<BR>
5  Professional society official<BR>
6  Attache<BR>
<BR>
DM:  +1 if Soc 9+ (optional, must choose before rolling)<BR>
<BR>
Hazardous-duty training:  Roll 5+ on 2D6 to acquire 1 level of each of the<BR>
following:  Vacc Suit, Survival, Vehicle, Engineering, Ship's Boat, Gun<BR>
Combat, Brawling<BR>
<BR>
Remote assignment:  No skills or promotion possible, but may choose next<BR>
duty assignment (excluding special duty).<BR>
<BR>
Task force:  Roll 3D6; if under Int+specialty (or highest tech skill if<BR>
technician), task is successful; roll once on research skill table and +1<BR>
Soc; if failure, no promotion/college allowed next term.<BR>
<BR>
Professional society official:  +1 Liaison, promotion on 8+ on 2D6 (takes<BR>
effect when next eligible, no DMs)<BR>
<BR>
Sabbatical:  Choose between roll on research or personal tables.<BR>
<BR>
Attache:  +1 Soc, choice of next duty (excluding special)<BR>
<BR>
Technician	Technical<BR>
survival	5+<BR>
skill		9+			<BR>
college		11+	<BR>
bonus		11+	<BR>
<BR>
Survival:  DM+1 if any skill in tech list below is 2+, DM+2 if Dex 9+<BR>
College [auto enrollment after completion of current term]:  DM as<BR>
admission, above<BR>
Bonus [as in Book 7, 1 roll on table, take 1/2]:  DM+1 if any<BR>
skill in tech list below is 4+<BR>
Readmission:  5+<BR>
<BR>
Academic	Research	Admin		Author		Teaching<BR>
survival	3+		auto		3+		auto<BR>
skill		9+		9+		none		9+<BR>
position	8+		7+		none		8+<BR>
promotion	9+		8+		none		9+<BR>
prize		13+		none		12+		none<BR>
bonus		11+		9+		auto		12+<BR>
Only one promotion per four-year term is allowed.<BR>
Prize:  DM+1 if specialty is 5+, DM+2 if Int 12+<BR>
Survival:  DM+1 if any skill in tech list below is 2+, DM+2 if Dex 9+<BR>
Position/Promotion:  DM+1 if Edu 11+, DM+2 if Soc 9+, DM+3 if received<BR>
prize since last eligibility<BR>
Bonus:   DM+1 if specialty 3+, DM+2 if Int 10+<BR>
Readmission:  4+<BR>
<BR>
Investigator	Research	Admin	Author	Teaching	Technical<BR>
survival	4+		auto	3+	auto		5+<BR>
skill		9+		9+	none	9+		9+<BR>
position	8+		7+	none	8+		none<BR>
promotion	9+		8+	none	9+		none<BR>
prize		13+		none	12+	none		none<BR>
bonus		9+		9+	auto	12+		10+<BR>
DMs as Academic, above; only one promotion per four-year term is allowed.<BR>
Readmission:  5+<BR>
<BR>
Skills		<BR>
Technical	Admin	Research	Teaching	Life	Personal<BR>
1 Comp*		Admin	Specialty	+1 Int		Forgery	Carousing<BR>
2 Mech		Leader	Secondary****	+1 Edu		Bribery	+1 Str<BR>
3 Elec**	Liasion	+1 Dex		Instruction	Vehicle	+1 Dex<BR>
4 Engr***	Legal	+1 Int		Instruction	Intrgtn	+1 Int<BR>
5 Medic		Recruit	Specialty	Specialty	Liasion +1 Edu<BR>
6 J/T		Admin	+1 Edu		Admin		J/T	+1 End<BR>
<BR>
First four tables require appropriate assignment; any of the three careers<BR>
may take the last two at any time.  *Substitute Mechanical for TL 4-<BR>
world.  **Substitute Mechanical for TL 3- world.  ***Reroll if TL 5-<BR>
world.  ****Treat as specialty if only LBB 1-6 skills are allowed.<BR>
<BR>
Rank	Academic		Investigator<BR>
E	Teacher			Researcher<BR>
1	Instructor		Principal Investigator<BR>
2	Assistant Professor	Group Leader<BR>
3	Associate Professor	Department Manager<BR>
4	Professor		Division Manager<BR>
5	Dean			Lab Director<BR>
6	Chancellor		Academician<BR>
<BR>
Mustering-out tables:<BR>
<BR>
Benefits	Cash<BR>
1 Instruments	1000<BR>
2 Mid Psg	2000<BR>
3 High Psg	5000<BR>
4 +1 Int	10000<BR>
5 +1 Edu	20000<BR>
6 +1 Soc	30000<BR>
7 Lab Ship	40000<BR>
<BR>
Rolls:  1/term minimum, +1 if rank 1 or 2 +2 if rank 3 or 4, +3 if rank 5<BR>
or 6,  DMs:  +1 on benefits table if rank 5+; +(Gambling) on cash<BR>
<BR>
Aging as per Book 1 or appropriate Alien Module.<BR>
<BR>
Notes:  TL restrictions on scientific specialties reflect the opinion of<BR>
the author on the structure of scientific discliplines past, present, and<BR>
future and may not be the opinion of the reader.<BR>
<BR>
If anyone has any problems with spacing in the above tables, please e-mail<BR>
me personally, and I will be happy to e-mail the original document to you<BR>
as .txt, .doc, .rtf, or .pdf .<BR>
<BR>
- ---<BR>
Neal C. Oldham<BR>
nco@caltech.edu<BR>
<BR>
ad astra!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2836<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (rly-yh02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.34]) by air-yh01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:32:20 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:31:44 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id RAA43373;<BR>
	Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:31:33 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:31:17 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id RAA43326<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:31:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:31:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007292131.RAA43326@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2836<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2837</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/29/00 4:29:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, July 29 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2837<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
Re: Trav-Tech Mailing list (was Re: Ship Size limits)<BR>
Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
Re: Fuel Cells (drafty gearhead stuff v1.x, longish)<BR>
Re: Adjusting sensor ranges (was ship size limits)<BR>
Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
Re : Alien vision (was Re: Imperial Army Uniform)<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re : Hull Materials (was : Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
Re: Alternative scientific chargen for CT<BR>
[BITS] Website update 29 July 2000<BR>
[BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:01:42 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/29/00 at 06:24 PM,  "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> said:<BR>
<BR>
>With my exams and all out of the way I'm starting (for my sins) to learn<BR>
>the FFS2 design sequence. I'm trying, really hard, and I can see that<BR>
>there's a lot of really good stuff in there, but I'm finding it almost<BR>
>impossible to break through the bizarre arrangement of the book. <BR>
<BR>
I know exactly how you feel!  I hate the way the FFS2 came out. Heck, just rewriteing *it* to be clear and understandable would go a long, long, way to answer all the FFS3 discussion.<BR>
<BR>
>Tables<BR>
>seem to be mislabelled (To convert sensor ranges from previous FFS1<BR>
>rules, use Table 204: LIDAR volume?)<BR>
<BR>
IMO, totally busted! I think that's right about Table 204, though.<BR>
<BR>
>I'm also at a serious loss with the sensor systems. I've used T4 before,<BR>
>but not for stuff in space - I always kept Brilliant Lances for that - so<BR>
>I really don't get the sensitivity ratings. Particularly since the only<BR>
>example refers to a scout with sensitivity 6, and you can't seem to buy<BR>
>sensors below sensitivity 13. I'm confused. Is there an explanation (or<BR>
>re-write, or errata) available somewhere?<BR>
<BR>
Nick, you have to get a copy of Bruce Macintosh's Definitive Sensor<BR>
Rules (DSR) off the net someplace.  Dom, you have them on the BITS<BR>
site...yes?  <BR>
<BR>
And while I'm this subject where is Bruce's "Fusion Guard" for space<BR>
combat? Oh, Bruce??? <g><BR>
<BR>
Although, DSR is fine, I don't use it.  What I have done is use the<BR>
Sensitivity Ratings from FFS2 in a TNE/BL like manner.  I put the SR<BR>
rating at Short range and double/halve ranges from there like in<BR>
TNE.  Here's an example<BR>
<BR>
PEMS-12.5                    30 kkm<BR>
                              hexes          kilometers<BR>
Easy        Contact   3      0 -   3          0 to 90,000<BR>
Routine     V Short   6      4 -   6     90,000 to 180,000<BR>
Difficult   Short     12.5   7 -  12    180,000 to 360,000<BR>
Formidable  Medium    25    13 -  25    360,000 to 720,000<BR>
Staggering  Long      50    26 -  50    720,000 to 1,440,000<BR>
Hopeless    V Long   100    51 - 100  1,440,000 to 2,880,000<BR>
Impossible  Extreme  200   101 - 200  2,880,000 to 5,760,000<BR>
<BR>
And if you want to go beyond Extreme range, just continue doubling<BR>
the ranges, and in T4/5 keep adding dice, in TNE keep /2, and in CT<BR>
or GT (when using the BITS task system) keep adding negative DM's.<BR>
<BR>
Modifiers include:<BR>
<BR>
Active:   Size (log of object's area/2) - any stealthing<BR>
<BR>
Passive:  IR (log of kw's emitted/reflected by object) - any<BR>
          directional masking<BR>
<BR>
 +++<BR>
I hope no one jumps on me about this being "unrealisticly" long or<BR>
short ranged, simplistic, or anything else because it works.  Not as<BR>
well as I'd like, but it *does* work.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:05:24 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Trav-Tech Mailing list (was Re: Ship Size limits)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/29/00 at 03:24 PM,  Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
>> A worthwhile set of posts for those who don't have them can be found on<BR>
>> the trav-tech list (trav-tech@quark.qrc.com or qrc.com) :-<BR>
>> <BR>
>	<BR>
>	Are you sure these address's are correct?<BR>
>	I'd love to subscribe, but I keep getting errors when trying to get tp<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
From the bottom of the most recent post there...<BR>
<BR>
>To sign off, send "unsubscribe" in e-mail to trav-tech-request@qrc.com.<BR>
>Traveller is a trademark of FFE.  The use of any trademark or copyright<BR>
>in posts to this list is not a challenge to trademark or copyright<BR>
>status.<BR>
<BR>
I'd guess you subscribe by sending "subscribe" in email to trav-tech-request@qrc.com. Let us know if that doesn't work.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:50:30 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
> Subject: Re : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3 (longish)<BR>
> I posted some draft rules for fuel cells on 3rd May 2000, which plonked<BR>
> into oblivion. Have a look at them ; I'd like to think that my research<BR>
> wasn't entirely in vain. Not that I don't enjoy reading 'Science',<BR>
> 'Nature', etc.<BR>
<BR>
Could you either re-post them, or bounce me a copy ?<BR>
<BR>
> > Anyone :<BR>
> > Fission plants. I'd like them to lift in efficiency of fission plants<BR>
from<BR>
> > TL9 and up - I remember someone talking about a better fission plant,<BR>
that<BR>
> > basically involves firing a PAW at a normally-subcritical lump of<BR>
plutonium.<BR>
> That was me. Accelerator driven subcritical reactors can run on thorium,<BR>
> which means that conventional fuel cycles aren't necessary.<BR>
><BR>
> The fission power plant table is a mess and needs to be replaced in its<BR>
> entirely. I heartily agree that damper and antimatter catalysed fission<BR>
> are good workarounds at the higher TLs, but fusion beats it hands down<BR>
> in terms of power density (using numbers from contemporary fusion<BR>
> research rather than the traditional tables).<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Congratulations. Consider yourself appointed as 'Vice-Chair of Peaceful<BR>
Nuclear Devices'.<BR>
<BR>
> Where fission may well have benefit at higher TLs is in scaling (lower<BR>
> minimum size) and higher reliability.<BR>
><BR>
> RTGs should be included ; batteries need to be tweaked a little.<BR>
> Nuclear isomer 'batteries' look promising at higher TLs ; there's a<BR>
> stable (half life ~10^15yr) tantalum isomer with an energy density of<BR>
> several MJ/g...<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Cool. Note that fission has major military disadvantages, once nuclear<BR>
dampers come along, so fission as a 'civilian' technology works.<BR>
<BR>
> Partial draft material table :-<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<snipped><BR>
<BR>
The other thing is to have 3 grades of material - construction, armour and<BR>
high-grade. Cost increase should be about an order of magnitude for each.<BR>
I'm not sure about efficiency increases.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> > Anyone (maybe also Leonard)<BR>
> > Life Support. I'd like something a bit more differentiated.<BR>
><BR>
> Does this include items such as G-couches, etc?<BR>
> Check out :-<BR>
> Subject: Effects of acceleration and gravity (part 3, longish)<BR>
> Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 04:32:36 +1000<BR>
><BR>
> for a more plausible treatment of same.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
OK. I'd also like a set of 'medical facilities'. M*A*S*H in space is a genre<BR>
that I think has a lot of plus points (and not just military either - a<BR>
'peacegaming' campaign could be a Peace Corps kinda teaching hospital on a<BR>
poor world).<BR>
<BR>
Rob, add 'Medico-in-Chief' to your other job as 'Vice Chair of Peaceful<BR>
Nuclear Devices'.<BR>
<BR>
Go as overboard as you want :)<BR>
<BR>
> > General :<BR>
> > Some thoughts about a 'quality' system.<BR>
> <snip><BR>
> > I dont want you to squeeze more<BR>
> > performance out of a given TL, but I think you should be able to trade<BR>
down<BR>
> > performance or price for more reliability.<BR>
><BR>
> If performance is defined as engine specific power, say (W/kg or W/L)<BR>
> then you can squeeze out more 'grunt', up to a point - compare a model<BR>
> aircraft petrol engine to that of a motorcycle, standard car, or purpose<BR>
> built racer.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Isnt this mostly a surface area:volume thing with smaller engines ?<BR>
<BR>
> Preliminary thoughts, using Marc's T5 draft item attribute system :-<BR>
> * Reliability<BR>
> I relate this to recommended maintenance interval.<BR>
> E.g.<BR>
> - - A Formula 1 car has low reliability (-5) since it needs to be<BR>
> thoroughly serviced after a two hour race.<BR>
> - - A starship has high reliability (4 or 5) since it only needs annual<BR>
> maintenance to safely operate.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I'd prefer to be using the one mechanic - 'Wear Value'.<BR>
<BR>
<exhaustive list of new thrust systems deleted><BR>
<BR>
Robert, get together with John and get some stats to me :)<BR>
<BR>
They could be most useful for the Long Night/Interstellar Wars period.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:13:31 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/29/00 at 05:01 PM,  eris@pcola.gulf.net said:<BR>
<BR>
Aargh!  I screwed it up from Formidable down.  I used the .5 on<BR>
purpose then forgot to apply it. <g> Here is the corrected table.<BR>
<BR>
    PEMS-12.5                    30 kkm<BR>
                                  hexes          kilometers<BR>
    Easy        Contact   3      0 -   3          0 to 90,000<BR>
    Routine     V Short   6      4 -   6     90,000 to 180,000<BR>
    Difficult   Short     12.5   7 -  12    180,000 to 360,000<BR>
    Formidable  Medium    25    13 -  25    360,000 to 750,000<BR>
    Staggering  Long      50    26 -  50    750,000 to 1,500,000<BR>
    Hopeless    V Long   100    51 - 100  1,500,000 to 3,000,000<BR>
    Impossible  Extreme  200   101 - 200  3,000,000 to 6,000,000<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:22:44 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Fuel Cells (drafty gearhead stuff v1.x, longish)<BR>
<BR>
On 05/03/00 at 11:01 AM,  "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
Robert, they didn't drop into a black hole.  Like most of the stuff<BR>
you send I kept a copy. <g> <BR>
<BR>
I didn't have any constructive comments to make, but "stuff like<BR>
this" *does* belong on the list.<BR>
<BR>
I hope this resend doesn't screw up the formating.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>* Overview (how they work, sorta)<BR>
>Fuel cells convert the energy of oxidation of a fuel directly to<BR>
>electricity. Theoretically, such devices can be the most efficient<BR>
>chemical power plants possible.<BR>
<BR>
>They are similar in structure to a battery, with positive and negative<BR>
>electrodes separated by an electrolyte solution.<BR>
>Gaseous fuel is passed over the positive electrode, where it is ionised.<BR>
>The positive ions move through the electrolyte to the negative electrode.<BR>
>The electrons move through an external circuit and generate a current.<BR>
>At the negative terminal, fuel ions, oxygen and electrodes combine to<BR>
>form water, carbon dioxide, or both, depending on the fuel :-<BR>
<BR>
>Reaction   Maximum Theoretical Efficiency<BR>
>H2 -> H2O          83%<BR>
>CO -> CO2          91%<BR>
>CH4 -> CO2 + H2O   93%<BR>
<BR>
>The big problems in recent RW fuel cell research have been/are :-<BR>
>- developing fuel processors to efficiently convert larger hydrocarbons<BR>
>and alcohols to methane, carbon monoxide and hydrogen ;<BR>
>- devising cheaper catalysts that will not be poisoned by activated<BR>
>carbon species or impurities in the fuel (e.g. sulphur).<BR>
<BR>
>* Developments by Tech Level<BR>
>Fuel cells become possible at the same time as the battery (discovery TTL<BR>
>4 [e.g. William Groves, 1839AD], utilisation TTL 3 - limits are the<BR>
>ability to isolate and work platinum, make carbon black, and prepare and<BR>
>store hydrogen).<BR>
<BR>
>These early devices are alkaline fuel cells, relying on an electrolyte of<BR>
>concentrated sodium or potassium hydroxide, and were used in the US space<BR>
>program.<BR>
<BR>
>Regenerative systems, where some external power source<BR>
>(e.g. solar or nuclear) is used to electrolyse water back to hydrogen and<BR>
>oxygen, are investigated for use in long-duration space missions or other<BR>
>isolated facilities.<BR>
<BR>
>With developments in materials science, improved electrodes and catalysts<BR>
>become available, leading to increases in power density. Cells are<BR>
>initially classified according to electrolyte type :-<BR>
<BR>
>Electrolyte         Operating temperature  Comments<BR>
>Polymer electrolyte 60-100C                High power density possible<BR>
>Alkaline            90-100C                "<BR>
>Phosphoric Acid     170-200C               Low specific power, but<BR>
>                                           up to 85% efficiency with<BR>
>                                           steam cogeneration Molten<BR>
>Carbonate           600-1000C              Best candidate for burning<BR>
>                                           hydrocarbons (e.g. gasoline)<BR>
>Solid Oxide         600-1000C              Theoretical efficiency 60%<BR>
<BR>
>A breakthrough at TTL 8 is the development of cells that directly use<BR>
>methanol and methane. These are initially about 40% efficient, comparable<BR>
>to heat engines ; but they are very expensive to construct.<BR>
<BR>
>By the late TTL 9 period, advances in catalysis technology and chemical<BR>
>engineering lead to the development of fuel cells that can use<BR>
>reformulated gasoline (aka high-grade hydrocarbon distillates) with the<BR>
>same efficiency as methanol/methane cells.<BR>
>'Multifuel' systems, capable of using any of the commonly available<BR>
>liquid fuels, are available by TTL 10.<BR>
<BR>
>Further advancements in the technology aim mainly at increasing cell<BR>
>energy density (power out per unit volume).<BR>
<BR>
>* Charts for FF&S<BR>
>TTL  Power  MinSize  Fuel (efficiency, type, L/MW-h)<BR>
>4    0.05   0.2      0.25, H2, 1028572<BR>
>5    0.08   0.2      0.4, LH2, 107142.5   <BR>
>6    0.1    0.1      0.6, LH2, 71428.3<BR>
>7    0.2    0.03     0.65, LH2, 65933.8<BR>
>8    0.4    0.01     0.65, LH2, 65933.8 ; 0.4, MeOH/CH4, 5770/8450 <BR>
>9    0.6    0.01     0.7    , LH2, 61224.3, 0.5 ; MeOH/CH4, 4616/6760 ;<BR>
>                     0.4, HGHCD, 2500<BR>
>10   1.0    0.01     0.8, LH2, 53571.25 ; 0.6, MeOH/CH4, 3846.7/5633.3; <BR>
>                     0.5, HGHCD, 2000<BR>
>12   1.2    0.01     LH2, 0.65, MeOH/CH4, 3550.8/5200 ; <BR>
>                     0.6, HGHCD, 1666.7<BR>
>14   1.5    0.001    LH2, 0.7, MeOH/CH4, 3297.1/4828.6 ; <BR>
>                     0.65, HGHCD, 1538.5<BR>
>16   2.0    0.001    LH2, 0.8, MeOH/CH4, 2885/4225 ; 0.8, HGHCD, 1250<BR>
<BR>
>Power MW/m3, min size in m3 (below this volume, power density is 0.1 that<BR>
>stated). All units have a density of 1 tonne/m3 and cost 0.02MCr/m3.<BR>
>Efficiency : % of fuel chemical energy converted to electricity MeOH =<BR>
>methanol, CH4 = methane, see tables below.<BR>
>HGHCD = high grade hydrocarbon distillate (assumed to be equivalent to<BR>
>diesel fuel in energy density).<BR>
<BR>
>Oxidiser multiplier<BR>
>For each volume of fuel, the minimum volume of LOX required is :-<BR>
>Fuel    Multiplier<BR>
>LH2     0.5<BR>
>MeOH    1.22<BR>
>CH4     1.13<BR>
>EtOH    1.8<BR>
>HGHCD   3.5*<BR>
<BR>
>The density of LOX is 1.15g/cc. EtOH = ethanol.<BR>
>* Assumes high grade hydrocarbon distillate has an average chain length<BR>
>of 9, and is fully saturated.<BR>
<BR>
>Energy densities for some fuels :-<BR>
>Type     MJ/kg MJ/L   density   Fuel Rate (L/MW-h, 100% eff) Diesel    40   <BR>
>36     0.9       1000<BR>
>EtOH      27    21.3   0.8       1690<BR>
>MeOH      19.7  15.6   0.8       2308<BR>
>CH4       24.2  10.6   0.436     3380    <BR>
>Hydrogen* 1.6	0.14   0.0875    257143<BR>
>LH2	  12	0.84   0.07      42857<BR>
<BR>
>density in g/cc<BR>
>*gas at zero C<BR>
<BR>
>Constructive criticism (including "We don't need this stuff on this list<BR>
>as vehicle design is a sorted issue, so there!") welcome.<BR>
<BR>
>Robert O'Connor<BR>
>Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:27:55 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Adjusting sensor ranges (was ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
> Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 10:29:02 -0300<BR>
> From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
> Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
>          USe GUNDAM's approach to the problem.  A high-energy particle<BR>
that<BR>
> is easily createable in mass quantities that is *opaque* to RADAR<BR>
> energies.  Result:  all combats in the GUNDAM universe are fought at<BR>
> *visual* ranges (albeit, optically enhanced visual) since *nobody* can get<BR>
> a fire-control lock on *anybody* and anything more than a few dozen KM at<BR>
> most...  far enough for PD to work, but that is *it*.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Umm, given the short range of vaguely reasonable Active EMS (radar) systems<BR>
under the Definitive Sensor Rules, people pretty much use passive systems<BR>
(PEMS), looking in the IR and visual spectrums.<BR>
<BR>
The best and easiest way to cut the sensor range down is to casually say as<BR>
the GM "erra is an unusually clear system. Most other places have the 'dusty<BR>
system' modifiers. A 1.5 mod cuts detection and firing ranges by a factor of<BR>
fifty, which should be enough for all you close-ram-and-board types.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>          Hey, if we are going to keep meson guns knowing how little it<BR>
> behaves like real mesons, why is *that* such a stretch?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
No no no ... it was built by Bob Meson, and works by adjusting the<BR>
phase-space of several flavours of quarks.<BR>
<BR>
>          Alternately, if that is too much to swallow, just say that EM<BR>
> warfare is so effective that you can jam the bleepers out of anything you<BR>
> want to.  Same result.<BR>
<BR>
Well, in that case we need to tweak the costs and effectiveness of ECM<BR>
systems. Better to be sneaky and just apply the dusty system mods.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:43:33 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
> Fusion rockets are pretty practical. They're nuisances to use, but<BR>
> that gives them flavour - which I think is important. If ships can get<BR>
> HEPLAR like reaction drives with good efficiency and no side<BR>
> effects at TL9, that removes any feeling of difference between TL9<BR>
> and TL10. I think we don't want to smooth the tech curve but want to<BR>
> make the early TLs as distinct as possible. So TL9 ships with fusion<BR>
> rockets can't land on planets; that's kind of fun.<BR>
<BR>
Note that the solution to this involves three thrust systems - a fusion<BR>
rocket for serious thrust, a contragravity system to get into orbit, and a<BR>
NERVA system to get from orbit to where you can fire up the fusion rocket.<BR>
<BR>
Oh ? You are an Early Terran ship, and you cant use contragravity ? Bummer.<BR>
<BR>
<good discussion of TLs of early thrust systems snipped><BR>
<BR>
Can I get some numbers from someone more technically competant about the<BR>
laser rocket idea ? Basically, you fire a big laser up the bum of the<BR>
rocket, where it heats up air. Laser turns off, hot air rushes out, we get<BR>
thrust. Repeat.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, you know the one.<BR>
<BR>
It strikes me that such a 'remote power' system could be useful for a lot of<BR>
other things - if we have a TL13 laser with a range of three light-seconds<BR>
on our main belter rock, then we could beam power to our shuttles going to<BR>
other rocks. This allows us to have a much cheaper unmanned shuttle, which<BR>
might just make such a system economic, as compared to shuttles with<BR>
expensive thruster plates, or expensive fusion plant+heplar combinations.<BR>
<BR>
Oh, and if anyone tries to steal our nice shuttle, we just up the juice on<BR>
the main laser from Gridlore power level to Famile Spofulam power level :)<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:46:09 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Alien vision (was Re: Imperial Army Uniform)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> You see, color vision requires at least two sets of receptors with<BR>
> notably *different* response curves to differing wavelengths. We use<BR>
> three (I think).<BR>
<BR>
Correct. Young's trichromacy theory, later proven to be correct by the<BR>
histologists and physiologists.<BR>
<BR>
> So aliens with more receptors will draw distinctions we'll be unable to<BR>
> see.<BR>
In most cases, more wouldn't be required ; the response range of the<BR>
pigments could be extended. I suppose another family for different<BR>
spectral ranges (e.g. near infrared or ultraviolet) could have evolved.<BR>
<BR>
> Worse yet, if the aliens use *different* visual pigments than we do,<BR>
> they'll experience colors differently than we do.<BR>
Yes. Heck, there's such a subjective component to vision that there can<BR>
be big differences in how people perceive colours.<BR>
<BR>
One can imagine the section of the Imperial Data Package dealing with<BR>
baseline ergonomic requirements for equipment, given the variations in<BR>
sensory modalities, let alone acuities, likely to be found in the 3I...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:46:20 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> Anybody know what the Isp of "single-H" is?<BR>
<BR>
>From NASA TM97-206228, an Isp of 750 sec using *contemporary engine<BR>
technology* would be possible with 15% by weight atomic hydrogen.<BR>
<BR>
The problem with all the proposed monoatomic propellants is<BR>
stabilisation ; this is cutting edge stuff in cryogenics, ISTR.<BR>
<BR>
> Ok, but would you answer a question for me? <BR>
> <BR>
> Vectors have a magnitude and direction.<BR>
> T*ns*rs have a magnitude (or is it magnitudes?) and *two* directions.<BR>
> <BR>
> Is there a "next step"? If so, would it be of any use in describing<BR>
> phenomena in a 4d (space & time) universe?<BR>
<BR>
Aren't they tensors for all n => 3?<BR>
<BR>
> An Isp of 1e6 means an exhaust velocity of 1/30th of c. <g><BR>
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Given the literature<BR>
available, it seems to be about the right order of magnitude (if it<BR>
pushes the speculative limit for rocket scientists).<BR>
<BR>
> A photon rocket that gives noticable thrust is going to be a weapon<BR>
> capable of carving up planets if it's focused, or frying them if it<BR>
> isn't.<BR>
Doh! It should have its output capped like lasers are in the later<BR>
issues of the rules.<BR>
<BR>
"It's not a spinal laser mount, it's my ship's main drive..."<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Mac noted (in FFS3 reaction drives) :-<BR>
> These all seem low; I know that these are the TLs all these ideas<BR>
> were proposed at, but that doesn't mean someone could really build a<BR>
> NSTR in the 1980s, without 1990s-quality computer modelling,<BR>
> for example.<BR>
Fair enough. Prototypes can be built one TTL earlier at a whacking great<BR>
Reliability penalty.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:46:53 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Hull Materials (was : Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> > Crystal Iron won't do?  <g> <BR>
> <BR>
> Unless it's a lot *denser* than regular iron, no, it won't. You'd need<BR>
> several *meters* to provide adequate shielding, if I recall correctly.<BR>
<BR>
What about magnetic shielding effects (isn't a crystaliron hull supposed<BR>
to be one big magnet)? <BR>
<BR>
I know it won't stop gamma rays and neutrons (put the LH2 tanks around<BR>
part of the crew area to form a 'storm shelter' instead), but charged<BR>
particles will be deflected, which makes up a goodly fraction of<BR>
insystem radiation.<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:01:16 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: "Neal C. Oldham" <nco@its.caltech.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Alternative scientific chargen for CT<BR>
<BR>
Already finding errors...<BR>
<BR>
Please not that I intended for a character to receive two levels in<BR>
his/her specialty after completion of graduate school.<BR>
<BR>
Also, the bonus roll should take place on the cash table.<BR>
<BR>
- ---<BR>
Neal C. Oldham<BR>
nco@caltech.edu<BR>
<BR>
ad astra!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:20:27 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: [BITS] Website update 29 July 2000<BR>
<BR>
BITS - British Isles Traveller Support<BR>
http://www.bits.org.uk/<BR>
<BR>
Hi all,<BR>
<BR>
The BITS website has been updated:<BR>
<BR>
	1) GT Bestiary added to Products Page.<BR>
<BR>
See the accompanying email for details of Rob Prior's excellent <BR>
software for MacOS.<BR>
<BR>
	2) Enormous Update of Travelling Pages.<BR>
<BR>
Yes, we've added a whole load of conventions to the Travelling Pages, <BR>
including the next two big ones BITS is attending: GenCon UK 2000, <BR>
and the all new DragonMeet in November 2000. Check the pages out to <BR>
find out where we'll be and what's happening.<BR>
<BR>
Anticipate another update in the next week with addition of the <BR>
mirror site for Stuart Ferris' excellent 'Heaven and Earth' for <BR>
Windows.<BR>
<BR>
Cheers,<BR>
<BR>
Dom Mooney (BITS Webmaster)<BR>
- -------------Dom Mooney---webmaster@bits.org.uk----------------<BR>
                  BITS - British Isles Traveller Support.<BR>
  http://www.bits.org.uk/              mailto:bits@bits.org.uk<BR>
Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
GURPS is a registered trademark of Steve Jackson Games, Inc.<BR>
BITS, CORE and their respective logos are trademarks of BITS UK Limited.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:19:51 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
BITS - British Isles Traveller Support<BR>
http://www.bits.org.uk/<BR>
<BR>
*****GT Bestiary by Rob Prior Now Available!<BR>
<BR>
Rob Prior has added yet another excellent program for MacOS to the <BR>
collection of shareware he has released through BITS. GT Bestiary <BR>
generates animals/lifeforms for different worlds and environments on <BR>
those worlds.<BR>
<BR>
And the program isn't just limited to GURPS Traveller. It will <BR>
produce output usable for Classic Traveller, MegaTraveller and T4.<BR>
<BR>
Key features:<BR>
*Define world age and evolution levels.<BR>
*Define sentience levels.<BR>
*Automatically generate animal names using languages ranging from <BR>
Vilani to Welsh and Maori.<BR>
*Generate for many biomes from Alpine areas through Polar Forests to Woodlands.<BR>
*Edit entries and export in text or html.<BR>
<BR>
GT Bestiary - a demonstration version may be downloaded from BITS to <BR>
try out. This is fully functional except that the saving and print <BR>
routines are disabled. The demo and product information may be <BR>
reached from the Products page on the BITS website.<BR>
<BR>
Full versions of GT Bestiary can be obtained as detailed in the demo <BR>
registration box for the small sum of  $10 US/CAN or 5 (UK and <BR>
Europe).<BR>
<BR>
Enjoy,<BR>
<BR>
Dom Mooney (BITS Webmaster)<BR>
<BR>
- -------------Dom Mooney---webmaster@bits.org.uk----------------<BR>
                 BITS - British Isles Traveller Support.<BR>
 http://www.bits.org.uk/              mailto:bits@bits.org.uk<BR>
Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
GURPS is a registered trademark of Steve Jackson Games, Inc.<BR>
BITS, CORE and their respective logos are trademarks of BITS UK Limited.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:22:42 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Eris Reddoch wrote :-<BR>
> Now, my favorite under utilized power plant idea is Boron cycle<BR>
> thermo-nuclear fission.<BR>
Hmm. There could be problems, in the absence of nuclear damping :-<BR>
<BR>
> http://epswww.epfl.ch/aps/BAPSDPP98/abs/S6900007.html<BR>
> <BR>
> [R8M3.07] Fundamental Limitations on Advanced-Fuel Fusion<BR>
> <BR>
> Todd H. Rider (MIT Lincoln Laboratory) <BR>
> <BR>
> Several fundamental physical limitations which apply<BR>
> to a very broad range of advanced-fuel fusion approaches will be<BR>
> considered. [1,2] Effects to be discussed include bremsstrahlung<BR>
> radiation and particle scattering due to ion-ion, ion-electron,<BR>
> and electron-electron collisions. A variety of advanced fuels<BR>
> will be considered,including D-3He, 3He-3He, p-11B, and p-6Li.<BR>
> Results will be given for fusion plasmas which are substantially<BR>
> out of thermodynamic equilibrium, as well as for plasmas which are<BR>
> close to equilibrium. <BR>
> <BR>
> [1] T.H. Rider, Ph.D. thesis, MIT (1995).<BR>
> [2] T.H. Rider, Phys. Plasmas 4, 1039 (1997). <BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
The upshot is that energy losses for proton-catalysed fusion are likely<BR>
to be large, with fusion gain ratios (Q = fusion power/radiative loss)<BR>
on the order of 1-2%.<BR>
<BR>
Workarounds include spin-polarising the fuel - but this only doubles or<BR>
triples Q. (This trick could also be used to make D-D fusion almost<BR>
aneutronic).<BR>
<BR>
Alternate plasma geometries e.g. colliding beam fusion, may also<BR>
circumvent the gain problem. Maximal Q looks like about 3-4 with such<BR>
reactor configurations, comparable to D-3He. <BR>
<BR>
ref :-<BR>
Science : Volume 278(5342), 21 November 1997, pp 1419-1422 :-<BR>
Rostoker, Norman; Binderbauer, Michl W.; Monkhorst, Hendrik J.<BR>
Colliding Beam Fusion Reactor [Article]<BR>
<BR>
and the response to this article on the 'Science' website.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2837<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb02.mx.aol.com (rly-yb02.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.2]) by air-yb01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:29:27 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:28:57 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id TAA47982;<BR>
	Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:28:33 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:28:29 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id TAA47938<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:28:29 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:28:29 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007292328.TAA47938@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2837<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2838</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/29/00 7:07:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, July 29 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2838<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re : Trav-Tech Mailing list<BR>
Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
Re: FFS2<BR>
Re: FFS2<BR>
Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
Re: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:25:36 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Trav-Tech Mailing list<BR>
<BR>
Thom Jones-Low wrote :-<BR>
> Are you sure these address's are correct?<BR>
> I'd love to subscribe, but I keep getting errors when trying to get tp<BR>
> them.<BR>
<BR>
Hmm...<BR>
I'm waiting for a reply from majordomo@quark.qrc.com.<BR>
The qrc.com addy is invalid.<BR>
<BR>
List's effectively dead from lack of traffic.<BR>
Archives should still be available (though I haven't checked for<BR>
months).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:46:55 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
> Can I get some numbers from someone more technically competant about the<BR>
> laser rocket idea ? Basically, you fire a big laser up the bum of the<BR>
> rocket, where it heats up air. Laser turns off, hot air rushes out, we<BR>
get<BR>
> thrust. Repeat.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe we're talking about different systems, but the only ground-to-orbit<BR>
laser propulsion system I've heard of has the laser at the other end. You<BR>
shine it down from a satellite onto your lift vehicle, which has a<BR>
parabolic concave upper surface  covered with mostly reflective<BR>
photovoltaic cells. These reflect the laser (or maser, I think) energy onto<BR>
a single point, which receives so much energy the air tries out the plasma<BR>
lifestyle. Then energy absorbed by the photovoltaic cells is used to power<BR>
a torus of electromagnets (ISTR they'd need room temperature semiconductors<BR>
to get enough flux density) and the field this generated pulls the air<BR>
plasma down past the sides of the craft, in turn drawing more air into the<BR>
focus. This builds up a nice airstream, and sucks the craft up the laser<BR>
beam. Ta-da!<BR>
<BR>
Besides which, you can use the maser satellite for direct beamed power when<BR>
you're not launching life vehicles.<BR>
<BR>
(But no, I'm afraid I don't have numbers.)<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:38:03 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> I wish that practical reaction drives became available slightly earlier,<BR>
>> (at Tech Level 9) became obsolete slightly later (at Tech Level 12, or<BR>
>> perhaps even 13).<BR>
><BR>
> Fusion rockets are pretty practical. They're nuisances to use, but<BR>
> that gives them flavour - which I think is important. If ships can get<BR>
> HEPLAR like reaction drives with good efficiency and no side<BR>
> effects at TL9, that removes any feeling of difference between TL9<BR>
> and TL10. I think we don't want to smooth the tech curve but want to<BR>
> make the early TLs as distinct as possible. So TL9 ships with fusion<BR>
> rockets can't land on planets; that's kind of fun.<BR>
<BR>
They should be able to land. But not too close to anything you care<BR>
about. That's why you need a body of water, or a big hunk of more or<BR>
less exposed bedrock.<BR>
<BR>
>>Solid core fission rockets TTL 6-7<BR>
>>Nuclear salt water rockets TTL 7+<BR>
>>Orion TTL 6+<BR>
>>Ion rockets TTL 6-7+<BR>
>>Solar sails TTL 6+<BR>
>>Magsails TTL 7+<BR>
> These all seem low; I know that these are the TLs all these ideas<BR>
> were proposed at, but that doesn't mean someone could really build a<BR>
> NSTR in the 1980s, without 1990s-quality computer modelling,<BR>
> for example. The approach that was taken with the actual rocket<BR>
> rockets in FFS2 (the chemical ones), one should note, is to generally<BR>
> put them at a fairly high TL (eg the Space Shuttle Main Engines are<BR>
> TL8) on the assumption that the actual fielded models only count as<BR>
> prototypes one TL early (eg the SSMEs are so cranky they need to<BR>
> be rebuilt every flight, so they're TL7 prototypes of TL8 rockets.)<BR>
<BR>
Actually, as I understand it, it's more a case of the SSMEs being like<BR>
the engine in a race car. Not cranky, but run so close to the edge that<BR>
you *have* to do a rebuild after every use. '<BR>
<BR>
That's why a lot of *private* designs use various engines normally used<BR>
in expendable boosters in a "de-rated" configuration. By reducing the<BR>
performance a bit you *greatly* extend both the lifetime of the engine,<BR>
and the need for maintenance. As I recall, we are talked about 5-10%<BR>
reductions in performance in return for *greatly* extended lifetimes<BR>
and servicing intervals.<BR>
<BR>
And solid core fission rockets *are* TL 6. We *built* a fully functional<BR>
engine in the early 60s. It'd have flown if the politics around the<BR>
test ban treaty and other things hadn't gotten in the way. It was<BR>
ground tested. And the VAB has shielding around the level it would have<BR>
been at when mated to a Saturn V first stage.<BR>
<BR>
I'm not sure if it'd fit a Space Shuttle cargo bay (anybody have the<BR>
dimensions of the cargo bay, and of the upper stages of a Saturn V?)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:41:11 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
> Subject: FFS2<BR>
><BR>
> With my exams and all out of the way I'm starting (for my sins) to learn<BR>
> the FFS2 design sequence. I'm trying, really hard, and I can see that<BR>
> there's a lot of really good stuff in there, but I'm finding it almost<BR>
> impossible to break through the bizarre arrangement of the book. Tables<BR>
> seem to be mislabelled (To convert sensor ranges from previous FFS1 rules,<BR>
> use Table 204: LIDAR volume?)<BR>
<BR>
There are two fundamental things to remember about FFS2. Firstly, it's got<BR>
buckets of misprints. Secondly, it's ahhh orginised in an interesting<BR>
fashion.<BR>
<BR>
I'd say the reference to table 204 should be a reference to table 194: Range<BR>
Factors.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> I'm also at a serious loss with the sensor systems. I've used T4 before,<BR>
> but not for stuff in space - I always kept Brilliant Lances for that - so<BR>
I<BR>
> really don't get the sensitivity ratings. Particularly since the only<BR>
> example refers to a scout with sensitivity 6, and you can't seem to buy<BR>
> sensors below sensitivity 13. I'm confused. Is there an explanation (or<BR>
> re-write, or errata) available somewhere?<BR>
<BR>
The example has two errors that cancel each other out. Five million klicks<BR>
is actually range factor twelve.<BR>
<BR>
It should read ...<BR>
<BR>
"So, if a Type S with a sensor rating of 12.5 was trying to detect a DD with<BR>
a signature of 1 at a range of 5 million  km, the total would be (12.5) +<BR>
(1.0) - (12) = 1.5, a very easy task for a skilled operator". The range of<BR>
12 comes from table 194.<BR>
<BR>
I'd strongly recommend using Bruce Macintosh's Definitive Sensor Rules.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Nick<BR>
> (miserable and confused gearhead)<BR>
<BR>
It gets like that. Make sure you tell us what pisses you off most, so we can<BR>
fix it in the FFS3 project.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 01:37:37 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2<BR>
<BR>
> I'd strongly recommend using Bruce Macintosh's Definitive Sensor Rules.<BR>
<BR>
Much as I'd love to, I'd still like to design the ship using FFS2. Are the<BR>
DSR compatible? Where can I find them?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 16:50:27 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Can I get some numbers from someone more technically competant about the<BR>
> laser rocket idea ? Basically, you fire a big laser up the bum of the<BR>
> rocket, where it heats up air. Laser turns off, hot air rushes out, we get<BR>
> thrust. Repeat.<BR>
<BR>
That's one version. The other (and much higher thrust!) version has a<BR>
big chunk of ice (possibly "doped" with chemicals to improve conversion<BR>
to plasma). The laser pulse converts a layer of the surface to plasma,<BR>
which expands explosively (planar shock wave, except at the very<BR>
edges). This gives the vehicle a kick in the ass. Then just as the<BR>
plasma clears, the next pulse hits. Repeat until orbit. <BR>
<BR>
*Real* rough figures, from a filk song by Jordin Kare (Jordin worked<BR>
with the guy (Jake Kantrowitz) who originally came up with the idea<BR>
back in 1972 or so, and has worked on a lot of other fun stuff like<BR>
rail guns).<BR>
<BR>
         Fuel: "5 tons of ice"<BR>
      Payload: "a clear ton of payload" <BR>
        Accel: 10 gees<BR>
   Beam power: "billion watt beam"<BR>
time to orbit: "5 minutes flat"<BR>
<BR>
Vehicle mass isn't mentioned. <BR>
<BR>
This is (obviously) for a cargo pod system. It'd take a much *bigger*<BR>
laser for a manned vehicle.<BR>
<BR>
Note the laser power. The idea was to use an array of lasers, both for<BR>
reliability, and for flexibility. In fact the original idea was<BR>
multi-use. The lasers would be "primarily" for anti-missile defense (or<BR>
in Traveller, for planetary defense). The power plants for them would<BR>
provide power to the "local" power grid during times of peak load, and<BR>
boost cargo the rest of the time.<BR>
<BR>
A laser launch system for a "mere" 100 ton shuttle would obviously run<BR>
at hundreds of gigawatts. And the individual lasers in the array would<BR>
be formidable weapons. <BR>
<BR>
Just check the weapons rules to see what a "mere" 1 GW pulse will do to<BR>
a ship. Then consider that these lasers would be designed for a pulse<BR>
rate in the vicinity of 1 per second or less. In a 30 minute combat<BR>
turn, that's 1800 pulses!<BR>
<BR>
> It strikes me that such a 'remote power' system could be useful for a lot of<BR>
> other things - if we have a TL13 laser with a range of three light-seconds<BR>
> on our main belter rock, then we could beam power to our shuttles going to<BR>
> other rocks. This allows us to have a much cheaper unmanned shuttle, which<BR>
> might just make such a system economic, as compared to shuttles with<BR>
> expensive thruster plates, or expensive fusion plant+heplar combinations.<BR>
<BR>
Maintaining aim at those ranges is a bit tricky. But with a little<BR>
work, you can boost "ingots" by using "slag" as reaction mass. <BR>
<BR>
> Oh, and if anyone tries to steal our nice shuttle, we just up the juice on<BR>
> the main laser from Gridlore power level to Famile Spofulam power level :)<BR>
<BR>
No need. Laser launch systems for any amount of mass worth mentioning<BR>
*require* weapons-grade power levels.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:28:18 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>          USe GUNDAM's approach to the problem.  A high-energy particle<BR>
> that<BR>
>> is easily createable in mass quantities that is *opaque* to RADAR<BR>
>> energies.  Result:  all combats in the GUNDAM universe are fought at<BR>
>> *visual* ranges (albeit, optically enhanced visual) since *nobody* can<BR>
> get<BR>
>> a fire-control lock on *anybody* and anything more than a few dozen KM at<BR>
>> most...  far enough for PD to work, but that is *it*.<BR>
><BR>
> So the cloud's not opaque to visual light? Then why can't I build a big<BR>
> LIDAR, or a high-resolution telescope linked to a CCD and a computer, and<BR>
> use those just like I'd use radar?<BR>
<BR>
Or just look for the *huge* IR signatures of all those ships.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:29:09 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 10:32 PM 7/29/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>So the cloud's not opaque to visual light? Then why can't I build a big<BR>
>>LIDAR, or a high-resolution telescope linked to a CCD and a computer, and<BR>
>>use those just like I'd use radar?<BR>
>><BR>
>>Nick<BR>
><BR>
>          Both of those are point systems, not "sweepers".  You are right, <BR>
> once you *know* where the target is, finding him with LIDAR for a weapons <BR>
> lock isn't bad.  What happens is your *detection* ranges get beaten to <BR>
> shit.  To quote _Armageddon_ "...and its an awfully big-assed sky, mister <BR>
> President..."  So instead of automatically seeing the target at 50,000+ km, <BR>
> maybe you are down to a dozen megametres...  at "real space speeds(tm)", <BR>
> you'll run out of those in a hurry.<BR>
<BR>
Except that in IR anything using power, or even at human livable<BR>
temperatures sticks out like a sore thumb against the *cold*<BR>
(*literally* hundreds of times colder!) sky.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:32:34 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/28/00 at 10:54 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
><BR>
>>Well, one thing that'd help would be if someone came up with a way to<BR>
>>stabilize monoatomic hydrogen (ie H, rather than H2). As I recall, this<BR>
>>gives a *chemical* rocket with an ISP approaching the preliminary NERVA<BR>
>>designs ( 2H -> H2 yiels a *lot* of energy, and the exhaust is about as<BR>
>>low a molecular weight as you can get).<BR>
><BR>
> I can't think of a handwave for this one.  I agree it would be a<BR>
> *neat* effect..remember "Salvage One" <g>...but how you could *do*<BR>
> it??  No idea.<BR>
><BR>
> There was a design, contemporay with NERVA, that looked very nice.<BR>
> It couldn't be built then because it involved creating parts with<BR>
> microgroves and pin holes in quantity.  I think it was called Dumbo,<BR>
> but I could be mis-remembering..anyway there was a writeup about it<BR>
> in Analog back in the mid-seventies if you want to go look it up.<BR>
<BR>
I probably have it. But it's sheer luck that the Analog with the NERVA<BR>
article isn't buried in storage with the rest of my pre-90s Analogs.<BR>
<BR>
> Now, my favorite under utilized power plant idea is Boron cycle<BR>
> thermo-nuclear fission.  The radiation is weak enough to be blocked<BR>
> with low weight shielding, the power density is good, it requires<BR>
> the use of "purified hydrogen" or you get bad, unwanted results, and<BR>
> the PC's would have to fuel up with, compaired to hydrogen, rare<BR>
> boron every few weeks.<BR>
<BR>
Hardly. Unless it's *really* inefficient, a kilo should provide enough<BR>
energy for *years*. Post the "cycle" and I'll calculate the raw energy<BR>
output. Fusion generates a *lot* of power from very little mass.<BR>
<BR>
The usual "rule of thumb" for fusion is that .1 percent of the fuel<BR>
mass is converted to energy. 1 GW of energy would require about 22<BR>
grams of fuel per second. Less than 2 tons a day, a bit over 13 tons a<BR>
week. Or 700 tons a year.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 17:47:43 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
>> Anybody know what the Isp of "single-H" is?<BR>
><BR>
>>From NASA TM97-206228, an Isp of 750 sec using *contemporary engine<BR>
> technology* would be possible with 15% by weight atomic hydrogen.<BR>
<BR>
That's the same Isp as the old NERVA engine!<BR>
<BR>
And for FFS3 I'd say we just call it 800 (I figure a "mature"<BR>
technology could do that). This gives a nice option for fission and<BR>
fusion rockets. They can land and take off using single-H, and use<BR>
fission/fusion heating at higher altitudes. <BR>
<BR>
> The problem with all the proposed monoatomic propellants is<BR>
> stabilisation ; this is cutting edge stuff in cryogenics, ISTR.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, stabilizing it is gonna be fun. And don't even *think* about a<BR>
fuel tank hit.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, if the ship's power plant is up to it, maybe you<BR>
could feed regular LH2 into a "converter" that turns it into monoatomic<BR>
hydrogen. Then you only need to keep it stable until it reaches the<BR>
engine.<BR>
<BR>
>> Ok, but would you answer a question for me? <BR>
>> <BR>
>> Vectors have a magnitude and direction.<BR>
>> T*ns*rs have a magnitude (or is it magnitudes?) and *two* directions.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Is there a "next step"? If so, would it be of any use in describing<BR>
>> phenomena in a 4d (space & time) universe?<BR>
><BR>
> Aren't they tensors for all n => 3?<BR>
<BR>
I don't know. <BR>
<BR>
>> An Isp of 1e6 means an exhaust velocity of 1/30th of c. <g><BR>
<BR>
> I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Given the literature<BR>
> available, it seems to be about the right order of magnitude (if it<BR>
> pushes the speculative limit for rocket scientists).<BR>
<BR>
Just commenting.<BR>
<BR>
>> A photon rocket that gives noticable thrust is going to be a weapon<BR>
>> capable of carving up planets if it's focused, or frying them if it<BR>
>> isn't.<BR>
<BR>
> Doh! It should have its output capped like lasers are in the later<BR>
> issues of the rules.<BR>
<BR>
> "It's not a spinal laser mount, it's my ship's main drive..."<BR>
<BR>
It all depends on which way it points. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:00:11 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Classic Traveller<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/28/00 at 11:25 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
><BR>
>>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>>> Here's another proposal for eliminating Really Big Ships:<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> Tie the amount of thrust produced by a reactionless drive to its<BR>
>>> *surface area*, rather than to its *volume* (they're called<BR>
>>> "thruster PLATES" for a reason...)<BR>
>>>                                                      - J. Raynor<BR>
><BR>
>>I *like* it. And tie it to TL as well. But be sure that the progession is<BR>
>>*not* straight line. Because at *some* point, such progressions always<BR>
>>turn into nightmares. Maybe an asymptotic curve? <BR>
><BR>
> Give me a formula! <g><BR>
<BR>
I can't recall any of the formulas that generate them at the moment,<BR>
and my copy of Standard Math Tables (which has lots of curves &<BR>
formulas in the Analytic Geometry section) is in storage. :-(<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:34:09 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Jesse's Art Book<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/29/00 12:49 PM, Travelleri@home.com issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Size of page is up in the air, 8.5"x11" vs. 8.5"x14", the ratio seems to be<BR>
> off for most of the art I've seen on Jesse's page. Now 11"x17"... ah, you'd<BR>
> probably lose sales at that size. I'd say go with the size that best fits<BR>
> the size ratio of the art. I'd rather see a smaller page than one with a lot<BR>
> of open area around the picture. I sure don't want to see them stretched and<BR>
> distorted to fit a page size ratio that they weren't designed for.<BR>
<BR>
No, streching is bad. But what about some info about the picture in whatever<BR>
margin there is, or some color text like the Beowulf mayday?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 15:58:55 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
On 07/28/00 at 10:54 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
>Well, one thing that'd help would be if someone came up with a way to<BR>
>stabilize monoatomic hydrogen (ie H, rather than H2). As I recall, this<BR>
>gives a *chemical* rocket with an ISP approaching the preliminary NERVA<BR>
>designs ( 2H -> H2 yiels a *lot* of energy, and the exhaust is about as<BR>
>low a molecular weight as you can get).<BR>
<BR>
Actually, there is a trick, but I'm not sure its practical.  You<BR>
put them in a magnetic field which lines up the spins of all the<BR>
free electrons.  The hydrogens can't combine until the two spins<BR>
are pared.  However, I think the size of the magnetic field necesary<BR>
to fight the effects of any reasonable temperature maybe rather<BR>
high (though it has beena while since I've been exposed to this...)<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:43:24 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 10:29 PM 7/29/00, you wrote:<BR>
> >          Both of those are point systems, not "sweepers".  You are right,<BR>
> > once you *know* where the target is, finding him with LIDAR for a weapons<BR>
> > lock isn't bad.  What happens is your *detection* ranges get beaten to<BR>
> > shit.  To quote _Armageddon_ "...and its an awfully big-assed sky, mister<BR>
> > President..."  So instead of automatically seeing the target at 50,000+ <BR>
> km,<BR>
> > maybe you are down to a dozen megametres...  at "real space speeds(tm)",<BR>
> > you'll run out of those in a hurry.<BR>
><BR>
>Except that in IR anything using power, or even at human livable<BR>
>temperatures sticks out like a sore thumb against the *cold*<BR>
>(*literally* hundreds of times colder!) sky.<BR>
>--<BR>
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
<BR>
         Hi, Leonard!<BR>
         Hmmm.  Passive operations (currently, RW) aren't accurate enough <BR>
to do fire-control with.  Yes, TMA will allow you to build up a roughly <BR>
accurate track about where the contact is, but that's much different than <BR>
being able to hit it with a weapon.  Particularly at light-lag ranges.  So, <BR>
again, you can see the contact a long way away, and you can do what you <BR>
need to do to intercept it and classify it, but attacking is still a "short <BR>
range" problem.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:08:23 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Cool. Note that fission has major military disadvantages, once nuclear<BR>
> dampers come along, so fission as a 'civilian' technology works.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, fusion has the exact same problem. Dampers *may* require a<BR>
different setting for fusion than for fission, but they'll work on<BR>
either. <BR>
<BR>
>>> Anyone (maybe also Leonard)<BR>
>>> Life Support. I'd like something a bit more differentiated.<BR>
<BR>
There's a reference in Ben Bova's "Return to Mars" that needs to be<BR>
tracked down by someone with a better browser than I currently have<BR>
access to.<BR>
<BR>
Check for references to "the Living Machine" which is a<BR>
sewage/wastewater treatment system using plants (much like what I've<BR>
described in the past), and producing clean water and food (as well as<BR>
air in space uses). It might not be usable on ships, but it ought to be<BR>
usable in stations, and on worlds with incompatible biosphers (or no<BR>
biosphere). <BR>
<BR>
>>> General :<BR>
>>> Some thoughts about a 'quality' system.<BR>
>> <snip><BR>
>>> I dont want you to squeeze more performance out of a given TL, but<BR>
>>> I think you should be able to trade down performance or price for<BR>
>>> more reliability.<BR>
>><BR>
>> If performance is defined as engine specific power, say (W/kg or W/L)<BR>
>> then you can squeeze out more 'grunt', up to a point - compare a model<BR>
>> aircraft petrol engine to that of a motorcycle, standard car, or purpose<BR>
>> built racer.<BR>
><BR>
> Isnt this mostly a surface area:volume thing with smaller engines ?<BR>
<BR>
Not entirely. You can take essentially the same engine get tune it for<BR>
high performance. That increases maintenance costs drasticly. It also<BR>
requires *very* frequent maintenance. Think "race car".<BR>
<BR>
You can also take that same "stock" engine and modify it to run in a<BR>
low maintenance mode at *reduced* performance.<BR>
<BR>
Note that "small" changes in required performance lead to *big* changes<BR>
in reliability and in frequency of maintenance.<BR>
<BR>
Also, "constant load" applications are far easier on motors than<BR>
varying or intermittent loads. Compare the lifetimes of the electric<BR>
motor in a clock with a similar one used under varying loads.<BR>
<BR>
>> Preliminary thoughts, using Marc's T5 draft item attribute system :-<BR>
>> * Reliability<BR>
>> I relate this to recommended maintenance interval.<BR>
>> E.g.<BR>
>> - - A Formula 1 car has low reliability (-5) since it needs to be<BR>
>> thoroughly serviced after a two hour race.<BR>
>> - - A starship has high reliability (4 or 5) since it only needs annual<BR>
>> maintenance to safely operate.<BR>
<BR>
It should also relate to expected performance/output. So a civilian<BR>
ship that just cruises along between port and the jump limit can get<BR>
away with stretching that "annual" maintenance quite a bit. Military<BR>
ships that have to "redline" the drives a lot may need to get stuff<BR>
checked monthly. <BR>
<BR>
In fact, that's a thought. Make the maintenance intewrval affected by<BR>
how "hard" you work the unit. So if you've got a 3 g drive and never<BR>
boost above 1 g, you can either skip maintenance, or reduce the time<BR>
and cost (parts check out ok, so they don't need to be pulled out and<BR>
replaced). If you run it at 3g at all (and especially if you are using<BR>
rules that let you "push" it to 3.5 g or some such) you may have to<BR>
take it in early, or risk a breakdown.<BR>
<BR>
> I'd prefer to be using the one mechanic - 'Wear Value'.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, that's a good name for it. Get a bonus (reduced wear) for operating<BR>
below "nominal" power, and penalties for operating above. <BR>
<BR>
I think it'd even add flavor. Being able to "push" your drive past<BR>
normal output, but with increased wear, and a chance of outright<BR>
failure. <BR>
<BR>
Anybody have suggestions on values? Here's an example of the sort of<BR>
thing I'm thinking of:<BR>
<BR>
+100%	wear * 10, roll 1 on d6 to avoid failure<BR>
+50%    wear * 5, roll 1-3 on d6 to avoid failure<BR>
+10%	wear * 2, roll 1-5 on d6 to avoid failure<BR>
<BR>
Failures rolls are made every combat turn.<BR>
<BR>
This is an example, not seriously suggested values. And there should<BR>
also be values for minuses on performance. Lessened wear, bonuses<BR>
against failure.<BR>
 <BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 18:46:43 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/28/00 at 11:45 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
><BR>
>>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>>> So I say we should be crippling the big ships, not making them illegal.<BR>
>>> Radiators were a good suggestion, and there have been others.<BR>
><BR>
>>Don't forget that radiators *also* make it possible to cripple a ship<BR>
>>without destroying it. <BR>
><BR>
> And a good thing that is too!  <g> Imagine damage control crews busily<BR>
> replacing destroyed radiators so the ship can get it's perfectly<BR>
> functional, but currently useless, weapons, drives, and power plant<BR>
> back on line.<BR>
<BR>
And to be *able* to repair them, some or all of the radiator needs to<BR>
be shut down. Otherwise the white hot radiators will *literally* fry<BR>
the folks trying to repair them. It'll also take a while for them to<BR>
cool off enough to work on. <BR>
<BR>
>>One item that needs to go in is efficiency of pwer plants. That is, how<BR>
>>many MW of heat does it produce for every *useful* MW it produces. At 90%<BR>
>>efficiency, you get .9 MW of power and .1 MW of heat. At 99%, you get .99<BR>
>>MW and .01 MW heat. Or in a more useful form, for each MW of useful power<BR>
>>you get (1/efficiency)-1 MW of heat.<BR>
><BR>
> Yes, but, as I'm sure you remember, 100% of those MW still<BR>
> eventually end up as heat that has to be radiated away...or gotten<BR>
> rid of somehow anyway.<BR>
<BR>
Sure. But my point is that if you want to power 50 GW of ship systems,<BR>
an 80% efficient power plant will mean that you need to get rid of 62.5<BR>
GW of heat. With 90% it's 55.6, with 95% it's 52.6, and with 99% it's<BR>
50.5. *Big* differences.<BR>
<BR>
>>I think we can skip detailing this, and just roll it into the power<BR>
>>requirements of the systems. The higher TL will result in less power<BR>
>>required, but all the power winds up as heat. That's likely easier to<BR>
>>work with and to explain.<BR>
><BR>
>>An exception *could* be made for radios, radar, and beam weapons, but I<BR>
>>don't know if it's worth the hassles. Opinions?<BR>
><BR>
> Probably not.  Just requiring radiators for 100% of the energy the pp<BR>
> produces gets close enough for game purposes.<BR>
<BR>
But as I note above, the "energy the pp produces" and "energy it<BR>
can *deliver*" are different things. <BR>
<BR>
The four power plants I list above can all *deliver* 50GW. But they<BR>
require greatly different amounts of radiator.<BR>
<BR>
I think "pp efficiency" doesn't add a lot of extra design work, but<BR>
*does* allow for extra "detailing" at different TLs. Low efficiency<BR>
plants are cheaper. And the extra radiator area may be cheaper than a<BR>
higher TL pp. It also gives players a way to upgrade a ship without<BR>
having to rebuild things. Swap out the old pp for a more efficient one<BR>
during annual maintenance. You wind up with extra radiator capacity,<BR>
and thus may be able to run weapons, manuever *and* charge the jump<BR>
grid all at the same time. <eg><BR>
<BR>
And yes, I think a civilian design that forces you to decide which<BR>
*two* of those three systems to run is a good thing. Especially if<BR>
there's this "easy" (but expensive) upgrade to the standard config. <BR>
<BR>
> I mean if we were<BR>
> getting really technical about this, we'd have to include the heat<BR>
> generated by the metabolisms of the people aboard too. <g><BR>
<BR>
About 100 watts per person. Trivial. At least in *most* cases.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:01:19 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/29/00 at 11:41 AM,  "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> <BR>
> said:<BR>
><BR>
>>> Don't forget that radiators *also* make it possible to cripple a ship<BR>
>>> without destroying it.<BR>
><BR>
>>No, it's even better than that. External sensor antennae make it possible<BR>
>>to cripple a ship by blinding it. External radiators slowly reduce the<BR>
>>power available to the ship as he takes light damage. He still has the<BR>
>>power available, but daren't operate the reactors at full power because<BR>
>>he can't get rid of the heat. I like the idea of ships having to juggle<BR>
>>energy as they lose radiator surfaces, and it makes fighters useful<BR>
>>again. Sure, we can't penetrate his armour, but we can force him to stop<BR>
>>firing that f**%*& meson gun...<BR>
><BR>
> A. you'll lose a lot of fighters doing it and B. he'll be repairing his <BR>
> sensors and radiators even while you are shooting them up.  It'll be a <BR>
> race...races are fun! <g><BR>
<BR>
That's the fun part. You *can't* repair a system and *use* it at the<BR>
same time. Radar and lidar have to shut down the damaged emitter until<BR>
it is repaired. as well as any that might fry the crew work on it. <BR>
<BR>
Radiators are even worse, because it'll take *time* to cool from white<BR>
heat (or even "merely" red-hot) to temps where you can live long enough<BR>
to make the repairs. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2838<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za01.mx.aol.com (rly-za01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.97]) by air-za03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:07:50 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:07:08 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA53767;<BR>
	Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:06:52 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:06:39 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA53697<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:06:39 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:06:39 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007300206.WAA53697@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2838<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2839</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/30/00 12:26:58 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, July 30 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2839<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
FFS3 power plants<BR>
Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
Re: Re : Hull Materials (was : Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
Re: Re : Alien vision (was Re: Imperial Army Uniform)<BR>
Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Leonard's rant (was Re: BATTLEDRESS...)<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
OT : Plastic Spaceships and Italian Penguins<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:09:32 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Except that in IR anything using power, or even at human livable<BR>
>temperatures sticks out like a sore thumb against the *cold*<BR>
>(*literally* hundreds of times colder!) sky.<BR>
<BR>
I have a few issues with this.  One is the assumption that<BR>
heat is radiated in all directions.  If you radiate heat<BR>
in one direction, then you only need to know one point<BR>
where the enemy is to avoid detection (heck, even if you<BR>
guess odds are good).  The other is that radiation must<BR>
be by black body radiation.  At traveller TLs it seems<BR>
reasonable that you might be able to manipulate the wavelength<BR>
down to the background.  Finally, I worked through the numbers<BR>
and using nearby stars to mask emission is viable to within<BR>
some distance (I'll have to see if I can't find my calc).  Stars<BR>
are far away, but they are really, really, really bright.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:10:27 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/29/00 at 05:01 PM,  eris@pcola.gulf.net said:<BR>
><BR>
> Aargh!  I screwed it up from Formidable down.  I used the .5 on<BR>
> purpose then forgot to apply it. <g> Here is the corrected table.<BR>
><BR>
>     PEMS-12.5                    30 kkm<BR>
>                                   hexes          kilometers<BR>
>     Easy        Contact   3      0 -   3          0 to 90,000<BR>
>     Routine     V Short   6      4 -   6     90,000 to 180,000<BR>
>     Difficult   Short     12.5   7 -  12    180,000 to 360,000<BR>
>     Formidable  Medium    25    13 -  25    360,000 to 750,000<BR>
>     Staggering  Long      50    26 -  50    750,000 to 1,500,000<BR>
>     Hopeless    V Long   100    51 - 100  1,500,000 to 3,000,000<BR>
>     Impossible  Extreme  200   101 - 200  3,000,000 to 6,000,000<BR>
<BR>
I think you've got a problem. Real world sensors can already beat those<BR>
figures at many wavelengths.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 15:21:59 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry<BR>
> At 05:48 PM 7/29/2000 +1200, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > To continue a discussion about non-cannoical battledress :<BR>
<BR>
> > As long as the body and head of the suit is large enough to<BR>
> > contain all or most of the user, where and how the legs and<BR>
> > arms of the suit move, and even if the suit has legs or arms,<BR>
> > are irrelevant to how, or whether, the user can move.<BR>
><BR>
> *sigh*<BR>
> Canonical battledress in Traveller, going back to the earliest sources I<BR>
> could find, all describe it as man-sized.  All the illustrations<BR>
> show suits of not more than large-human proportions.<BR>
<BR>
*sigh* right back at ya !<BR>
<BR>
I did specifically state that was a discusion of non-canonical battle dress,<BR>
I've re-included above the bit you cut out that said this.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
> There are wonderful games out there, Heavy Gear, Jovian Chronicles,<BR>
> Battletech, that have just these types of vehicles.  These things<BR>
> are *not* part of Traveller however.<BR>
<BR>
I've already said that I agree there is no canonical evidence that<BR>
battledress in Traveller  is like this.<BR>
<BR>
But just because a piece of possible technology isn't specifically shown in<BR>
a Traveller supplement is no good reason to state categorically that they<BR>
are not part of Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
AFAIK there is no direct mention of naginata or butterfly knives in a<BR>
Traveller supplement either. Would you seriously suggest that such weapons<BR>
could not be used in a Traveller game because of this ?<BR>
<BR>
> I think the only "mecha" I've seen was in DGP's _101 Vehicles_.<BR>
<BR>
There are also mecha in T2300, though obviously that doesn't count.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:05:14 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 power plants<BR>
<BR>
Rob O'Conner's stuff on Fuel Cells got me thinking.<BR>
<BR>
This is the result. Please ignore the specific numbers in the example - I am<BR>
looking for a structure that can describe any power plant. I would imagine a<BR>
variety of power plants for every kind of power plant at every TL eg 'Small<BR>
TL7' (motorbike engine - efficient but lots of heat) and 'Large TL7' (tank<BR>
engine. Less efficient, but less heat).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Power Plants<BR>
<BR>
A power plant is a method of turning fuel into electricity. Unfortunatly,<BR>
the universe being the sort of place it is, power plants also produce waste<BR>
products and waste heat.<BR>
<BR>
Waste products are assumed to be ejected outside the vehicle. Waste heat<BR>
must be radiated out of the vehicle, or the power plant will overheat and<BR>
fail - something familiar to every follower of Ferrari in Formula One<BR>
racing.<BR>
<BR>
Therefore, every power plant has three components - the chamber, the fuel<BR>
tank and the radiator.<BR>
<BR>
Fuel is rated for it's energy capacity, and is measured in liters.<BR>
<BR>
Each chamber is rated for it's fuel throughput per time unit, it's<BR>
percentage efficiency and it's percentage heat output.<BR>
<BR>
Radiators are rated for their capbility.<BR>
<BR>
Example : A TL8 diesel IC power plant.<BR>
<BR>
The chamber is capable of converting one liter of fuel per minute at 10%<BR>
efficency. It's heat output is equal to 10%.<BR>
<BR>
The 5cm thick radiator is capable of radiating 100 joules per square<BR>
centimeter per second in a standard atmosphere.<BR>
<BR>
The fuel is hydrocarbon distillates, and has an energy density of 36<BR>
megajoules per liter.<BR>
<BR>
Therefore, when the power plant is running, it will create 3.6 megajoules of<BR>
useful energy and 3.6 megajoules of waste heat every sixty seconds (or 60<BR>
kilowatts of energy, plus 60 kilowatts of waste heat).<BR>
<BR>
To get rid of this 60 kilowatts of waste heat, the power plant will need 600<BR>
cm^2 of radiator (or a 30cm by 20cm 5 cm thick plate).<BR>
<BR>
The power plant will need a fuel tank rated for hydrocarbons of an<BR>
appropriate volume.<BR>
<BR>
Example #2 : A TL10 Fission power plant<BR>
<BR>
The chamber is capable of converting one cc of fuel per month at 0.1%<BR>
efficiency. It's heat output is equal to 2.4%<BR>
<BR>
The 2cm thick radiators are capable of getting rid of 1200 watts of energy<BR>
in a standard atmosphere.<BR>
<BR>
The fuel is plutonium, and has an energy density of 9 * 10^16 joules per<BR>
gram.<BR>
<BR>
Therefore, when the power plant is running, it will create 9 * 10^14 joules<BR>
of useful energy per month, and 2.16 * 10^16 joules of waste heat per month<BR>
(at 43 200 seconds per month, this is 4.16 * 10^11 watts, or 20.833<BR>
gigawatts. It has to get rid of a staggering 500 gigawatts of waste heat).<BR>
<BR>
The radiator is capable of radiating 1200 watts per cm^2,  so we need 416<BR>
million cm^2 of radiator, or 41 600 m2 of radiator (or a 300m x 139 m<BR>
radiator)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:02:11 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
><BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
> > Cool. Note that fission has major military disadvantages, once nuclear<BR>
> > dampers come along, so fission as a 'civilian' technology works.<BR>
><BR>
> Actually, fusion has the exact same problem. Dampers *may* require a<BR>
> different setting for fusion than for fission, but they'll work on<BR>
> either.<BR>
<BR>
Leonard, think about the implications for a second.<BR>
<BR>
Given the ranges of nuclear dampers, if we allow them to turn off fusion<BR>
plants, we have a super-weapon.<BR>
<BR>
We dont want that.<BR>
<BR>
We dont mind if they can turn off/melt/whatever fission plants, because<BR>
fission is a TL6 technology and dampers are TL12, and if you try to use TL6<BR>
technologies in a TL12 battlefield, you deserve what you get.<BR>
<BR>
We dont know the details of how dampers work. Maybe TL12 dampers have a<BR>
narrow range of isotopes they work against. Maybe this goes up as damper TL<BR>
advances.<BR>
<BR>
But we cannot allow them to do anything to fusion reactors.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> >>> Anyone (maybe also Leonard)<BR>
> >>> Life Support. I'd like something a bit more differentiated.<BR>
><BR>
> There's a reference in Ben Bova's "Return to Mars" that needs to be<BR>
> tracked down by someone with a better browser than I currently have<BR>
> access to.<BR>
><BR>
> Check for references to "the Living Machine" which is a<BR>
> sewage/wastewater treatment system using plants (much like what I've<BR>
> described in the past), and producing clean water and food (as well as<BR>
> air in space uses). It might not be usable on ships, but it ought to be<BR>
> usable in stations, and on worlds with incompatible biosphers (or no<BR>
> biosphere).<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
*putting dictator hat on*<BR>
<BR>
Leonard, I want to split up the project. I definitely want to minimise the<BR>
work that any given person has to do. This includes me.<BR>
<BR>
So I'd like you to toss some reasonable numbers together, for various life<BR>
support systems at various TLs.<BR>
<BR>
*takes dictator hat off*<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 20:22:54 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Re : Hull Materials (was : Re: Classic Traveller)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
>> > Crystal Iron won't do?  <g> <BR>
>> <BR>
>> Unless it's a lot *denser* than regular iron, no, it won't. You'd need<BR>
>> several *meters* to provide adequate shielding, if I recall correctly.<BR>
><BR>
> What about magnetic shielding effects (isn't a crystaliron hull supposed<BR>
> to be one big magnet)? <BR>
<BR>
Not that I've ever heard.<BR>
<BR>
> I know it won't stop gamma rays and neutrons (put the LH2 tanks around<BR>
> part of the crew area to form a 'storm shelter' instead), but charged<BR>
> particles will be deflected, which makes up a goodly fraction of<BR>
> insystem radiation.<BR>
<BR>
But the fields require to produce *enough* deflection are unreasonably<BR>
strong.  Keep in mind that the particle energies are similar to those<BR>
in medium sized cyclotrons. And they tend to be a lot larger than a<BR>
ship's diameter.<BR>
<BR>
Worse, the "beam" of particles is much, much wider than the ship. So<BR>
you'll be deflecting stuff away from the ship on one side, and *into*<BR>
the ship on the other.<BR>
<BR>
That's why shadow shielding is likely the only viable setup until<BR>
really high TLs.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 19:43:27 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Re : Alien vision (was Re: Imperial Army Uniform)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
>> You see, color vision requires at least two sets of receptors with<BR>
>> notably *different* response curves to differing wavelengths. We use<BR>
>> three (I think).<BR>
><BR>
> Correct. Young's trichromacy theory, later proven to be correct by the<BR>
> histologists and physiologists.<BR>
><BR>
>> So aliens with more receptors will draw distinctions we'll be unable to<BR>
>> see.<BR>
> In most cases, more wouldn't be required ; the response range of the<BR>
> pigments could be extended. I suppose another family for different<BR>
> spectral ranges (e.g. near infrared or ultraviolet) could have evolved.<BR>
<BR>
Well, it's true that evolution tends to be minimalist. Even so, it's<BR>
also random. So whiule unlikely, it isd possible that a species might<BR>
be "quadrochromatic".<BR>
<BR>
As for IR/UV, as I've noted before, there are severe problems with<BR>
chromatic abberation once the visual range is more than a single<BR>
octave. One interesting solution proposed over on rec.arts.sf.science<BR>
during the "O Superman" thread was having several sets of eyelids (many<BR>
creatures have this), transparent to different "bands". Could that<BR>
evolve? Damned if I know.<BR>
<BR>
>> Worse yet, if the aliens use *different* visual pigments than we do,<BR>
>> they'll experience colors differently than we do.<BR>
<BR>
> Yes. Heck, there's such a subjective component to vision that there can<BR>
> be big differences in how people perceive colours.<BR>
<BR>
Sure, I and a friend often argue about whether certain items are "blue"<BR>
or "green".  Basicly, we draw the boundary between those two "colors"<BR>
in differenty place along the continuum. But we'd arrange a series of<BR>
colored items in the same order along that "blue to green" continuum.<BR>
<BR>
An alien with different visual pigments might not even agree that there<BR>
*was* a continuum. Sort of like trying to have a bar that's red at one<BR>
end, green at the other, and with a smooth shift from one end to the<BR>
other. Our visual system doesn't map colors that way. Theirs might. <BR>
<BR>
> One can imagine the section of the Imperial Data Package dealing with<BR>
> baseline ergonomic requirements for equipment, given the variations in<BR>
> sensory modalities, let alone acuities, likely to be found in the 3I...<BR>
<BR>
Oy!<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 23:27:12 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/29/00 at 07:10 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> On 07/29/00 at 05:01 PM,  eris@pcola.gulf.net said:<BR>
>><BR>
>> Aargh!  I screwed it up from Formidable down.  I used the .5 on<BR>
>> purpose then forgot to apply it. <g> Here is the corrected table.<BR>
>><BR>
>>     PEMS-12.5                    30 kkm<BR>
>>                                   hexes          kilometers<BR>
>>     Easy        Contact   3      0 -   3          0 to 90,000<BR>
>>     Routine     V Short   6      4 -   6     90,000 to 180,000<BR>
>>     Difficult   Short     12.5   7 -  12    180,000 to 360,000<BR>
>>     Formidable  Medium    25    13 -  25    360,000 to 750,000<BR>
>>     Staggering  Long      50    26 -  50    750,000 to 1,500,000<BR>
>>     Hopeless    V Long   100    51 - 100  1,500,000 to 3,000,000<BR>
>>     Impossible  Extreme  200   101 - 200  3,000,000 to 6,000,000<BR>
<BR>
>I think you've got a problem. Real world sensors can already beat those<BR>
>figures at many wavelengths.<BR>
<BR>
Get ready to gasp. <BR>
<BR>
I don't really care!  <g> It works for my games, and that's what I<BR>
care about. <BR>
<BR>
You can tell me that the virtually certain detection of beachballs at<BR>
20,000,000 kms is realistic if you want to, but it isn't going to<BR>
happen in the games I run.  OTOH, if that beachball was radiating<BR>
100 MW, you might just detect it....even with my rules. <g><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:40:04 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:19:51 +0100<BR>
>From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
<BR>
>BITS - British Isles Traveller Support<BR>
>http://www.bits.org.uk/<BR>
><BR>
>*****GT Bestiary by Rob Prior Now Available!<BR>
><BR>
>Rob Prior has added yet another excellent program for MacOS to the<BR>
>collection of shareware he has released through BITS. GT Bestiary<BR>
>generates animals/lifeforms for different worlds and environments on<BR>
>those worlds.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
Anybody know where I can get a good mac emulator for the pc?<BR>
Or baring that is there any chance of porting Mr. Prior's code to the<BR>
pc.<BR>
<BR>
Dave "buying a wintell seemed like such a good idea at the time" Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:27:42 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Leonard's rant (was Re: BATTLEDRESS...)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 03:45:02 PST<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>Subject:<BR>
<BR>
>Why should I even bother making the effort? I don't get paid for this.<BR>
>I do it because I enjoy discussing stuff and sharing the stuff I know.<BR>
>But if people aren't going to pay attention, I might as well save<BR>
>myself a *lot* of time and something more useful.<BR>
><BR>
>Yes, this is a rant. It's at least the third time in two dys that I've<BR>
>had this happen.<BR>
<BR>
Well I for one pay attention. And I at least would miss your contributions<BR>
to the list. So stick around please we need you.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:41:34 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Eris Reddoch wrote :-<BR>
>> Now, my favorite under utilized power plant idea is Boron cycle<BR>
>> thermo-nuclear fission.<BR>
> Hmm. There could be problems, in the absence of nuclear damping :-<BR>
><BR>
>> http://epswww.epfl.ch/aps/BAPSDPP98/abs/S6900007.html<BR>
>> <BR>
>> [R8M3.07] Fundamental Limitations on Advanced-Fuel Fusion<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Todd H. Rider (MIT Lincoln Laboratory) <BR>
>> <BR>
>> Several fundamental physical limitations which apply<BR>
>> to a very broad range of advanced-fuel fusion approaches will be<BR>
>> considered. [1,2] Effects to be discussed include bremsstrahlung<BR>
>> radiation and particle scattering due to ion-ion, ion-electron,<BR>
>> and electron-electron collisions. A variety of advanced fuels<BR>
>> will be considered,including D-3He, 3He-3He, p-11B, and p-6Li.<BR>
>> Results will be given for fusion plasmas which are substantially<BR>
>> out of thermodynamic equilibrium, as well as for plasmas which are<BR>
>> close to equilibrium. <BR>
>> <BR>
>> [1] T.H. Rider, Ph.D. thesis, MIT (1995).<BR>
>> [2] T.H. Rider, Phys. Plasmas 4, 1039 (1997). <BR>
>> <BR>
><BR>
> The upshot is that energy losses for proton-catalysed fusion are likely<BR>
> to be large, with fusion gain ratios (Q = fusion power/radiative loss)<BR>
> on the order of 1-2%.<BR>
><BR>
> Workarounds include spin-polarising the fuel - but this only doubles or<BR>
> triples Q. (This trick could also be used to make D-D fusion almost<BR>
> aneutronic).<BR>
><BR>
> Alternate plasma geometries e.g. colliding beam fusion, may also<BR>
> circumvent the gain problem. Maximal Q looks like about 3-4 with such<BR>
> reactor configurations, comparable to D-3He. <BR>
<BR>
I wonder if electrostatic confinement rather than magnetic confinement<BR>
would work better for these? <BR>
<BR>
> ref :-<BR>
> Science : Volume 278(5342), 21 November 1997, pp 1419-1422 :-<BR>
> Rostoker, Norman; Binderbauer, Michl W.; Monkhorst, Hendrik J.<BR>
> Colliding Beam Fusion Reactor [Article]<BR>
><BR>
> and the response to this article on the 'Science' website.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Robert O'Connor<BR>
> Medico, Gamer<BR>
><BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:42:31 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 10:29 PM 7/29/00, you wrote:<BR>
>> >          Both of those are point systems, not "sweepers".  You are right,<BR>
>> > once you *know* where the target is, finding him with LIDAR for a weapons<BR>
>> > lock isn't bad.  What happens is your *detection* ranges get beaten to<BR>
>> > shit.  To quote _Armageddon_ "...and its an awfully big-assed sky, mister<BR>
>> > President..."  So instead of automatically seeing the target at 50,000+ <BR>
>> km,<BR>
>> > maybe you are down to a dozen megametres...  at "real space speeds(tm)",<BR>
>> > you'll run out of those in a hurry.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Except that in IR anything using power, or even at human livable<BR>
>>temperatures sticks out like a sore thumb against the *cold*<BR>
>>(*literally* hundreds of times colder!) sky.<BR>
>>--<BR>
>>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
><BR>
>          Hi, Leonard!<BR>
>          Hmmm.  Passive operations (currently, RW) aren't accurate enough <BR>
> to do fire-control with.  Yes, TMA will allow you to build up a roughly <BR>
> accurate track about where the contact is, but that's much different than <BR>
> being able to hit it with a weapon.  Particularly at light-lag ranges.  So, <BR>
> again, you can see the contact a long way away, and you can do what you <BR>
> need to do to intercept it and classify it, but attacking is still a "short <BR>
> range" problem.<BR>
<BR>
But the IR should locate things well enough to use lidar or the like to<BR>
get a firing solution.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 21:44:29 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>Except that in IR anything using power, or even at human livable<BR>
>>temperatures sticks out like a sore thumb against the *cold*<BR>
>>(*literally* hundreds of times colder!) sky.<BR>
><BR>
> I have a few issues with this.  One is the assumption that<BR>
> heat is radiated in all directions.  If you radiate heat<BR>
> in one direction, then you only need to know one point<BR>
> where the enemy is to avoid detection (heck, even if you<BR>
> guess odds are good). <BR>
<BR>
Except that radiators that radiate to less than 2 pi steradians (half a<BR>
sphere) get less efficient in direct proportion to the reduction in the<BR>
solid angle. Worse, the radiator *temp* goes up exponentially as you<BR>
reduce the solid angle. Just like reducing area.<BR>
<BR>
So you get much, *MUCH* brighter in the area you do radiate in. <BR>
<BR>
Also, *you* are assuming that the enemy doesn't have passive sensor<BR>
platforms scattered around the system. A *bad* assumption. And it only<BR>
takes one to detect you. <BR>
<BR>
> The other is that radiation must be by black body radiation.  At<BR>
> traveller TLs it seems reasonable that you might be able to<BR>
> manipulate the wavelength down to the background.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. Heat radiation is *by definition* "black body", modified only by<BR>
the emissivity characteristics of the radiator. Which can't be tuned<BR>
*that* much. Narrowing the emmission curve makes the peak that much<BR>
higher. <BR>
<BR>
Anyway, regardless of wavelength, the *power* remains the same<BR>
(actually, most means of shifting the wavelngth around or narrowing the<BR>
bandwidth use more energy than just leaving things alone. And you have<BR>
to get rid of *that* energy too). <BR>
<BR>
So, no matter *what* wavelength(s) you are emitting at, you are going<BR>
to be emitting a *lot* of photons. Far more than the background.<BR>
<BR>
> Finally, I worked through the numbers<BR>
> and using nearby stars to mask emission is viable to within<BR>
> some distance (I'll have to see if I can't find my calc).  Stars<BR>
> are far away, but they are really, really, really bright.<BR>
<BR>
They are point sources, you aren't. And in any case, that trick won't<BR>
even work for sensors on opposite sides of the planet, much less ones<BR>
scattered around the system.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2000 22:15:57<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: RE: BATTLEDRESS SURVEY HELP NEEDED!!!<BR>
<BR>
At 03:21 PM 7/30/2000 +1200, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>But just because a piece of possible technology isn't specifically shown in<BR>
>a Traveller supplement is no good reason to state categorically that they<BR>
>are not part of Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
When we are discussing how battledress *in Traveller* is constructed and<BR>
moves, and how that would affect the look of said suits for the upcoming GT<BR>
Ground Forces.<BR>
<BR>
It's like we are discussing designs for the Indy 500, and you start<BR>
pointing out that top-fuel dragsters are faster.  Yes, but they aren't what<BR>
are being discussed.<BR>
<BR>
>AFAIK there is no direct mention of naginata or butterfly knives in a<BR>
>Traveller supplement either. Would you seriously suggest that such weapons<BR>
>could not be used in a Traveller game because of this ?<BR>
<BR>
No, but all I've seen is thread is people discussing the range of motion<BR>
requirements for Traveller BD, and you jumping in with these non-canonical<BR>
threads, which are at best distracting.<BR>
<BR>
The knives in question are simply variants of the generic Blade or Dagger.<BR>
What you are discussing is an entirely different design theory.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:52:31 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 12:40 AM,  "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Anybody know where I can get a good mac emulator for the pc? Or baring<BR>
>that is there any chance of porting Mr. Prior's code to the pc.<BR>
<BR>
Do a search for Executor.  I thought I had the the url, but I can't find it.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 18:38:41 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
On 30 Jul 00, at 0:52, eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> On 07/30/00 at 12:40 AM,  "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
> >Anybody know where I can get a good mac emulator for the pc? Or baring<BR>
> >that is there any chance of porting Mr. Prior's code to the pc.<BR>
<BR>
> Do a search for Executor.  I thought I had the the url, but I can't find it.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.ardi.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 04:15:21 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 02:42 AM 7/30/00, you wrote:<BR>
> >          Hi, Leonard!<BR>
> >          Hmmm.  Passive operations (currently, RW) aren't accurate enough<BR>
> > to do fire-control with.  Yes, TMA will allow you to build up a roughly<BR>
> > accurate track about where the contact is, but that's much different than<BR>
> > being able to hit it with a weapon.  Particularly at light-lag <BR>
> ranges.  So,<BR>
> > again, you can see the contact a long way away, and you can do what you<BR>
> > need to do to intercept it and classify it, but attacking is still a <BR>
> "short<BR>
> > range" problem.<BR>
><BR>
>But the IR should locate things well enough to use lidar or the like to<BR>
>get a firing solution.<BR>
>--<BR>
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
<BR>
         Actually, "finding" the target with LIDAR is the same level of <BR>
difficulty as hitting it with a destructive-level energy beam.  Any *smart* <BR>
vessel design would have laser detectors on the hull..<BR>
         "Captain!  We've just been painted by LIDAR in SEARCH mode!"<BR>
         "Hard evasive!  Launch sand down that bearing!"<BR>
         At which point we're back to the original problem...  Save that we <BR>
now get the added benefit of the sand cloud acting like smoke-screen in the <BR>
visual band.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:11:03 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: OT : Plastic Spaceships and Italian Penguins<BR>
<BR>
With regard to the recent discussion of plastic spaceship models, I just<BR>
found my copies of the 11th (1974) and  17th (1980) editions of the Airfix<BR>
catalogue.<BR>
<BR>
For general imformation, the "Space" series from 1974 contains the following<BR>
models :<BR>
<BR>
05172-9 Russian Vostok<BR>
06172-2 Saturn 1-B<BR>
09170-5 Apollo Saturn V<BR>
<BR>
And the "Space" series from 1980 contains :<BR>
<BR>
10171-8 Moonraker Spaceship (James Bond : Moonraker)  (complete with Drax<BR>
Enterprise Transfers !)<BR>
09179-5 Apollo Saturn V<BR>
03013-5 Lunar Module<BR>
03400-5 Autogyro Rocket 'Copter (James Bond : You Only Live Twice )<BR>
02026-8 Angel Interceptor ( Captain Scarlet )<BR>
05171-6 Orion Spacecraft (this is the 2001 Pan-Am clipper re-named )<BR>
05173-2 Hawk Spaceship (Space : 1999)<BR>
06174-8 Eagle Transporter (Space : 1999)<BR>
07170-9 StarCruiser 1  (a "new concept" from Gerry Anderson, no series<BR>
AFAIK)<BR>
<BR>
Note the changes, "fantasy" craft in the later edition, only real rockets in<BR>
1974.<BR>
<BR>
If anyone wants pictures, LMK.<BR>
<BR>
Oh, in the same box I found "Australian Modeller #6", "Radio Models November<BR>
1977", a ROCO Mini-tanks catalogue with no date, and ESCI catalogues for<BR>
1979 and 1986.<BR>
<BR>
The ESCI 1979 catalogue has pictures of penguins using various bits of<BR>
technology, which I've  put on my web site at<BR>
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~frankie/html/penguins.html<BR>
because, well, just because they're penguins.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
Vist Munden's Bar at http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2839<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (rly-ye04.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.201]) by air-ye02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 03:26:58 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 03:26:46 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id DAA64859;<BR>
	Sun, 30 Jul 2000 03:26:26 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 30 Jul 2000 03:25:40 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id DAA64806<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 03:25:40 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 03:25:40 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007300725.DAA64806@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2839<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2840</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/30/00 9:36:10 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, July 30 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2840<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Off Topic: On Topic (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
Re: Off Topic: On Topic (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Trav-Tech Mailing list<BR>
Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
[BITS] Heaven and Earth Mirror Site active!<BR>
Re: Sensors (was re: Ship Size Limites)<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:47:26 -0700<BR>
From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
First of all, I agree that enforcing radiator requirements is probably the <BR>
best way to limit Star Destroyers.  (The thing we have to watch out for is <BR>
making Scout/Couriers impossible too...)<BR>
<BR>
As far as repairing/replacing radiators go, I have a possibly fanciful and <BR>
impractical image:  a redundant bank of long rods, mounted flush with the <BR>
hull.  You shoot one out on its own RCS jet, dragging a 'curtain' behind it <BR>
that's the radiator surface.  Stop it once it's drawn the curtain <BR>
tight.  Have another bank like it on the other side of the hull, where they <BR>
can't see each other.<BR>
<BR>
If one of the radiators suffers too much damage, or gets too hot or <BR>
whatever, you don't go out and fix it; you jettison it, reel out another <BR>
rod-and-curtain, and switch the connections inside the ship.  Hope you run <BR>
out of enemies before you run out of radiators.<BR>
<BR>
Of course you have to make sure the radiators turn with the ship, instead <BR>
of buckling, but you're going to have that problem any case.  Based on the <BR>
numbers I've seen, any warship bigger than a Happy Fun Ball will /need/ <BR>
extendable radiators ... it simply doesn't have enough surface area to <BR>
dissipate its power output.<BR>
<BR>
Anyway, the image of a starship "spreading its wings" before getting <BR>
underway, or cutting one loose in battle and deploying a replacement, is <BR>
very appealing to me.  Anyone want to shoot it down?<BR>
<BR>
- --------------<BR>
Kelly St.Clair        "Never give up, never surrender!"<BR>
kellys@efn.org                   -- Commander Peter Q. Taggart<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 01:04:31 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>  >>Except that in IR anything using power, or even at human livable<BR>
>  >>temperatures sticks out like a sore thumb against the *cold*<BR>
>  >>(*literally* hundreds of times colder!) sky.<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > I have a few issues with this.  One is the assumption that<BR>
>  > heat is radiated in all directions.  If you radiate heat<BR>
>  > in one direction, then you only need to know one point<BR>
>  > where the enemy is to avoid detection (heck, even if you<BR>
>  > guess odds are good).<BR>
><BR>
>Except that radiators that radiate to less than 2 pi steradians (half a<BR>
>sphere) get less efficient in direct proportion to the reduction in the<BR>
>solid angle. Worse, the radiator *temp* goes up exponentially as you<BR>
>reduce the solid angle. Just like reducing area.<BR>
><BR>
>So you get much, *MUCH* brighter in the area you do radiate in.<BR>
<BR>
Except, you do it in a direction you know someone isn't in.  Even<BR>
if you don't know a single direction that someone isn't in,<BR>
being brighter isn't much of an issue if you were going to be<BR>
detect anyway and picking one direction reduces the odds a lot.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Also, *you* are assuming that the enemy doesn't have passive sensor<BR>
>platforms scattered around the system. A *bad* assumption. And it only<BR>
>takes one to detect you.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Space is big.  Even a modestly narrow angle is going to mean a<BR>
_lot_ sensors.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>  > The other is that radiation must be by black body radiation.  At<BR>
>  > traveller TLs it seems reasonable that you might be able to<BR>
>  > manipulate the wavelength down to the background.<BR>
><BR>
>Nope. Heat radiation is *by definition* "black body", modified only by<BR>
>the emissivity characteristics of the radiator. Which can't be tuned<BR>
>*that* much. Narrowing the emmission curve makes the peak that much<BR>
>higher.<BR>
<BR>
Right, I should have said emit, not radiate, to indicate that you<BR>
were assuming that emission had to be by simple blackbody radiation.<BR>
Otherwise the point holds.<BR>
<BR>
>Anyway, regardless of wavelength, the *power* remains the same<BR>
>(actually, most means of shifting the wavelngth around or narrowing the<BR>
>bandwidth use more energy than just leaving things alone. And you have<BR>
>to get rid of *that* energy too).<BR>
<BR>
_Most_.  At our TL.  What can do it at Traveller TLs?  It isn't<BR>
unreasonable....<BR>
<BR>
>So, no matter *what* wavelength(s) you are emitting at, you are going<BR>
>to be emitting a *lot* of photons. Far more than the background.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, but you get to help mask be the background (it is, as you<BR>
pointed out, easier to detect signal against a zero background).<BR>
But I agree that using direction emission or occultation of a<BR>
star is more effective.<BR>
<BR>
>  > Finally, I worked through the numbers<BR>
>  > and using nearby stars to mask emission is viable to within<BR>
>  > some distance (I'll have to see if I can't find my calc).  Stars<BR>
>  > are far away, but they are really, really, really bright.<BR>
><BR>
>They are point sources, you aren't. And in any case, that trick won't<BR>
>even work for sensors on opposite sides of the planet, much less ones<BR>
>scattered around the system.<BR>
<BR>
Well, stars aren't really point sources either.  Now the angle is<BR>
small but even if one side spends the money to get sensors with the<BR>
kind a spacial resolution he needs, does he check every star at<BR>
that kind of resolution on a continous basis?  That is a lot of<BR>
checking.<BR>
<BR>
And who says you need to radiate from a large area?  Being able<BR>
to emit from a small area is not unreasonable for Traveller<BR>
TLs.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 03:41:47 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 12:47 AM,  "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org> said:<BR>
<BR>
>If one of the radiators suffers too much damage, or gets too hot or <BR>
>whatever, you don't go out and fix it; you jettison it, reel out another <BR>
>rod-and-curtain, and switch the connections inside the ship.  Hope you<BR>
>run  out of enemies before you run out of radiators.<BR>
<BR>
>Of course you have to make sure the radiators turn with the ship, instead<BR>
> of buckling, but you're going to have that problem any case.  Based on<BR>
>the  numbers I've seen, any warship bigger than a Happy Fun Ball will<BR>
>/need/  extendable radiators ... it simply doesn't have enough surface<BR>
>area to  dissipate its power output.<BR>
<BR>
>Anyway, the image of a starship "spreading its wings" before getting <BR>
>underway, or cutting one loose in battle and deploying a replacement, is <BR>
>very appealing to me.  Anyone want to shoot it down?<BR>
<BR>
And now we have the opportunity for "rigging fire." <g>  They aren't sails, but knocking the wings off stops the ship as surely as taking down the sails did in the age of sail. <BR>
<BR>
Probably impractical, but wonderful imagery.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 03:50:23 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Off Topic: On Topic (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 01:04 AM,  "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
>>  >>Except that in IR anything using power, or even at human livable<BR>
>>  >>temperatures sticks out like a sore thumb against the *cold*<BR>
>>  >>(*literally* hundreds of times colder!) sky.<BR>
<BR>
>>  > I have a few issues with this.  One is the assumption that<BR>
>>  > heat is radiated in all directions.  If you radiate heat<BR>
>>  > in one direction, then you only need to know one point<BR>
>>  > where the enemy is to avoid detection (heck, even if you<BR>
>>  > guess odds are good).<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
After all the complaints about off topic posts clogging the list, and now we're generating half a dozen digests a day with nary an off topic post amongst them...well hardly any anyway. Isn't it great! <g><BR>
<BR>
Back on topic.  How do you tell the difference between a laser comm painting your ship to deliver a message and a Lidar getting a lock for an attack? <BR>
<BR>
BTW, Michel, you know that bogy between your ship and the gas giant just "pinged" your ship with a laser comm don't you?  <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:46:15 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>*****GT Bestiary by Rob Prior Now Available!<BR>
>><BR>
>>Rob Prior has added yet another excellent program for MacOS to the<BR>
>>collection of shareware he has released through BITS. GT Bestiary<BR>
>>generates animals/lifeforms for different worlds and environments on<BR>
>>those worlds.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <snip><BR>
><BR>
> Anybody know where I can get a good mac emulator for the pc?<BR>
> Or baring that is there any chance of porting Mr. Prior's code to the<BR>
> pc.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, it's *much* simpler to pick up an old Mac SE 30 for $25 or<BR>
so. You can often get an Imagewriter II printer for about that too. <BR>
<BR>
They'll run most of the Mac stuff for Traveller just fine. And they<BR>
don't take up a lot of space.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 00:50:37 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>> Subject: Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
>><BR>
>> In mail you write:<BR>
>><BR>
>> > Cool. Note that fission has major military disadvantages, once nuclear<BR>
>> > dampers come along, so fission as a 'civilian' technology works.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Actually, fusion has the exact same problem. Dampers *may* require a<BR>
>> different setting for fusion than for fission, but they'll work on<BR>
>> either.<BR>
><BR>
> Leonard, think about the implications for a second.<BR>
><BR>
> Given the ranges of nuclear dampers, if we allow them to turn off fusion<BR>
> plants, we have a super-weapon.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. They take finicky aiming or else you *acceleraste* the reaction<BR>
rather than damp it. It's hard to get a node or anti-node onto the<BR>
powerplant of a ship way the heck out there. It's easy to set it up so<BR>
bombs on your ship or base won't go off. And knocking out fission<BR>
warheads on missiles aimed at you is of intermediate difficulty.<BR>
<BR>
> We dont want that.<BR>
<BR>
> We dont mind if they can turn off/melt/whatever fission plants, because<BR>
> fission is a TL6 technology and dampers are TL12, and if you try to use TL6<BR>
> technologies in a TL12 battlefield, you deserve what you get.<BR>
><BR>
> We dont know the details of how dampers work. Maybe TL12 dampers have a<BR>
> narrow range of isotopes they work against. Maybe this goes up as damper TL<BR>
> advances.<BR>
<BR>
Alas, we *do* know how they work. It's explicitly stated that the<BR>
manipulate one of the nuclear forces. (Strong force or weak force, I<BR>
forget which) That force controls the rate at which fission *and*<BR>
fusion occur. <BR>
<BR>
> But we cannot allow them to do anything to fusion reactors.<BR>
<BR>
We don't really have a choice. <BR>
<BR>
Also, the likely means by which they knock out missile warheads is to<BR>
cause premature fission which melts the carefully shaped segments of<BR>
fissionable. The warhead melts down, and even after the beam is gone it<BR>
can't go off. <BR>
<BR>
If they tried to *suppress* the reaction, the bomb would go off as soon<BR>
as they pointed the damper at something else. Likewise suppressing the<BR>
fusion reactions in the ships reactor would be kinda tricky, and as<BR>
soon as the ship moved or the damper changing aiming points, the<BR>
reactor would run just fine.<BR>
<BR>
Trying to *accelerate* a fusion reaction isn't apt to do more than<BR>
provide a challenge to the reactor control systems. It's not like a<BR>
fusion reactor *can* "runaway" the way a fision one can.<BR>
<BR>
So the effect on a fission reactor (or weapon) is to ruin it, the<BR>
effect on a dusion reactor is more along the lines of someone jerking<BR>
the "throttle" in different directions.<BR>
<BR>
>>>>> Anyone (maybe also Leonard)<BR>
>>>>> Life Support. I'd like something a bit more differentiated.<BR>
>><BR>
>> There's a reference in Ben Bova's "Return to Mars" that needs to be<BR>
>> tracked down by someone with a better browser than I currently have<BR>
>> access to.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Check for references to "the Living Machine" which is a<BR>
>> sewage/wastewater treatment system using plants (much like what I've<BR>
>> described in the past), and producing clean water and food (as well as<BR>
>> air in space uses). It might not be usable on ships, but it ought to be<BR>
>> usable in stations, and on worlds with incompatible biosphers (or no<BR>
>> biosphere).<BR>
><BR>
> *putting dictator hat on*<BR>
><BR>
> Leonard, I want to split up the project. I definitely want to minimise the<BR>
> work that any given person has to do. This includes me.<BR>
<BR>
> So I'd like you to toss some reasonable numbers together, for various life<BR>
> support systems at various TLs.<BR>
><BR>
> *takes dictator hat off*<BR>
<BR>
<sigh> I don't have the required info. That's *why* I posted that.<BR>
Because I think there's a web site out there with it BUT I CAN'T ACCESS<BR>
MOST WEB SITES USEFULLY.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:25:40 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
At 3:25 -0400 30/7/00,  "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <BR>
<a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> wrote:<BR>
>On 30 Jul 00, at 0:52, eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
> > On 07/30/00 at 12:40 AM,  "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com> said:<BR>
> > >Anybody know where I can get a good mac emulator for the pc? Or baring<BR>
> > >that is there any chance of porting Mr. Prior's code to the pc.<BR>
> > Do a search for Executor.  I thought I had the the url, but I <BR>
>can't find it.<BR>
>http://www.ardi.com<BR>
<BR>
If anyone is successfully using Executor to run Rob's software, <BR>
please let me know. I'd be interested in some notes to go on the BITS <BR>
website on how good it is fo rthis.<BR>
<BR>
Cheers,<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:23:49 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
At 3:25 -0400 30/7/00, "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com> wrote:<BR>
> >*****GT Bestiary by Rob Prior Now Available!<BR>
> >Rob Prior has added yet another excellent program for MacOS to the<BR>
> >collection of shareware he has released through BITS. GT Bestiary<BR>
> >generates animals/lifeforms for different worlds and environments on<BR>
> >those worlds.<BR>
><snip><BR>
>Anybody know where I can get a good mac emulator for the pc?<BR>
>Or baring that is there any chance of porting Mr. Prior's code to the<BR>
>pc.<BR>
<BR>
Porting may happen, but we haven't succeeded in cloning Rob yet to <BR>
get a higher output from him.<BR>
<BR>
I mean, he's really prolific at JTAS, has just updated 101 Starships <BR>
and is still writing software. GT Metator was planned for the next <BR>
few weeks too but his Mac laptop screen just died :-/<BR>
<BR>
Personally, I'd look out for an old Mac with a processor >68020, <BR>
preferably with System 7.5+ so you can:<BR>
<BR>
a) run it native<BR>
b) save it in Windows format.<BR>
<BR>
BITS presently uses a 10Mb RAM Apple  LC (68020 processor) to <BR>
demonstrate at conventions - I'd go for an LC2 or 3 or an early <BR>
PowerPC in preference now.... with the iMac at $649 the second hand <BR>
value of Macs is quite low.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:08:23 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
> > So the cloud's not opaque to visual light? Then why can't I build a big<BR>
> > LIDAR, or a high-resolution telescope linked to a CCD and a computer,<BR>
and<BR>
> > use those just like I'd use radar?<BR>
><BR>
> Or just look for the *huge* IR signatures of all those ships.<BR>
<BR>
Well, that assumes that the cloud is transparent to IR as well; I suspect<BR>
that the GUNDAM solution would say the only wavelengths transmitted for<BR>
long were the visual spectrum.<BR>
<BR>
My point was that limiting the system to the visual spectrum doesn't<BR>
preclude the use of sensors - it just means your sensors have to use the<BR>
visual spectrum.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:15:46 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
> And now we have the opportunity for "rigging fire." <g>  They aren't<BR>
sails, but knocking the wings off stops the ship as surely as taking down<BR>
the sails did in the age of sail.<BR>
<BR>
Exactly! At the moment the light fighter (the 'main strategic advantage the<BR>
Imperium has over its neighbours') is almost entirely useless, because it<BR>
can't do a damn thing to a major warship.<BR>
<BR>
Fighters might become useful again!<BR>
<BR>
Nick stops ranting about fighters.<BR>
(For the moment.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:21:26 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
<BR>
At 05:50 AM 7/30/00, you wrote:<BR>
><snip><BR>
><BR>
>After all the complaints about off topic posts clogging the list, and now <BR>
>we're generating half a dozen digests a day with nary an off topic post <BR>
>amongst them...well hardly any anyway. Isn't it great! <g><BR>
><BR>
>Back on topic.  How do you tell the difference between a laser comm <BR>
>painting your ship to deliver a message and a Lidar getting a lock for an <BR>
>attack?<BR>
><BR>
>BTW, Michel, you know that bogy between your ship and the gas giant just <BR>
>"pinged" your ship with a laser comm don't you?  <g><BR>
><BR>
>Eris<BR>
<BR>
         Just FYI, in the RealWorld(tm) I am a Naval Reservist who does <BR>
sensor ops.  Before I opted to downgrade my readiness status so I could be <BR>
a Dad, I was in the top 10% in Canada at what I do.<BR>
<BR>
         WARNING:  MONSTER OVERSIMPLIFICATION AHEAD.<BR>
<BR>
         The biggest difference between a communications signal and a <BR>
sensor signal is frequency and energy.  A comms signal only has to go one <BR>
way and needs to carry *lots* of information.  A sensor signal has to be <BR>
able to go at least twice the distance the same comms signal does, and <BR>
needs to be a "pure tone" to allow a good picture to be created.<BR>
<BR>
         Because you need four times as much energy to go twice as far and <BR>
still have a "legible" signal, the sensor beam needs *at least* *eight* <BR>
times as much energy as the comms beam.  That is why turning a sensor <BR>
active on a battlefield is *suicide*;  they can see you on passives long <BR>
before you see them on actives.<BR>
<BR>
         The comms signal will initially, by almost requirement, be a <BR>
modulated "Hi, I'm a comms beam" carrier pattern.  The ship's computer <BR>
getting peppered with it will recognize that pattern and classify it as <BR>
such and then trigger the appropriate things with the communications system <BR>
to beam its own carrier back down the bearing that the originator came from.<BR>
<BR>
         The sensor signal will be a stream of distinct pulses at a <BR>
comparatively high energy level.  Again, the ship being peppered won't find <BR>
a carrier pattern, will find a pattern and energy level consistent with a <BR>
LIDAR on "search" mode and warn the sensor ops team.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:26:02 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Off Topic: On Topic (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
At 05:50 AM 7/30/00, you wrote:<BR>
><snip><BR>
><BR>
>After all the complaints about off topic posts clogging the list, and now <BR>
>we're generating half a dozen digests a day with nary an off topic post <BR>
>amongst them...well hardly any anyway. Isn't it great! <g><BR>
<BR>
         Yes.  I have actually started reading the TML again instead of <BR>
letting my Janitor Filter hose 90% of the posts automatically.  I hope it <BR>
lasts a while.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:46:20 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> Anybody know what the Isp of "single-H" is?<BR>
<BR>
>From NASA TM97-206228, an Isp of 750 sec using *contemporary engine<BR>
technology* would be possible with 15% by weight atomic hydrogen.<BR>
<BR>
The problem with all the proposed monoatomic propellants is<BR>
stabilisation ; this is cutting edge stuff in cryogenics, ISTR.<BR>
<BR>
> Ok, but would you answer a question for me? <BR>
> <BR>
> Vectors have a magnitude and direction.<BR>
> T*ns*rs have a magnitude (or is it magnitudes?) and *two* directions.<BR>
> <BR>
> Is there a "next step"? If so, would it be of any use in describing<BR>
> phenomena in a 4d (space & time) universe?<BR>
<BR>
Aren't they tensors for all n => 3?<BR>
<BR>
> An Isp of 1e6 means an exhaust velocity of 1/30th of c. <g><BR>
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. Given the literature<BR>
available, it seems to be about the right order of magnitude (if it<BR>
pushes the speculative limit for rocket scientists).<BR>
<BR>
> A photon rocket that gives noticable thrust is going to be a weapon<BR>
> capable of carving up planets if it's focused, or frying them if it<BR>
> isn't.<BR>
Doh! It should have its output capped like lasers are in the later<BR>
issues of the rules.<BR>
<BR>
"It's not a spinal laser mount, it's my ship's main drive..."<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Mac noted (in FFS3 reaction drives) :-<BR>
> These all seem low; I know that these are the TLs all these ideas<BR>
> were proposed at, but that doesn't mean someone could really build a<BR>
> NSTR in the 1980s, without 1990s-quality computer modelling,<BR>
> for example.<BR>
Fair enough. Prototypes can be built one TTL earlier at a whacking great<BR>
Reliability penalty.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 10:58:29 -0400<BR>
From: Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Trav-Tech Mailing list<BR>
<BR>
	The http://www.qrc.com web site goes to "QRC Division of Macro<BR>
International Inc.", a web design company. <BR>
	As far as I can tell quark.qrc.com is no longer on the Internet.<BR>
<BR>
	However, following Eris's suggestion, the subscription to <BR>
trav-tech-request@qrc.com worked, but the authorization followup to<BR>
Majordomo@qrc.com failed with a "person does not exist" failure message. <BR>
<BR>
	From this I'd conclude the list is dead, gone and deleted. <BR>
<BR>
	I'd like to participate in the FF&S3 (re)write. I've never seen FF&S1/2<BR>
so I have no comments on the original. OTOH if part of this exercise is<BR>
to make the book useable by others, a fresh perspective may be helpful. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
    Thomas Jones-Low<BR>
    tjoneslo@together.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 08:11:19 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship Troopers: The Movie<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> http://www.kentaurus.com/troopers.htm<BR>
> <BR>
> has a very good analysis in the flaws of the adaption of Starship Troopers.<BR>
> <BR>
> BTW, we have had a flamewar on this before ;-)<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
I think ultimately the point was that Viginia Heinlein got money, which was<BR>
RAH's intention.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 17:15:43 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: [BITS] Heaven and Earth Mirror Site active!<BR>
<BR>
BITS - British Isles Traveller Support<BR>
http://www.bits.org.uk/<BR>
<BR>
BITS is proud to announce that we have been given permission to <BR>
mirror Stuart Ferris' superb world building software for Windows 9x, <BR>
NT and 2000. The mirror is now active, and may be linked to by <BR>
clicking on the links on the BITS archive page on the website. The <BR>
primary Heaven and Earth site remains DownPort.com.<BR>
<BR>
http://www.bits.org.uk/     --> Archive  ---> Heaven & Earth Link<BR>
<BR>
If you have a Windows machine, check out this excellent piece of software!<BR>
<BR>
Enjoy!<BR>
<BR>
Dom (BITS webmaster)<BR>
- -------------Dom Mooney---webmaster@bits.org.uk----------------<BR>
                  BITS - British Isles Traveller Support.<BR>
  http://www.bits.org.uk/              mailto:bits@bits.org.uk<BR>
Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
GURPS is a registered trademark of Steve Jackson Games, Inc.<BR>
BITS, CORE and their respective logos are trademarks of BITS UK Limited.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:36:28 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors (was re: Ship Size Limites)<BR>
<BR>
>I have a few issues with this.  One is the assumption that<BR>
>heat is radiated in all directions.  If you radiate heat<BR>
>in one direction, then you only need to know one point<BR>
>where the enemy is to avoid detection (heck, even if you<BR>
>guess odds are good).<BR>
However, the smaller the solid angle you're radiating the<BR>
heat out over, the hotter your radiators need to be. Second,<BR>
you can't radiate in perfect narrow beams; there will always be<BR>
some spill over. Most power in a cone many tens of degrees<BR>
on a side is probably the best you can expect, with a few<BR>
percent leaking out in other directions.<BR>
<BR>
The sensor rules in FFS2 and the (better explained)<BR>
Definitive Sensor Rules assume that ship's waste heat<BR>
is generally ~10% of their power plant output; and that<BR>
most of that heat is radiated in specific directions, so<BR>
a typical enemy ship sees only 1% of that.<BR>
<BR>
If you buy good IR masking, it is implicitly running the<BR>
radiators hotter and more directionally. The biggest level<BR>
you can buy cuts the spillover down by another factor of<BR>
a hundred...but even with that it's remarkably easy to see<BR>
a big ship.<BR>
<BR>
If you know exactly what direction the enemy is in under<BR>
the DSR you can use "agressive baffling", representing<BR>
more careful pointing of the radiators, and get an additional<BR>
bonus. (Memo to self: agressive baffling should be<BR>
incompatible with evasion.) On the other hand, ships that<BR>
are suprised/not at combat alert are easy to see, in part<BR>
because they have no idea what way to point.<BR>
<BR>
And, even if you block the IR...one lesson of the FFS2/DSR<BR>
rules is that it's actually surprisingly easy to see the reflected<BR>
visible light from a ship, even if the hull is 99% black.<BR>
<BR>
>The other is that radiation must<BR>
>be by black body radiation.  At traveller TLs it seems<BR>
>reasonable that you might be able to manipulate the wavelength<BR>
>down to the background.<BR>
Various laws of thermodynamics make this hard. Ultimately,<BR>
if you're radiating the same spectral pattern as the background<BR>
(which is not the 3K radiation in most solar systems - it's dominated<BR>
by thermal IR and reflected sunlight from zodiacal dust) - at the<BR>
same intensity, you're absorbing as much heat as you're radiating.<BR>
<BR>
>Finally, I worked through the numbers<BR>
>and using nearby stars to mask emission is viable to within<BR>
>some distance (I'll have to see if I can't find my calc).  Stars<BR>
>are far away, but they are really, really, really bright.<BR>
I'd be interested to see how you did the calculation, which is<BR>
remarkably hard to do, and basically what I do for a living<BR>
(trying to use large telescopes with adaptive optics to directly<BR>
detect IR emission from young extrasolar planets.) "Some distance"<BR>
would be on the order of a couple of arcseconds, small enough<BR>
not to help much.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh<BR>
(author of the FFS2 sensor rules and the Definitive Sensor<BR>
Rules for T4.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:41:35 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
> One thousand MW per meter!  Does it strike anyone as even remotely<BR>
> reasonable?  It looks like magic radiators arrive at TL 14, and<BR>
> suddenly make huge ships possible to me.<BR>
<BR>
Part of what's implied is that the percentage of energy from a powerplant<BR>
that goes into waste heat is going down with TL. (After all, lots of power<BR>
goes into things like thruster plates whose efficiency we can't even<BR>
begin to estimate, since they violate conservation of energy.)<BR>
So TL12 plants have about 10%  of their energy as waste heat,<BR>
TL14 1%. TL12 radiators run at 2000K, radiating about 1 MW/square<BR>
meter.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2840<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37]) by air-yh01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:36:10 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:35:33 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id MAA83234;<BR>
	Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:35:25 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:35:08 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id MAA83185<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:35:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:35:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007301635.MAA83185@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2840<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2841</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/30/00 1:34:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, July 30 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2841<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: FFS2<BR>
Re: Traveller Links<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
Living Machine (was Re: FFS3 stuff)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Trav-Tech Mailing list<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
I got the Supplements Reprint!<BR>
Should I get MT?<BR>
Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Fusion & Nuclear Dampers<BR>
Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
RE: Should I get MT?<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:45:54 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2<BR>
<BR>
My first note is that Andrew Akin's remarkable spreadsheet gets<BR>
all the FFS2 rules right for ship design. Find it and use it.<BR>
<BR>
>I'm also at a serious loss with the sensor systems. I've used T4 before,<BR>
>but not for stuff in space - I always kept Brilliant Lances for that - so I<BR>
>really don't get the sensitivity ratings. Particularly since the only<BR>
>example refers to a scout with sensitivity 6, and you can't seem to buy<BR>
>sensors below sensitivity 13. I'm confused. Is there an explanation (or<BR>
>re-write, or errata) available somewhere?<BR>
I'll try to dig up and post the whole Definitive Sensor Rules which explain<BR>
how to use this. I haven't been following the TML much; I apologize for<BR>
not picking up on these threads sooner.<BR>
<BR>
The short form is: yes, the example is a typo - for reasons that<BR>
made sense at the time (trying to change the sensor scale to be<BR>
compatible with what we were told Marc was going to use as a<BR>
range scale for T4.1) I shifted the sensor ranges by 7 at the last<BR>
minute.<BR>
<BR>
The short form of how to use the sensors is actually remarkably simple:<BR>
if (sensitivity) + (target signature) <= range, you have a chance of<BR>
detecting the target.<BR>
<BR>
The DSR include all sorts of modifications to this, skill effects, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 23:06:59 -0400<BR>
From: "swordworlder" <swordworlder@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Links<BR>
<BR>
Try this, they are all working links:<BR>
http://www.dmoz.org/Games/Roleplaying/Systems/Traveller/<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Charles Collin" <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
> Does anyone have a well-organized list of Traveller links?  Everytime I<BR>
> start randomly cruising for Trav sites, I get the awful feeling I'm<BR>
> missing tons of good stuff.<BR>
><BR>
> On a related note, who's in charage of the HIWG site?  It has a number of<BR>
> broken links...<BR>
<BR>
You only get one toughie per day :-)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:57:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Hmmm.  Passive operations (currently, RW) aren't accurate enough<BR>
>to do fire-control with.  Yes, TMA will allow you to build up a roughly<BR>
>accurate track about where the contact is, but that's much different than<BR>
>being able to hit it with a weapon.  Particularly at light-lag ranges.  So,<BR>
>again, you can see the contact a long way away, and you can do what you<BR>
>need to do to intercept it and classify it, but attacking is still a "short<BR>
>range" problem.<BR>
<BR>
All you guys knew that if you kept talking about sensors, sooner or<BR>
later you'd invoke me, right?<BR>
<BR>
The short answer is that current-tech fire control, mostly concerned about<BR>
how to put missiles near a target or hit it with a wobbly gun shell at short<BR>
range, isn't a good model for lasers at 100,000 km.<BR>
<BR>
The long answer is: passive/visible or IR sensors are actually much more<BR>
accurate than radar in terms of their ability to measure a angle or bearing.<BR>
A lot of this has to do with physics; radar beams are big and fuzzy compared<BR>
to light beams.<BR>
<BR>
In fact, I don't personally believe that<BR>
radar will be accurate enough to use at space combat ranges - I left<BR>
AEMS active sensors in FFS2/DSR (a) to keep people from arguing, and<BR>
(b) because at high TL they may implicitly include a laser-based component<BR>
(radar for search, LIDAR for targetting.)<BR>
<BR>
Probably the best example, in fact, is one of the first real-world laser<BR>
systems likely to be deployed, the YAL-1 Airborne Laser - it will use<BR>
visible and IR tracking for targetting, not radar (cf various AvWeek<BR>
articles.)<BR>
<BR>
Of course, pure passive sensors don't give you a good range to the<BR>
target. To get that you either need two sensor platforms (so you can<BR>
triangulate) or a long time (to build up a fire-control solution based<BR>
on accelerations). Or a LIDAR; I think in practice the real fire control<BR>
sensors<BR>
will be LIDARs (and everyone designing an FFS2 ship probably realizes<BR>
this.)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:01:00 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>In mail you write:<BR>
>><BR>
>>>>Except that in IR anything using power, or even at human livable<BR>
>>>>temperatures sticks out like a sore thumb against the *cold*<BR>
>>>>(*literally* hundreds of times colder!) sky.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> I have a few issues with this.  One is the assumption that<BR>
>>> heat is radiated in all directions.  If you radiate heat<BR>
>>> in one direction, then you only need to know one point<BR>
>>> where the enemy is to avoid detection (heck, even if you<BR>
>>> guess odds are good).<BR>
>><BR>
>>Except that radiators that radiate to less than 2 pi steradians (half a<BR>
>>sphere) get less efficient in direct proportion to the reduction in the<BR>
>>solid angle. Worse, the radiator *temp* goes up exponentially as you<BR>
>>reduce the solid angle. Just like reducing area.<BR>
>><BR>
>>So you get much, *MUCH* brighter in the area you do radiate in.<BR>
><BR>
> Except, you do it in a direction you know someone isn't in.  Even<BR>
> if you don't know a single direction that someone isn't in,<BR>
> being brighter isn't much of an issue if you were going to be<BR>
> detect anyway and picking one direction reduces the odds a lot.<BR>
<BR>
Well, keep in mind that a "narrow angle" radiator tends to act like a<BR>
*flat (2pi) radiator liad across it's "opening".<BR>
<BR>
>>Also, *you* are assuming that the enemy doesn't have passive sensor<BR>
>>platforms scattered around the system. A *bad* assumption. And it only<BR>
>>takes one to detect you.<BR>
><BR>
> Space is big.  Even a modestly narrow angle is going to mean a<BR>
> _lot_ sensors.<BR>
<BR>
It's *getting* the angle that's a pain.<BR>
<BR>
>>Anyway, regardless of wavelength, the *power* remains the same<BR>
>>(actually, most means of shifting the wavelngth around or narrowing the<BR>
>>bandwidth use more energy than just leaving things alone. And you have<BR>
>>to get rid of *that* energy too).<BR>
><BR>
> _Most_.  At our TL.  What can do it at Traveller TLs?  It isn't<BR>
> unreasonable....<BR>
<BR>
Actually, it *is* unreasonable. There's this thing called entropy. And<BR>
the narrower the bandwidth the lower the entropy of the emmisions. <BR>
<BR>
I said most because I know \better than to say *all*. somebody'd jump<BR>
on it. But I'd be *really* surprised at an even *theoretically*<BR>
possible technique that didn't result in greatly increase heat<BR>
generation. <BR>
<BR>
>>So, no matter *what* wavelength(s) you are emitting at, you are going<BR>
>>to be emitting a *lot* of photons. Far more than the background.<BR>
><BR>
> Yeah, but you get to help mask be the background (it is, as you<BR>
> pointed out, easier to detect signal against a zero background).<BR>
> But I agree that using direction emission or occultation of a<BR>
> star is more effective.<BR>
><BR>
>>> Finally, I worked through the numbers<BR>
>>> and using nearby stars to mask emission is viable to within<BR>
>>> some distance (I'll have to see if I can't find my calc).  Stars<BR>
>>> are far away, but they are really, really, really bright.<BR>
>><BR>
>>They are point sources, you aren't. And in any case, that trick won't<BR>
>>even work for sensors on opposite sides of the planet, much less ones<BR>
>>scattered around the system.<BR>
<BR>
> Well, stars aren't really point sources either.  Now the angle is<BR>
> small but even if one side spends the money to get sensors with the<BR>
> kind a spacial resolution he needs, does he check every star at<BR>
> that kind of resolution on a continous basis?  That is a lot of<BR>
> checking.<BR>
<BR>
You missed a point. Sensors on opposite sides of the planet (ie right<BR>
and left sides as you face it) *won't* see you and the star in the same<BR>
place. If you are in line with the star for one, you won't be for the<BR>
other. So at the very least, one sensor will see you *and* the star,<BR>
only partial overlapped. Which means one is going to see the star as<BR>
much brighter. <BR>
<BR>
> And who says you need to radiate from a large area?  Being able<BR>
> to emit from a small area is not unreasonable for Traveller<BR>
> TLs.<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, it is. <BR>
<BR>
Consider that power radiated per unit area is better known as<BR>
temperature. There's a limit. And at the power levels involved we'll be<BR>
pretty close to it to start with. It's not like you can have "narrow"<BR>
radiators *and* operate them at tens or hundreds of thousands of<BR>
degrees. You'll be lucky to operate them at as much as 5000 degrees.<BR>
More like 3000. And that sets a lower limit on the area they have to<BR>
take up. <BR>
<BR>
Yes, there are setups that use things like liquid metal sprays, and<BR>
even electron clouds. But those can't be made to emit in the sort of<BR>
narrow cone you need. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 09:18:34 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>          Just FYI, in the RealWorld(tm) I am a Naval Reservist who does <BR>
> sensor ops.  Before I opted to downgrade my readiness status so I could be <BR>
> a Dad, I was in the top 10% in Canada at what I do.<BR>
><BR>
>          WARNING:  MONSTER OVERSIMPLIFICATION AHEAD.<BR>
><BR>
>          The biggest difference between a communications signal and a <BR>
> sensor signal is frequency and energy.  A comms signal only has to go one <BR>
> way and needs to carry *lots* of information.  A sensor signal has to be <BR>
> able to go at least twice the distance the same comms signal does, and <BR>
> needs to be a "pure tone" to allow a good picture to be created.<BR>
><BR>
>          Because you need four times as much energy to go twice as far and <BR>
> still have a "legible" signal, the sensor beam needs *at least* *eight* <BR>
> times as much energy as the comms beam.  That is why turning a sensor <BR>
> active on a battlefield is *suicide*;  they can see you on passives long <BR>
> before you see them on actives.<BR>
><BR>
>          The comms signal will initially, by almost requirement, be a <BR>
> modulated "Hi, I'm a comms beam" carrier pattern.  The ship's computer <BR>
> getting peppered with it will recognize that pattern and classify it as <BR>
> such and then trigger the appropriate things with the communications system <BR>
> to beam its own carrier back down the bearing that the originator came from.<BR>
><BR>
>          The sensor signal will be a stream of distinct pulses at a <BR>
> comparatively high energy level.  Again, the ship being peppered won't find <BR>
> a carrier pattern, will find a pattern and energy level consistent with a <BR>
> LIDAR on "search" mode and warn the sensor ops team.<BR>
<BR>
Then again, it could be a simple CW transmission. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:05:42 -0500<BR>
From: "D. Smart" <dsmart@imagin.net><BR>
Subject: Living Machine (was Re: FFS3 stuff)<BR>
<BR>
shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> >>> Anyone (maybe also Leonard)<BR>
> >>> Life Support. I'd like something a bit more differentiated.<BR>
> <BR>
> There's a reference in Ben Bova's "Return to Mars" that needs to be<BR>
> tracked down by someone with a better browser than I currently have<BR>
> access to.<BR>
> <BR>
> Check for references to "the Living Machine" which is a<BR>
> sewage/wastewater treatment system using plants (much like what I've<BR>
> described in the past), and producing clean water and food (as well as<BR>
> air in space uses). It might not be usable on ships, but it ought to be<BR>
> usable in stations, and on worlds with incompatible biosphers (or no<BR>
> biosphere).<BR>
<BR>
Check out the following links:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC35/Guterson.htm<BR>
<BR>
http://www.livingtechnologies.com/htm/machine.htm<BR>
<BR>
http://www.livingmachines.com/htm/home.htm (Home URL for<BR>
previous link)<BR>
<BR>
David<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 10:17:45 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>  > Space is big.  Even a modestly narrow angle is going to mean a<BR>
>  > _lot_ sensors.<BR>
><BR>
>It's *getting* the angle that's a pain.<BR>
<BR>
Yes its hard at our TL.  We are also taking a several TLs<BR>
into the future...<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>  >>Anyway, regardless of wavelength, the *power* remains the same<BR>
>  >>(actually, most means of shifting the wavelngth around or narrowing the<BR>
>  >>bandwidth use more energy than just leaving things alone. And you have<BR>
>  >>to get rid of *that* energy too).<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > _Most_.  At our TL.  What can do it at Traveller TLs?  It isn't<BR>
>  > unreasonable....<BR>
><BR>
>Actually, it *is* unreasonable. There's this thing called entropy. And<BR>
>the narrower the bandwidth the lower the entropy of the emmisions.<BR>
<BR>
So you have to emit more.  If that wavelength is harder to detect<BR>
you can still be better off.<BR>
<BR>
>I said most because I know \better than to say *all*. somebody'd jump<BR>
>on it. But I'd be *really* surprised at an even *theoretically*<BR>
>possible technique that didn't result in greatly increase heat<BR>
>generation.<BR>
<BR>
It is possible to adsorb two photons and emit one (they are called<BR>
frequency doublers).  The opposite is just as doable.<BR>
<BR>
>  > Well, stars aren't really point sources either.  Now the angle is<BR>
>  > small but even if one side spends the money to get sensors with the<BR>
>  > kind a spacial resolution he needs, does he check every star at<BR>
>  > that kind of resolution on a continous basis?  That is a lot of<BR>
>  > checking.<BR>
><BR>
>You missed a point. Sensors on opposite sides of the planet (ie right<BR>
>and left sides as you face it) *won't* see you and the star in the same<BR>
>place. If you are in line with the star for one, you won't be for the<BR>
>other. So at the very least, one sensor will see you *and* the star,<BR>
>only partial overlapped. Which means one is going to see the star as<BR>
>much brighter.<BR>
<BR>
Yes, it won't work in all cases, but it will work in many cases<BR>
of interest.  Combined with directional<BR>
emmission and other tricks, it shows that detection is _not_<BR>
automatic.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>  > And who says you need to radiate from a large area?  Being able<BR>
>  > to emit from a small area is not unreasonable for Traveller<BR>
>  > TLs.<BR>
><BR>
>Sorry, it is.<BR>
><BR>
>Consider that power radiated per unit area is better known as<BR>
>temperature. There's a limit. And at the power levels involved we'll be<BR>
>pretty close to it to start with. It's not like you can have "narrow"<BR>
>radiators *and* operate them at tens or hundreds of thousands of<BR>
>degrees. You'll be lucky to operate them at as much as 5000 degrees.<BR>
>More like 3000. And that sets a lower limit on the area they have to<BR>
>take up.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
You are assuming simple blackbody radiation again (I would get into<BR>
why you can't operate at high temperatures, but I don't see why<BR>
one has to assume that at Traveller TLs they still use "cooling<BR>
fins").<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:30:31 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Trav-Tech Mailing list<BR>
<BR>
At 11:58 AM 7/30/00, you wrote:<BR>
>         The http://www.qrc.com web site goes to "QRC Division of Macro<BR>
>International Inc.", a web design company.<BR>
>         As far as I can tell quark.qrc.com is no longer on the Internet.<BR>
><BR>
>         However, following Eris's suggestion, the subscription to<BR>
>trav-tech-request@qrc.com worked, but the authorization followup to<BR>
>Majordomo@qrc.com failed with a "person does not exist" failure message.<BR>
><BR>
>         From this I'd conclude the list is dead, gone and deleted.<BR>
><BR>
>         I'd like to participate in the FF&S3 (re)write. I've never seen <BR>
> FF&S1/2<BR>
>so I have no comments on the original. OTOH if part of this exercise is<BR>
>to make the book useable by others, a fresh perspective may be helpful.<BR>
><BR>
>--<BR>
>     Thomas Jones-Low<BR>
>     tjoneslo@together.net<BR>
<BR>
         If y'all want, I can set up a new trav-tech list on my box here, <BR>
and/or a FFS-RW list.  I'd be glad to help in that capacity.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:04:52 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 12:35 -0400 30/7/00, "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
>Exactly! At the moment the light fighter (the 'main strategic advantage the<BR>
>Imperium has over its neighbours') is almost entirely useless, because it<BR>
>can't do a damn thing to a major warship.<BR>
>Fighters might become useful again!<BR>
>Nick stops ranting about fighters.<BR>
>(For the moment.)<BR>
<BR>
I assume you are referring to M0 with the fighter ref? The fighter is <BR>
devastating in that Milieu particularly against pirates (ie small <BR>
ships). The TL size limit for ships (HG2) means that they are more <BR>
effective as their opponents are smaller (generally).<BR>
<BR>
Fighters are just an expendable missile screen and a way to damage <BR>
surface fittings in Classic/MegaTraveller.<BR>
<BR>
Real ships have spinal mounts ;-)<BR>
<BR>
I'd argue for small ships like missile boats and Weber's LACs rather <BR>
than light fighters for normal operations, as the modern day naval <BR>
surface combatant analogy isn't good for Traveller starships.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
 <BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:11:22 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
Anyone have an idea of why I'm being refused a connection to this site?  I<BR>
was trying to find out more about the Condition Reflex Infantry mentioned in<BR>
some posts a while ago.  I kind of like this super police state concept for<BR>
the Solomani Sphere and am looking for more information.<BR>
<BR>
In particular, I am interested in exploring to possibilities of extinction<BR>
of personal liberties and freedom on high tech  Solomani worlds.  I think it<BR>
adds a thought provoking twist to the Sollies.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:31:51 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Arthur Boff <ajboff@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: I got the Supplements Reprint!<BR>
<BR>
I bought the CT Supplements Reprint book yesterday.<BR>
Very useful! I'd like to thank Marc for rereleasing<BR>
the CT line, and congratulate all those who<BR>
contributed to the GDW CT Supplements for making such<BR>
useful game aids.<BR>
<BR>
Arthur Boff<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:34:23 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Arthur Boff <ajboff@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Should I get MT?<BR>
<BR>
Hello,<BR>
<BR>
I may be in a position to get a copy of MegaTraveller.<BR>
<BR>
The question I want to ask is: Is it worth it?<BR>
<BR>
I have the currently available CT reprints and some<BR>
BITS and GT supplements. Would MT add a lot to my<BR>
game?<BR>
<BR>
I've heard that MT was merely all the CT rules brought<BR>
together. So is the reprint of the CT Books<BR>
effectively The Game MT Was Meant To Be?<BR>
<BR>
Arthur<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:52:33 -0700<BR>
From: Bill <beast@aracnet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
>Anyone have an idea of why I'm being refused a connection to this site?  I<BR>
>was trying to find out more about the Condition Reflex Infantry mentioned in<BR>
>some posts a while ago.  I kind of like this super police state concept for<BR>
>the Solomani Sphere and am looking for more information.<BR>
><BR>
>In particular, I am interested in exploring to possibilities of extinction<BR>
>of personal liberties and freedom on high tech  Solomani worlds.  I think it<BR>
>adds a thought provoking twist to the Sollies.<BR>
><BR>
>-Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
I'm not 100% certain but it seems the web server is down.<BR>
I'm sure Tod will have it up and running as soon as possible.<BR>
If you like, I would be happy to discuss what I know of the CRI, as I <BR>
have a CRI character in the Evil Tod's universe.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Bill<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:04:43 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
on 7/30/00 11:11 AM, Dan Lane at danielrlane@home.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Anyone have an idea of why I'm being refused a connection to this site?  I<BR>
> was trying to find out more about the Condition Reflex Infantry mentioned in<BR>
> some posts a while ago.  I kind of like this super police state concept for<BR>
> the Solomani Sphere and am looking for more information.<BR>
> <BR>
> In particular, I am interested in exploring to possibilities of extinction<BR>
> of personal liberties and freedom on high tech  Solomani worlds.  I think it<BR>
> adds a thought provoking twist to the Sollies.<BR>
> <BR>
> -Dan Lane<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Sorry about that, the apparently the powerstrip popped a breaker sometime<BR>
last night.  I've fixed that.<BR>
<BR>
Stuff at solsec.org has pretty lean so far.  I've been waiting for "Rim of<BR>
Fire" to arrive, so I can decide if I'm going to use any ideas from them, or<BR>
just go on my own way.<BR>
<BR>
Stay tuned.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 15:13:29 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
> Correct. Young's trichromacy theory, later proven to be correct by the<BR>
> histologists and physiologists.<BR>
<BR>
<Professional Pride> Ya, but the psychophysicists pointed the way! </PP><BR>
*Ahem*<BR>
<BR>
>> So aliens with more receptors will draw distinctions we'll be unable to<BR>
>> see.<BR>
> In most cases, more wouldn't be required ; the response range of the<BR>
> pigments could be extended. I suppose another family for different<BR>
> spectral ranges (e.g. near infrared or ultraviolet) could have evolved.<BR>
<BR>
In actual fact, there are many species of fish and birds with more than 3<BR>
pigment types.  Gold fish have four, and one of them goes into the UV. <BR>
Why?  One theory is that making subtle color-distinctions is advantageous<BR>
in choosing mates.  More pigments mean better color discrimination.  Some<BR>
birds have 5 pigments, and one type of shrimp has 10! But in that last<BR>
case, it's probably not an opponent system, but a set of 10 seperate<BR>
channels. <BR>
<BR>
<Leonard><BR>
As for IR/UV, as I've noted before, there are severe problems with<BR>
chromatic abberation once the visual range is more than a single<BR>
octave. One interesting solution proposed over on rec.arts.sf.science<BR>
</Leonard><BR>
<BR>
True, but this is only a problem is one assumes a 'unified' visual system.<BR>
There's nothing stopping a creature from having several visual senses<BR>
which don't get re-integrated except at a very high level (the way our<BR>
hearing and sight don't really get re-integrated until they hit 'higher<BR>
fucntions').  In fact, these different senses could arise from the same<BR>
retina, potentially.<BR>
<BR>
<Leonard><BR>
during the "O Superman" thread was having several sets of eyelids (many<BR>
creatures have this), transparent to different "bands". Could that<BR>
evolve? Damned if I know.<BR>
</Leonard><BR>
<BR>
Several eyelids aren't necessary.  Many creatures have evolved colored oil<BR>
droplets which sit on top of individual receptor types.  You could have an<BR>
IR receptor with oil that filters out lower frequencies. This way you can<BR>
have your several visual systems simultaneously.  THe only problem might<BR>
be embryological.  It might be difficult for such a system to organize<BR>
itself.  Not sure. <BR>
<BR>
<Leonard><BR>
An alien with different visual pigments might not even agree that there<BR>
*was* a continuum. Sort of like trying to have a bar that's red at one<BR>
end, green at the other, and with a smooth shift from one end to the<BR>
other. Our visual system doesn't map colors that way. Theirs might.<BR>
</Leonard><BR>
<BR>
Our visual system uses two color continua:  Red-Green and Blue-Yellow. <BR>
The 'quick intuitive' proof of this is that you can't imagine a<BR>
"reddish-green" or a "bluish yellow". These result in qualitatively<BR>
different sensations (yellow and green, respectively). <BR>
<BR>
This is a result of the three receptor types opposing each other in R-G<BR>
and (R+G)-B channels. With more receptors types, there can be more<BR>
continua, and thus color concepts that humans will have a very hard time<BR>
understanding even theoretically. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> One can imagine the section of the Imperial Data Package dealing with<BR>
> baseline ergonomic requirements for equipment, given the variations in<BR>
> sensory modalities, let alone acuities, likely to be found in the 3I...<BR>
<BR>
I imagine alot of stuff in the Imperium is 'over-engineered' from our<BR>
perspective.  Considering the range of gravities, atmospheres and<BR>
ergonomic factors that have to be taken into account for many devices,<BR>
they would have to be.<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 12:33:04 -0700<BR>
From: sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: Fusion & Nuclear Dampers<BR>
<BR>
The established tech for nuclear dampers can definitely affect both <BR>
fission & fusion power plants.  However, if we don't want folks using <BR>
NDs to shut down another ship's power plant we have an easy <BR>
handwave.  At TL 12 and above the increase in fusion pp efficiency <BR>
seems almost certain to be due to small scale nuclear dampers <BR>
being used to moderate and control the fusion.  That being the <BR>
case, perhaps TL 12 and above fusion plants cannot be easily <BR>
affected by external nuclear dampers.  In that case, fission plants <BR>
and TL 11 and lower fusion plants are all susceptible to NDs, and <BR>
higher TL ships are not.<BR>
<BR>
All that being said, I would prefer if at very short ranges (a few <BR>
hundred meters) a ND could shut off a ship's power plant, so that a <BR>
highport's ND could also be used to shut off a docked ship's power <BR>
plant (in fact this would likely be the primary reason for a highport <BR>
to have an ND).<BR>
<BR>
Also, do we have any reason to believe that NDs work at a range <BR>
greater than a few kilometers?  in space nuclear detonations are <BR>
*much* more effective at very short ranges (especially given how <BR>
well radiation shielded any superdense or bonded superdense hull <BR>
is).  Another solution to the problem is to simply say that NDs <BR>
don't work beyond maybe 5 kilometers.  <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com    <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:55:32 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
<BR>
> Nick, you have to get a copy of Bruce Macintosh's Definitive Sensor<BR>
> Rules (DSR) off the net someplace.  Dom, you have them on the BITS<BR>
> site...yes?<BR>
<BR>
Verily. I have found them, and they are good. Cheers.<BR>
<BR>
So sensitivity 14 PEMS for a destroyer and sensitivity 13 PEMS for a<BR>
fighter are about in the right ballpark?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 21:30:42 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Should I get MT?<BR>
<BR>
> Arthur Boff wrote:<BR>
> I may be in a position to get a copy of MegaTraveller.<BR>
><BR>
> The question I want to ask is: Is it worth it?<BR>
><BR>
> I have the currently available CT reprints and some<BR>
> BITS and GT supplements. Would MT add a lot to my<BR>
> game?<BR>
><BR>
> I've heard that MT was merely all the CT rules brought<BR>
> together. So is the reprint of the CT Books<BR>
> effectively The Game MT Was Meant To Be?<BR>
<BR>
Some people may tell you "No" but my answer is "Yes, get MT" (but<BR>
it is a matter of personal taste).<BR>
<BR>
While TNE and GT are completely separate rule systems both MT and<BR>
T4 can be thought of as CT+.  MT builds on  the  CT  system  with<BR>
some major  enhancements:  first  DGPs  task  system  (which  was<BR>
originally an optional add-on for CT)  is  now  fully  integrated<BR>
into the rules (the task system is the "best thing  since  sliced<BR>
bread" of the RPG world).  Second  there  is  a  unified  vehicle<BR>
construction system which covers everything from ground  vehicles<BR>
up to starships.  Note that although the starship  combat  system<BR>
is basically High Guard (CT Book  5),  starship  construction  is<BR>
very different and IMHO more realistic ... no more 1 million  ton<BR>
battleships with 6G, Jump-6, Agility 6!  Personal combat is  also<BR>
much improved (with armour and weapon  penetration  treated  much<BR>
more rationally).<BR>
<BR>
As for the MT background: many don't like it but there's  nothing<BR>
to stop you using a different background (I use MT rules  and  CT<BR>
setting) and there are useful nuggets of information throughout.<BR>
<BR>
MT supplements by  DGP  are  worth  their  weight  in  gold,  and<BR>
represented  the  high  point  in  Traveller.   (The  recent   GT<BR>
supplements are also first class  but  suffer  some  cross-system<BR>
compatability issues with CT.)<BR>
<BR>
IMHO:<BR>
- - CT is for pureists<BR>
- - MT is best (but get the eratta)<BR>
- - TNE was a failed experiment (or deviation)<BR>
- - T4 was an attempt to return to Traveller's roots  ...  hampered<BR>
  by production issues<BR>
- - GT is for those weird people who like GURPS  :-^<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2841<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc05.mx.aol.com (rly-zc05.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.5]) by air-zc04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:34:07 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:33:23 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA91984;<BR>
	Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:33:13 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:32:59 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA91940<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:32:58 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:32:58 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007302032.QAA91940@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2841<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2842</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/30/00 1:53:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, July 30 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2842<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
The Definitive Sensor Rules<BR>
ffs2 sensor errata<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:56:30 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: The Definitive Sensor Rules<BR>
<BR>
{2000 summary: This is as posted to the TML a while ago. I can't find<BR>
all of my ECM notes, or exotic sensor (densitometer/grav) notes - anyone<BR>
who has them could *please* email them to me. Comments from<BR>
the 2000 Bruce are encased in these curly braces. I don't guarantee<BR>
formatting of tables - I hope it works but don't trust<BR>
Outlook Express to get it right; please tell me if it gets<BR>
munged up. I would be interested in anyone who wants to host this<BR>
on a web page (some old versions are out there) who is willing to<BR>
put a significant amount of effort into getting the tables formatted<BR>
right.}<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Exectutive summary: these are the definitve rules for using the new sensors<BR>
in FFS2 (the printed version is somewhat incomplete) and also definitive<BR>
rules for converting old sensors to the new system.<BR>
<BR>
As part of the FFS2 project, I offered to help with better passive sensor<BR>
rules, based on realistic simulations of detector properties, background at<BR>
different wavelength, and brightness of a target spacecraft at different<BR>
wavelength.  Target signature was modelled with three main components:<BR>
reflected starlight, thermal emission from the hull, and thermal<BR>
emission from waste-heat radiators; the radiators were based on the<BR>
assumptions that went into FFS2's powerplant rules (please - no debate about<BR>
power plant radiator realism!) and were usually the dominant component, though<BR>
reflected sunlight is also very high for non-black starships.<BR>
<BR>
I may write a long article about the results later, but the main result<BR>
was that even very small sensors can achieve initial detection - though<BR>
not necessarily a position accurate enough for fire control - at very<BR>
long ranges; even up to millions of km for a TL-8 5-m diameter sensor (a P1<BR>
in T4 terms) for a 100-ton non-military target.<BR>
<BR>
Based on this I set out to write more realistic sensor rules. Improvements<BR>
include a straightforward system for calculating initial detection ranges<BR>
for any target (based on some suggestions by Anders, mostly). This seems<BR>
especially useful to roleplayers - it's nice to have rules that define<BR>
precisely how far away (for example) at Type S can detect a powered-off<BR>
lifeboat parked next to an asteroid. it's also useful for heavyduty<BR>
military gearheads - it answers questions like "can a big military<BR>
sensor array detect a starship refuelling at a comet in the Kuiper belt".<BR>
<BR>
The rules also make a distinction<BR>
between detecting a target and achieving a fire control solution, and<BR>
adding a much wider range of possible sensors (it always bugged me that any<BR>
medium-sized FFS ship could fit the best possible sensor.)<BR>
<BR>
Unfortunately, while I know a lot about visible/IR sensors, I know very<BR>
little about radar - in the absence of a radar expert, Dave and I put together<BR>
active sensor rules through the ancient Vilani technique of "Making It Up."<BR>
In particular we tried to adjust<BR>
things so that active sensors were roughly game-balanced with passive sensors<BR>
(though I guess that this somewhat overrates active sensors.)<BR>
<BR>
Also unfortunately, the rules as they appear in FFS2 are somewhat incomplete;<BR>
they include the details of how big these new sensors are, but not much detail<BR>
on how to actually use these sensors in combat or role-playing.<BR>
So, as a preview and general service, I figured I'd post my (draft) sensor<BR>
rules here. I'll also include rules for converting FFS/QSDS/SSDS sensors and<BR>
ships to the new system. FFS2 includes much more detail for designing ships<BR>
with sensors - including very large ones - optimized for this new system,<BR>
new ECM options, etc., and is recommended for people wanting to take full<BR>
advantage of these rules.<BR>
<BR>
I've broken the rules up into three parts for this posting: Basic (Part 2),<BR>
Intermediate (Part 4), and Advanced (Part 5), with Basic covering all you need<BR>
or simple spacecraft operations in a free space, intermediate adding more<BR>
terrain options and a different treatment of active sensors, and advanced<BR>
adding some even-more-complicated terrain rules for exotic solar systems.<BR>
The rating/conversion rules get their own section (Part 3.)<BR>
<BR>
If any Traveller web site maintainers are interested in this, I'd be willing<BR>
to see it posted on a (non-IG) web site. If IG is interested in this, I'd<BR>
be willing to negotiate turning it into a JTAS article or a rules section<BR>
for a future book (like "Imperial Squadrons", or NAH.)<BR>
<BR>
The rules aren't particularly tied to any combat system. They are<BR>
oriented towards role-playing with a referee keeping enemy ships hidden,<BR>
but could be used for two-player combat with a defending player keeping their<BR>
ships secret or both players using dummy counters a la BR.<BR>
<BR>
[Some designer's notes are intersperesed in square brackets like this.]<BR>
[These are drafts. Not all the exotic situations have been modelled<BR>
in detail; some numbers are estimated and will change. I'm also willing<BR>
to tweak models for game balance and would *love* to hear from people<BR>
using these in role-playing situations or combat.<BR>
- --------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Part 2: Basic Rules<BR>
<BR>
Sensors are used for two main purposes. The first is DETECTING a<BR>
previously unknown target. The second is obtaining a fire-control LOCK on<BR>
a detected target.<BR>
<BR>
The target detection attempts are resolved by evaluating the<BR>
SIGNAL of each attempt using the formula below, and then comparing the<BR>
signal to the success chart (Table 1) to determine the difficulty of the<BR>
sensor operator's task. The SIGNAL must be >=0.0 for there to be any chance<BR>
of detection; if the signal is sufficiently high detection is automatic.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Very important: only one passive and one active (if active sensors are on)<BR>
sensor can be used per sensing ship per<BR>
target per turn, even if the sensing ship has multiple sensors. [This is a<BR>
game-balance decision; because the T4 task system is so coarse and<BR>
even Impossible tasks so easy, it would otherwise always be better to put<BR>
two cheap sensors on a ship than one expensive one. The intermediate rules<BR>
do allow a ship to use multiple sensors for different purposes (like scanning<BR>
different arcs.)]<BR>
<BR>
Table 1: Detection Task Difficulty<BR>
<BR>
SIGNAL    Difficulty<BR>
<BR>
<0        target cannot be detected under any circumstances.<BR>
0.0       Impossible     (TNE: Impossible)<BR>
0.5       Staggering     (TNE: Formidable)<BR>
1.0       Average        (TNE: Average)<BR>
>=1.5          Automatic detection<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
SIGNAL is calculated as follows:<BR>
<BR>
SIGNAL = SENSITIVITY- RANGE + SIGNATURE +(MODIFIERS)<BR>
<BR>
SENSITIVITY is the sensitivity rating of the sensor attempting the<BR>
detection (determined in the design process.)<BR>
<BR>
SIGNATURE is the target's signature, also determined during the<BR>
design process but sometimes modified for specific conditions or actions.<BR>
Active sensors use the targets active (radar) signature.<BR>
Starships are rated with two different passive signatures. For the basic<BR>
system, use only the target's emitted (infrared) signature.<BR>
MODIFIERS will adjust the target's signature based on its actions.<BR>
<BR>
RANGE is the range factor, taken from the range chart (Table 2) - note that<BR>
these range factors are chosen to match what I was told the T4.1<BR>
range bands would be.<BR>
<BR>
Table 2: Range factors<BR>
<BR>
Range:                                            RANGE<BR>
km             BL Hexes  T4 name   T4.1 name      term<BR>
<=500                              regional       8<BR>
<=5,000        0                   continental    9<BR>
<=50,000       1-2       VS        planetary      10<BR>
<=500,000      3-16      S         far orbit      11<BR>
<=5,000,000    17-160    M and L                  12<BR>
<=50,000,000   161-1600                           13<BR>
<=500,000,000 (3 AU)               interplanetary 14<BR>
<=5,000,000,000 (30 AU)            outsystem      15<BR>
<=50,000,000,000 (300 AU)          "oort"         16<BR>
<=500,000,000,000 (3000 AU)                       17<BR>
<BR>
Finally, the target's signature is modified by the following actions or<BR>
conditions:<BR>
<BR>
Condition           Active Sig.      Passive Sig.<BR>
                    (radar)     (emitted/IR)<BR>
Non-maneuvering          0.0       -0.5<BR>
Shutdown                 0.0       -1.0<BR>
Using active sensors     +1.0      +1.0<BR>
Surprised                +0.5      +1.0<BR>
same hex as planet       -1.0        -0.5<BR>
 or asteroid<BR>
in atmosphere             0.0       -0.5<BR>
landed                   -2.0       -1.0<BR>
<BR>
Explanations:<BR>
<BR>
Non-maneuvering: no use of maneuver drive (except micro-evasion) during past<BR>
     turn.<BR>
Shutdown: all power (except life support and passive sensors) shut down -<BR>
     may not fire weapons or maneuver until powerplant restarted (which normally<BR>
     requires one full turn.)<BR>
Using active sensors: ships using any using any active sensor any active<BR>
     sensor must annouce this to all ships with functional active or<BR>
     passive sensors within the same solar system. [Yes, that's correct,<BR>
     within the solar system; there's an intermediate rule that defines<BR>
     precisely how far you can see an active sensor, but the answer is a<BR>
     long, long, way. For a real-world example, military over-the-horizon<BR>
     ICBM early warning radars (about a sensetivity 10 or 11) can be<BR>
     detected by an Arcebo-sized radio telescope (about a sensitivity<BR>
     14 PEMS) several parsecs away (range factor 19.)]<BR>
Surprised: Targets that are unaware of the presence of any enemy ship (ref's<BR>
     discretion) are significantly easier to detect. [Ships are normally<BR>
     assumed to manage their thermal radiators to radiate most heat away<BR>
     from suspected enemy craft - which is impossible if you don't know<BR>
     there are any enemy craft out there.]<BR>
Planet: targets within the same 30,000km BL hex as a planet or asteroid are<BR>
     assumed to be using it for cover wherever possible.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
In the basic system, once a target is detected, the referee should inform<BR>
the sensor operator of that fact and the target's signature, and place the<BR>
ship's counter on the map (if you're using one). In the basic system ships<BR>
remain detected forever (or until they move far enough away to reduce their<BR>
SIGNAL to -1.0). After one turn of detection, the referee can inform the<BR>
sensor operator of the tonnage and basic configuration of the target; after<BR>
two turns, the class.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Fire control:<BR>
<BR>
At the most basic level, you can just allow any ship to fire on any<BR>
detected target.<BR>
<BR>
For slightly more detail, at the instant of weapons fire, the firing ship<BR>
must obtain a succesful FIRE CONTROL LOCK on the target. The same procedure<BR>
as above is used, but the SIGNAL is reduced by -1.5 - firing on a target is<BR>
much more difficult than merely detecting it. All other modifiers apply.<BR>
Optionally, targets without a fire control lock may be fired on, but the fire<BR>
task is increased by 3 difficulty levels.<BR>
{I'm a little unhappy with this - it makes passive fire control too hard.<BR>
Experiment with reducing it to a -1.0. Also, fire carried out with only<BR>
passive sensors should be one difficulty level harder for the first turn<BR>
unless (a) there are two friendly ships both with detections (not locks) on the<BR>
target, or (b) the sensor operator makes a Difficult sensor role; this<BR>
simulates difficulty in range-finding with passive sensors}<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Examples:<BR>
A Scout ship has a passive sensor sensitivity of 14 and an<BR>
active sensor sensitivity of 12. It is attempting to detect a trader with a<BR>
active (radar) signature of 0 and a passive emitted (IR) signature of 0.<BR>
At interplanetary (500,000,000km) range detection the passive SIGNAL is<BR>
         14        +   0       -  14     =    0<BR>
      sensitivity   signature    range      SIGNAL<BR>
and detection is an Impossible task. The active SIGNAL is 12 + 0 - 14 = -2<BR>
and the target cannot be detected with active sensors.<BR>
<BR>
If the range were 5,000,000km, the passive signal would be 14 + 0 - 12 = 2<BR>
and detection would be automatic.<BR>
<BR>
If the target had shut down its power plant at 5,000,000 km, the passive<BR>
signal would be 14 + 0 - 1.0 - 12 = 1 (average task.)<BR>
<BR>
If the scout ship was then attempting to obtain a fire control lock at<BR>
a range of 500,000km, the signal would be 14 - 1.5 + 0 - 1.0 - 11 = 0.5<BR>
(formidable task) - but the trader would be unable to return fire (since<BR>
its power plant is shut down.)<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Part 3: Rating ships.<BR>
<BR>
Note that FFS2 includes a much wider range of sensors for use on newly-<BR>
designed ships - including much more powerful active sensors and huge<BR>
arrays for use on capital ships. It also includes advanced stealth and<BR>
ECM options.<BR>
<BR>
FFS2 also distinguishes between sensors that are optimized for detecting new<BR>
targets ("scanners") and those optimized for fire-control ("trackers") but<BR>
sensors converted from FFS are considered to be dual-mode tracker/scanners<BR>
(as are most high-TL sensors in FFS2), except for LADARs.<BR>
<BR>
Sensor rating conversions:<BR>
{I am extremeley unhappy with the conversion table, which I worked<BR>
out based only on area. A new one based on functionality and price<BR>
should be constructed. THis tends to overrate big FFS1 sensors.}<BR>
<BR>
Passive sensors from FFS/QSDS/SSDS are converted to the new system<BR>
using Table 3:<BR>
<BR>
Table 3: Passive Sensor Conversion Table<BR>
<BR>
FFS range(hexes)         Sensitivity<BR>
or T4 rating<BR>
0.01 - 0.1               13<BR>
1-2                      13.5<BR>
3-4                      14<BR>
5-6                      14.5<BR>
7-8                      15.0<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Active sensors use Table 4:<BR>
<BR>
Table4: Active Sensor Conversion Table<BR>
<BR>
FFS range(hexes)    Sensitivity<BR>
or T4 rating<BR>
0.01-0.1            11.5<BR>
1-7                 12.0<BR>
8-16                12.5<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
LADAR sensors use Table 5 - but LADARs are considered "Trackers", and<BR>
can only be used for fire control locks or for maintaining contact with<BR>
previously-detected targets.<BR>
<BR>
Table 5: LADAR Sensor Conversion Table<BR>
<BR>
FFS range(hexes)         Sensitivity<BR>
or T4 rating<BR>
0.01-0.1            13.5<BR>
1-7                 14.0<BR>
8-15                15.0<BR>
16                  15.5<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
SIGNATURES:<BR>
<BR>
A ship's active (radar) signature is calculated based on its surface<BR>
area using the following table:<BR>
<BR>
The base radar signature is given by the following table:<BR>
<BR>
surface area    radar signature         (hull size)<BR>
<BR>
0.1-9m^2               -0.5        <1 ton<BR>
10-999m^2               0          1-200 tons<BR>
1000-99999m^2          +0.5        200-90,000 tons<BR>
100000-9999999m^2      +1          100,000 tons+<BR>
<BR>
The hull size column is provided for T4 designs whose surface area is<BR>
not given in the USP - use the hull size column instead.<BR>
EMM decreases radar signature by 0.5.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
The passive emitted (or infrared) signature is calculated based on a ship's<BR>
power plant output. (For T4 ships that don't list the power plant output,<BR>
use (Power Plant Rating * Tons / 2).)<BR>
<BR>
Power            signature<BR>
0.000-0.009 MW    -2.5<BR>
0.01-0.09 MW      -2.<BR>
0.1-0.9 MW        -1.5<BR>
1 -9 MW           -1<BR>
10 MW             -0.5<BR>
100 MW             0<BR>
1000 MW            0.5<BR>
10000 MW           1<BR>
100000 MW          1.5<BR>
1000000 MW         2<BR>
<BR>
Ships with Stealth reduce their emitted signature by 0.5. Ships with<BR>
EMM reduce their signature by 1.0<BR>
<BR>
(as an Advanced rule, increase the power by 0.0001 MW per m2 of surface<BR>
area to include heat loading due to absorbed sunlight - this is normally<BR>
negligible except for ships with power plants shut down.)<BR>
<BR>
(also as an advanced rule, rather than using the generic -0.5<BR>
non-manuevering or -1.0 shutdown bonus in combat, designers may rate<BR>
the emitted signature at different power levels (such as with all systems<BR>
except life support shut down, or with power-using weapons not firing.))<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
The passive reflected (visible) signature, used in the Intermediate and<BR>
Advanced rules, is calculated based on a ship's surface area:<BR>
<BR>
surface area        reflected signature hull size<BR>
<BR>
1-9m^2                -2                <1 ton<BR>
10-99m^2              -1.5              1-95 tons<BR>
100-999m^2            -1                100-200 tons<BR>
1000-9999m^2          -0.5              300-3000 tons<BR>
10000-99999m^2         0                4000-100,000 tons<BR>
100000-999999m^2     0.5           200,000 - 1,000,000 tons<BR>
1000000-9999999m^2   1.0<BR>
<BR>
(The hull size table is again provided for lazy T4 owners.)<BR>
<BR>
Ships with TL10+ EMM reduce their reflected signature by 0.5<BR>
<BR>
These base signatures are for normal TL10+ starships, which are assumed<BR>
to have "chameleon" hulls that can change color and pattern. This capability<BR>
is normally used for adverstising and thermal management, but in a combat<BR>
situation the hull is adjusted to be as black as possible (typically 99%<BR>
black for a civilian hull.)<BR>
<BR>
Starships without this color-changing coating - TL9- ships, or (optionally)<BR>
some higher TL cut-rate civilian ships - increase their reflected<BR>
signature by +1. TL8-9 ships with Stealth ignore this penalty.<BR>
<BR>
Example: A TL-12 100dTon scoutship has a spherical hull (with an<BR>
area of 600 m2), and a power plant output of 150 MW. It has an active<BR>
(radar) signature of 0.0.<BR>
It would have a reflected signature of -1. ITs effective power plant<BR>
output is 150 MW + (600x0.0005)=150.3 MW, for an emitted signature of 0.<BR>
If the ship was equipped with EMM the emitted<BR>
signature would be reduced to -1.0 (and the active and reflected to -0.5<BR>
and -2.0 respectively.) If the ship was then running<BR>
without manuevering, with the powerplant running at 50 MW,<BR>
the emitted signature would be reduced still further to -1.5.<BR>
Even with the power plant completely shut off, the effective power<BR>
is still 0.3 MW, for an emitted signature (including masking) of -2.5<BR>
The scout has a T4 sensor rating of A2 P3, which converts to a new<BR>
sensor rating of A12 P14<BR>
<BR>
A designer would record this on the ship record as follows:<BR>
Active Sig:                 (-0.5)<BR>
Passive Sig (emit.refl):    (-1/-2)<BR>
                   (-1.5/-2 at 50 MW power)<BR>
                   (-2.5/-2 when shut down)<BR>
<BR>
Or (the short form): Signature (act/emit/ref): -1/-1/-2<BR>
<BR>
Part 4: Intermediate rules:<BR>
<BR>
There are fpur main changes to the basic detection process. The first<BR>
is a different detection table for active and passive sensors, to reflect<BR>
the fact that active sensor detection probabilities drop off steeply:<BR>
<BR>
Revised Table 1: detection task difficulties:<BR>
<BR>
SIGNAL    active detection    passive detection<BR>
          task                task<BR>
<0        (target cannot be detected under any circumstances)<BR>
0         Impossible          Impossible<BR>
0.5       Average             Staggering (TNE: Formidable)<BR>
1.0       (automatic)         Average<BR>
1.5                           Easy<BR>
2.0                           (automatic detection.)<BR>
<BR>
The second is a range table with fractional range bands (in-between the<BR>
T4 range bands):<BR>
<BR>
Revised table 2: Range factors<BR>
{This has some minor errata added to it - the 11.5 range band was<BR>
fixed. Since T4.1 never existed the range bands there are meaningless.<BR>
I added in the MCS range bands, though.}<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Range:                                       RANGE<BR>
km             BL Hexes  MCS  T4.1 name      term<BR>
<=500                         regional       8<BR>
<=1,600                                      8.5<BR>
<=5,000                       continental    9<BR>
<=16,000       0         PB                  9.5<BR>
<=50,000       1-2       VS   planetary      10<BR>
<=160,000      3-5       S                   10.5<BR>
<=500,000      6-16      M    far orbit      11<BR>
<=1,600,000    17-50     L                   11.5<BR>
<=5,000,000    51-160    X                   12<BR>
<=16,000,000   161-500                       12.5<BR>
<=50,000,000   501-1600                      13<BR>
<=160,000,000  1 AU                          13.5<BR>
<=500,000,000  3 AU           interplanetary 14<BR>
<=1,600,000,000     10 AU                    14.5<BR>
<=5,000,000,000     30 AU     outsystem      15<BR>
<=16,000,000,000  100 AU                     15.5<BR>
<=50,000,000,000  300 AU      oort           16<BR>
<=500,000,000,000 3000 AU                    17<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
The third change is that all ships have two different passive signatures,<BR>
their emitted (infrared) signature, and their reflected (visible) signature.<BR>
A passive sensor detection attempt must be evaluated against whichever of<BR>
these provides the higher total signal. Normally this will be the emitted<BR>
signature.<BR>
<BR>
The fourth is that detected targets no longer remain automatically detected<BR>
but must be reaquired each turn; however, previously-detected targets get<BR>
a 1.5 increase to their signal, which generally makes repeat detection<BR>
automatic. (Note that this modifier does NOT apply to fire control locks.)<BR>
<BR>
Finally, the intermediate rules use a vastly expanded table of<BR>
terrain and condition modifiers. These can be broken down broadly into<BR>
effects that modify the target's signature and effects that modify the<BR>
sensor's sensitivity:<BR>
<BR>
Modifiers to signature<BR>
<BR>
Condition           Active Sig.      Passive Sig.    Passive Sig.<BR>
                    (radar)     (emitted/IR)    (reflected/vis)<BR>
Target actions:<BR>
Non-maneuvering     +0.0      -0.5       0.0<BR>
Shutdown            +0.0      -1.0       0.0<BR>
Firing beam weapons +0.5      +1.0      +0.5<BR>
Launching msls/SC   +0.5      +0.0      +0.5<BR>
Using active sensors+1.0      +1.0      +1.0<BR>
Evading             -0.5      -0.5      -0.5<BR>
using HEPlaR 1-2G   +0.0      +0.5      +0.0<BR>
using HEPlaR 3-20G  +0.0      +1.0      +0.0<BR>
using HEPlaR 21G+   +0.0      +1.5      +0.0<BR>
{The HEPlaR modifiers are way too low.}<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
     Surprise modifiers:<BR>
Surprised           +0.5      +1.0      +0.5<BR>
Alert               +0.0      +0.5      +0.0<BR>
Battle Stations     +0.0      +0.0      +0.0<BR>
<BR>
     Terrian modifiers:<BR>
same hex as planet  -1.0      -1.0      -0.5<BR>
 or asteroid<BR>
in shadow           -0.0      -0.0      -2.0<BR>
landed              -2.0      -1.0      -0.5<BR>
landed and camoflaged -2.0         -1.0      -1.0<BR>
near large GG       -0.5      -0.5      -0.0<BR>
<BR>
     Atmosphere modifiers<BR>
In atmosphere  6+   0.0       -0.5      -0.0<BR>
In atmos 8-9        0.0       -1.0      -0.5<BR>
In atmos A+         -0.5      -1.5      -1.0<BR>
upper GG atmosphere -1.0      -2.0      -1.5<BR>
lower GG atmosphere -1.5      -2.5      -2.5<BR>
deep GG atmosphere  -2.5      -4.5      -4.5<BR>
<BR>
     General modifiers (not for Firecontrol locks):<BR>
Target was detected +1.5      +1.5      +1.5<BR>
  last turn<BR>
Target was detected +0.5      +0.5      +0.5<BR>
  within last 10 turns<BR>
<BR>
Non-maneuvering: no use of maneuver drive (except micro-evasion) during past<BR>
turn.<BR>
Shutdown: all power (except life support and passive sensors) shut down -<BR>
 may not fire weapons or maneuver until powerplant restarted (which normally<BR>
 requires one full turn.)<BR>
Firing beam weapons opens covers exposing (hot) weapon focal plane arrays<BR>
   and reducing stealthing. Firing missiles or launching/recovering small<BR>
   craft similarly increases signatures<BR>
<BR>
Using active sensors: ships using any using any active sensor any active<BR>
     sensor must annouce this to all ships with functional active or<BR>
     passive sensors within a range equal to the active sensor range +<BR>
     passive sensor range minus 5 (which is normally the whole solar<BR>
     system and occasionally the whole subsector.)<BR>
Surprised: Targets that are unaware of the presence of any enemy ship (ref's<BR>
     discretion) are significantly easier to detect. See the surprise<BR>
     rules in BR for details - ships can either be completely surprised, on<BR>
     alert status (some battle stations manned but no hostiles detected)<BR>
     or at battle stations with an enemy detected (no modifiers.)<BR>
Evasion: succesful BL/BR evasion attempt<BR>
HEPlaR (and Fusion rockets) have a large signature penalty.<BR>
Planet: targets within the same 30,000km BL hex as a planet or asteroid are<BR>
     assumed to be using it for cover wherever possible.<BR>
  Ships in shadow (generally any ship in the same hex as a planet or asteroid<BR>
  may opt to be in shadow) have a much lower reflected (visible-light) sig.<BR>
<BR>
  Landed ships are any ship that takes one turn to land on a planet or<BR>
   asteroid surface; they are assumed to set down to take advantage of<BR>
   terrain, and to dump waste heat into the object rather than radiate it.<BR>
   Modifier is not cumulative with "same hex".<BR>
<BR>
  Landed ships may be camoflaged - this requires one person-hour per 100 dTons<BR>
   of ship, is a Formidable task (Ship Tactics or Sensor), and requires<BR>
   camoflage equipment (MCR 0.01 and 0.1 tons per 100 dTons of ship, comes<BR>
   free with EMM or any other masking.) Ships lose their camoflage<BR>
   advantage if they fire weapons or (obviously) maneuver. Clearing the<BR>
   camoflage requires 10 person-minutes per 100 dTons of ship.<BR>
<BR>
Being within an atmosphere (or a gas giant atmosphere) reduces<BR>
detectability and sensor sensitivity.<BR>
These modifiers are cumulative with "landed" or "same hex" as<BR>
applicable.<BR>
Ships in a gas giant atmosphere<BR>
can be at one of three depths - upper, lower, and deep. Moving from one to<BR>
another requires one turn.<BR>
<BR>
Sensitivity modifiers:<BR>
<BR>
Condition      Active Sense.  Passive Sense.   Passive Sense.<BR>
               (radar)        (emitted/IR)      (reflected/vis)<BR>
<BR>
In atmosphere  6+    0.0      -0.0      -0.5<BR>
In atmos 8-9        0.0       -0.5      -1.0<BR>
In atmos A+         -0.5      -1.0      -1.5<BR>
upper GG atmosphere -1.0      -2.0      -1.5<BR>
lower GG atmosphere -1.5      -2.5      -2.5<BR>
deep GG atmosphere  -2.5      -4.5      -4.5<BR>
<BR>
Intermediate example: A scout (A12 P14) in space is trying to detect another<BR>
EMM-equipped scout (active/emitted/reflected signature -1.0/-1.0/-2.0).<BR>
The target is landed (sig modifiers -2/-1/-0.5). The range is 5,000,000km<BR>
(RF=12.) The active signal is 12 -2 -1 -12 = -3, undetectable. The<BR>
passive emitted signal is 14 -1 -1 -12 = 0, an Impossible task.<BR>
The passive reflected signal is 14 -2 -0.5 -12 = -0.5, lower than the<BR>
emitted signal, so the emitted signal is used.<BR>
The landed scout sees a passive signal of 14 -1.0 -12 = 1.0, an<BR>
Average task, and will almost certainly get the first shot.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Part 5: Advanced<BR>
<BR>
The advanced rules add a many more sensitivity modifiers<BR>
<BR>
Condition           Active Sig.      Passive Sig.    Passive Sig.<BR>
            (       radar)      (emitted/IR)    (reflected/vis)<BR>
Non-maneuvering     +0.0      -0.5       0.0<BR>
Shutdown            +0.0      -1.0       0.0<BR>
Firing beam weapons +0.5      +1.0      +0.5<BR>
Launching msls/SC   +0.5      +0.0      +0.5<BR>
Using active sensors+1.0      +1.0      +1.0<BR>
Evading             -0.5      -0.5      -0.5<BR>
using HEPlaR 1-2G   +0.0      +0.5      +0.0<BR>
using HEPlaR 3-20G  +0.0      +1.0      +0.0<BR>
using HEPlaR 21G+   +0.0      +1.5      +0.0<BR>
Chem rocket 1-10G   +0.0      +0.5      +0.0<BR>
Chem rocket 11+G    +0.0      +1.0      +0.0<BR>
Surprised           +0.5        +1.0         +0.5<BR>
Alert               +0.0      +0.5      +0.0<BR>
Agressive baffling: +0.0      -1.0      +0.0<BR>
  Vs baffled hex<BR>
Agressive baffling: +0.0      +0.5      +0.0<BR>
  Vs all others<BR>
same hex as planet  -1.0        -1.0         -0.5<BR>
 or asteroid<BR>
in shadow           -0.0       0.0      -2.0<BR>
landed              -2.0      -1.0      -0.5<BR>
landed and camoflaged-2.0          -1.0      -1.0<BR>
near large GG       -0.5      -0.0      -0.0<BR>
In atmosphere  6+    0.0      -0.5      -0.0<BR>
In atmos 8-9         0.0      -1.0      -0.5<BR>
In atmos A+         -0.5      -1.5      -1.0<BR>
upper GG atmosphere -1.0      -2.0      -1.5<BR>
lower GG atmosphere -1.5      -2.5      -2.5<BR>
deep GG atmosphere  -2.5      -4.5      -4.5<BR>
within 30 degrees<BR>
     of star        -0.5      -0.5      -0.5<BR>
Target was detected +1.5      +1.5      +1.5<BR>
  last turn (N/A to FC)<BR>
Target was detected +0.5      +0.5      +0.5<BR>
  within last 10 turns (N/A to FC)<BR>
<BR>
Target location:<BR>
   Inner zone       -0.5      +0.0      +1.0<BR>
   Habitable zone   +0.0      +0.0      +0.0<BR>
   Outer zone       +0.0      +0.0      -1.0<BR>
     >100 AU        +0.0      +0.0      -2.0<BR>
     >1000 AU       +0.0      +0.0      -3.0<BR>
     >10000 AU      +0.0      +0.0      -4.0<BR>
      or deep space<BR>
<BR>
Ships that have detected an enemy target can employ "agressive baffling",<BR>
     turing their radiators away from that single target hex but increasing<BR>
     their signature elsewhere.<BR>
Being in the same arc as the star (in the Habitable zone or closer) relative<BR>
to the sensing ship decrease detectability. (BL/BR players should designate<BR>
one direction to be the "sun" direction and apply this bonus to any target<BR>
in the same 60 degree arc.)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Sensitivity modifiers:<BR>
<BR>
Condition           Active Sense. Passive Sense.   Passive Sense.<BR>
                    (radar)     (emitted/IR)    (reflected/vis)<BR>
<BR>
In atmosphere  6+    0.0           -0.0      -0.5<BR>
In atmos 8-9         0.0           -0.5      -1.0<BR>
In atmos A+         -0.5           -1.0      -1.5<BR>
upper GG atmosphere -1.0           -2.0      -1.5<BR>
lower GG atmosphere -1.5           -2.5      -2.5<BR>
deep GG atmosphere  -2.5           -4.5      -4.5<BR>
<BR>
Sensor scanning       +0.5         +0.5      +0.5<BR>
  single 30 deg arc<BR>
Sensor scanning       +1.0         +1.0      +1.0<BR>
  single hex<BR>
<BR>
Sensor location:<BR>
   Inner zone       +0.0           -0.5      -0.5<BR>
   Habitable zone   +0.0           +0.0      +0.0<BR>
   Outer zone       +0.0           +1.0      +1.0<BR>
<BR>
Dust level (inner or habitable zone only):<BR>
   Normal           +0.0           +0.0      +0.0<BR>
   None             +0.0           +0.5      +0.5<BR>
   Light            +0.0           +0.0      +0.5<BR>
   Heavy            +0.0           -0.5      -0.5<BR>
   Extreme          -0.5           -1.0      -1.5<BR>
<BR>
Single arc: restricting a sensor to a single 30-degree arc<BR>
  improves sensitivity. Restricting scans to a single hex (including<BR>
  the ship's own) improves it still more. Note that ships may use multiple<BR>
  sensors to each scan a different arc or hex.<BR>
<BR>
Location/Dust: sensitivity is reduced in the inner portions of a solar<BR>
  system due to scattered light from zodiacal dust.<BR>
  Some systems (referees discretion until I write the rules...) may<BR>
  have light or no such dust, particularly older stars and/or stars with<BR>
  no planetoid belts. Young stars or stars with several planetoid belts<BR>
  may posses heavy dust; extremely young systems with thick protoplanetary<BR>
  disks qualify for the "extreme" modifier.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Example: in a normal system, a battlecruiser (signature 0.5/0.5/-0.5)<BR>
has jumped near a comet in the Kuiper belt (Range=15.) A large<BR>
sensor array (Passive sensitivity 15.5) in the inner solar system is<BR>
attempting to detect it. In the first turn, the battle cruiser<BR>
is operating at full power as it maneuvers to the comet and the emitted signal<BR>
is<BR>
15.5 + 0.5 - 15.0 = 1.0, an Average task. If it escapes detection and<BR>
manages to enter the comet's hex, it would gain the -1 for being in the<BR>
same hex as the comet, and -0.5 for non-maneuvering, for a signal of -0.5<BR>
(undetectable.) A second sensor array located in the outer zone of the<BR>
system, however, would have a sensitivity bonus of 1.0 for a signal of<BR>
15.5 + 1.0 + 0.5 - 15.0 -1.0 -0.5 = 0.5, a Staggering task (every half hour<BR>
turn) to detect the ship; it might be able to successully refuel and jump<BR>
out. (Clever system defence managers can probably think of ways to make<BR>
this harder...)<BR>
<BR>
Scan duration:<BR>
<BR>
The rules assume 30 minute turns. If the combat system has shorter turns,<BR>
sensor sensitivity will be reduced; in a roleplaying situation (such as<BR>
interplanetary travel) it will often be more convienient to extend the turns,<BR>
increasing sensor sensitivity. use the following table to modify sensitivity<BR>
based on turn length:<BR>
<BR>
Turn Length    Sense Mod    Notes<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
1-60 seconds        -0.5      personal combat turns<BR>
1-120 minutes       0.0        space combat turns<BR>
2-100 hours         +0.5      "system crossing" timescale<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(c) 1997,2000 Bruce Alan Macintosh. Traveller is a trademark of Imperium Games.<BR>
Contact the author for permission to reproduce electronically.<BR>
Author's current primary email address is bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:58:57 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: ffs2 sensor errata<BR>
<BR>
{2000 notes: I think Outlook Express is going to munge the<BR>
formatting of this up even more than the previous post.<BR>
Apologies in advance; again, I'd love to find someone who<BR>
wants to host this and is good at HTML and willing to work a<BR>
little. I think I found most of my exotic sensor stuff and<BR>
ECM stuff, which is quite rough.}<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Stealth (pg 65):<BR>
 At TL8-9, only one level of stealth maybe applied, and this<BR>
stealthing has no effect against TL10+ sensors. At TL10-11, only two<BR>
levels of stealth may be applied. At TL12+ ships may have up to three<BR>
levels of stealth. Regardless of armour thickness stealthy hulls have a<BR>
minimum cost. For convienience the effects of stealth are summarized below<BR>
(rounded off slightly for convienience)<BR>
<BR>
Level Minimum   Component   Component    Armour      Min Cost  Signature Mod<BR>
 TL   vol mult      area mult  cost mult    (MCr/m2)<BR>
1 8  1.1       1.25     x5           0.005      -0.5<BR>
2 10  1.2   1.56     x25          0.025        -1.0<BR>
3 12  1.3   1.95     x125         0.125        -1.5<BR>
<BR>
Component vol mult=multiplier for volume of all surface-area-using<BR>
  components (except drives and radiators), such as weapons, sensors, etc.<BR>
Component area mult=multiplier for surface area of all surface-area-using<BR>
  components<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Sensors (page 72-74):<BR>
<BR>
 See instead the "Definitive Sensor Rules" by Bruce Macintosh<BR>
(http://www.missouri.edu/~ccjoe/traveller/house/sensor.rules.html.)<BR>
has a version; and I posted it to TML at the end of July 2000.<BR>
<BR>
In particular, active sensors no longer use twice<BR>
the range factor, but instead use a modified detection chart.<BR>
The range factors given in the examples should be increased by 6.<BR>
<BR>
Sensor Options: Folding arrays: ignore the "double the volume."<BR>
Instead, folding arrays multiply the cost by 1.2 and reduce the required<BR>
surface area to 10% of normal. Note that the spacecraft cannot evade while<BR>
the folding array is deployed. At TL10+, PEMS arrays can operate while<BR>
folded, at a penalty of -1 to sensitivity.<BR>
<BR>
Passive Sensors:<BR>
<BR>
Resolution: Resolution is in meters. To calculate resolution<BR>
at any other distance, use the following formula:<BR>
<BR>
 resolution = R * (D/50000km)<BR>
where R is the resolution given in the table and D is the distance<BR>
in km.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Active sensors: delete "twice" in "twice the range factor".<BR>
<BR>
Vehicle Active Sensors:<BR>
(see new table below.) Note that TL6-7 active sensors are missing<BR>
and will be added later. The only TL6-7 passive sensors available<BR>
are those in the "Portable Visible and Infrared Light Sensors" table.<BR>
Rules for specialized TL-6 and 7 trackers will be added later (but<BR>
will only rarely be used, since there are no TL-6 or 7 beam weapons<BR>
to require fire control.)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Jammers:<BR>
Active sensor jammers are divided into two types, "area jammers" and<BR>
"deceptive jammers". Detailed rules will appear in the next edition<BR>
of the Definitive Sensor Rules.<BR>
<BR>
Area jammers blanket an entire region with electromagnetic<BR>
interference to reduce sensor sensitivity.All sensors within a<BR>
active jammer's range and in a 30 degree arc from the jamming ship have their<BR>
sensitivity reduced by 0.5 for both detection and fire control.<BR>
Area Jamming enemy sensors is a Staggering task,<BR>
reduced one difficulty level for every tech level the jammer exceeds the<BR>
sensor (One DM for every two tech levels in TNE.)<BR>
Jamming sensors one TL higher is an Impossible task; sensors more than<BR>
two TLs higher cannot be area jammed.<BR>
<BR>
Deceptive jammers protect a single ship by attempt to mimic<BR>
radar/AEMS signals hitting the jammer-equipped ship to disrupt fire control<BR>
locks (but not detection.)<BR>
Fire control locks against a ship equipped with<BR>
a deceptive jammer, by a sensor within that jammer's range,<BR>
have sensitivity reduced by 0.5. Deceptive jamming is a Formidable task,<BR>
recuced one difficulty level for every tech level the jammer exceeds the<BR>
sensor (One DM for every two tech levels in TNE.)<BR>
Jamming sensors one TL higher is an Impossible task; sensors more than<BR>
two TLs higher cannot be area jammed.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Passive sensor jammers also operate to prevent fire control locks.<BR>
(The name is something of a misnomer since they actually do emit radiation.)|<BR>
Fire control locks against a ship equipped with<BR>
a passive jammer, by a sensor within that jammer's range,<BR>
have sensitivity reduced by 0.5. Deceptive jamming is a Impossible task,<BR>
recuced one difficulty level for every tech level the jammer exceeds the<BR>
sensor (One DM for every two tech levels in TNE.) Passive jammers can only<BR>
be used against sensors that have been detected by the jamming ship.<BR>
Sensors of higher TL cannot be jammed. The next DSR edition will include<BR>
rules for using passive jammers to blind or decieve enemy sensors (generally<BR>
only possible for sensors of lower TL than the jammer.)<BR>
<BR>
Decoys: Active sensor decoys and LIDAR decoys are also available. They<BR>
require 0.1 m3 per m2 of the ship's surface per decoy bundle, mass<BR>
2 tons per m3 and cost MCr 5 per m3. The launcher rquires 0.01 m3 per m2 of<BR>
surface area, masses one ton per m3 and costs MCr 0.1 per m3.<BR>
(Seperate decoys and launchers are required for active sensors and LIDAR.)<BR>
They reduce the signature of the deploying ship by 0.5. Decoys of all types<BR>
are only effective against sensors of equal or lower tech level. Successfully<BR>
operating decoys is an Impossible task,<BR>
recuced one difficulty level for every tech level the jammer exceeds the<BR>
sensor (One DM for every two tech levels in TNE.)<BR>
TL6-7 decoys cost one tenth as much as normal decoys.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tables:<BR>
<BR>
Table 195: Detection Probability<BR>
<BR>
SIGNAL active detection passive detection<BR>
 task   task<BR>
<0 (target cannot be detected under any circumstances)<BR>
0 Impossible  Impossible<BR>
0.5 Average   Staggering (TNE: Formidable)<BR>
1.0 (automatic detection) Average<BR>
1.5    Easy<BR>
2.0    (automatic detection.)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Table 196: Sensor mass is 1 ton/m2, not m3.<BR>
<BR>
Table 197: change the last two lines:<BR>
<BR>
Sensitivity Max Range  Diameter   Area by TL(m2)   Resolution<BR>
                                        8     9        @50,000km<BR>
14  500,000     15.0       ---  100.0      1.5m<BR>
14.5          1,500,000     50.0       --- 1000.0      0.5m<BR>
<BR>
Sensor mass is 1 ton per m2, not per m3.<BR>
<BR>
Table 198: change the "firing range" column to read<BR>
Sensitivity Firing range (km)<BR>
12.5  50,000<BR>
13.0        160,000<BR>
13.5        500,000<BR>
13.5         1,600,000<BR>
14.0         5,000,000<BR>
14.5        16,000,000<BR>
15.0        16,000,000<BR>
15.5        16,000,000<BR>
<BR>
PEMS mass is 1 ton per m2, not per m3.<BR>
PEMS power is 0.001 MW per m2.<BR>
Footnote: * indicates "limited by diameter. PEMS15.5 and 16 may be built with<BR>
larger<BR>
than listed diameter; multiply resolution and maximum range by<BR>
(diameter/300m), to a maximum of x3 for PEMS 15.5 and x10 for PEMS 16.<BR>
<BR>
The table for converting from FFS1/T4 is mislabelled as the second copy of<BR>
"Table 204: LIDAR Volume". In any event, it is in error; replace with the<BR>
following tables:<BR>
<BR>
Table 204a: Passive Sensor Conversion Table<BR>
<BR>
FFS range(hexes)  Sensitivity<BR>
or T4 rating<BR>
0.01 - 0.1   13<BR>
1-2    13.5<BR>
3-4    14<BR>
5-6    14.5<BR>
7-8    15.0<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Table 204b: Active Sensor Conversion Table<BR>
<BR>
FFS range(hexes)  Sensitivity<BR>
or T4 rating<BR>
0.01-0.1   11.5<BR>
1-7    12.0<BR>
8-16    12.5<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Table 205c: LIDAR conversion table<BR>
<BR>
or T4 rating<BR>
FFS range       Sensitivity<BR>
1               13.5<BR>
2               14.0<BR>
4               14.5<BR>
6               15.0<BR>
8-16            15.5<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Add the Active Jammer Table:<BR>
<BR>
Range Area by TL (m2)<BR>
 8 9 10-11 12-13 14-15<BR>
11        500    100      50      25      10<BR>
12      5,000  1,000     500     250     100<BR>
13     50,000 10,000   5,000   2,500   1,000<BR>
14    -----  100,000  50,000  25,000  10,000<BR>
15      ---   -----    -----    ---- 100,000<BR>
<BR>
Active area jammers have area given by the above table. They have<BR>
a volume of 5m3 per m2, a mass of 2 tonnes/m3, and require 5 MW per m2.<BR>
They cost MCr 5 per m2.<BR>
<BR>
Active deceptive jammers have 1/10 the area given above. They have<BR>
a volume of 2m3 per m2, a mass of 2 tonnes/m3, and require 0.1 MW per m2.<BR>
They cost MCr 5 per m2.<BR>
<BR>
Passive jammer table:<BR>
Range Area by TL (m2)<BR>
 8 9 10-11 12-13 14-15<BR>
13       1      0.5      0.2     0.1     0.1<BR>
14      10      5        2       1       0.5<BR>
15     100     50       20      10       5<BR>
16    1000    500      200     100      50<BR>
<BR>
PEMS jammer volume is 2m3 per m2 of area. Mass is 2 tonnes per m2.<BR>
They require 0.1 MW per m2 and cost MCr 5 per m2.<BR>
<BR>
Table 205: Vehicle Active Sensors:<BR>
<BR>
Sensitivity Area by TL    Typical<BR>
  8 9 10-11 12-13 14-15 Range<BR>
6.5  0.05 0.025 0.01 0.005 0.002     16<BR>
7  0.1 0.05 0.025 0.01 0.005     50<BR>
8  0.25 0.10 0.05 0.02 0.010    160<BR>
8.5  0.5 0.20 0.10 0.05    0.025    500<BR>
9  1.0 0.50 0.20 0.10 0.050  1,600<BR>
Volume: sensor volume is 1m3 per m2 of area at all TL. Mass is 2 tonnes per m3.<BR>
Power required is 0.05 MW/m2. Price is MCr 1 per m2.<BR>
<BR>
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Some addenda that didn't make it into the first draft, but ship designers<BR>
might be interested in:<BR>
<BR>
Sensor Options:<BR>
<BR>
High or Low-powered active sensors.<BR>
<BR>
Active sensors may be designed to trade off required input power for size -<BR>
achieving greater sensitivity in a small package by use of a higher-powered<BR>
beam, for example. High-power active sensors of a given sensitivity have<BR>
the price as a normal sensor of the same sensitivity, but the designer<BR>
may decrease the surface area<BR>
by any factor between 2 and 5, increasing the power consumption by the same<BR>
factor.  High-power sensors have a volume of 10m3 per m2 of area.<BR>
<BR>
Similarly, low-power active sensors decrease the input power by a factor of<BR>
2 to 5, increasing the surface area by the same amount. Low-power<BR>
sensors have a volume of 2.5 m3 per m2 of area.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Continous sensor formula (handy for spreadsheets):<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Mathematically inclined users can calculate the area of sensors of arbitrary<BR>
sensitivity by using the following formula:<BR>
Area = Base Area * 100 ^ (sensitivity-13)   (the ^ signifies exponentiation.)<BR>
The base area is found on the following table:<BR>
<BR>
TL PEMS base area AEMS base area<BR>
8      50,000<BR>
9       1,000<BR>
10-11   2     5,000<BR>
12-13  1     2,500<BR>
14-15  0.5     1,000<BR>
<BR>
The minimum diameter and firing range (for PEMS) is taken from the nearest<BR>
PEMS on table 198. Sensors may not be constructed with greater or lesser<BR>
sensitivity than those on Table 198 and Table 201 at a given TL.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Exotic Sensors:<BR>
<BR>
 There are three types of exotic sensors available: Neutrino sensors,<BR>
Gravitic Sensors, and Neural Activity Scanners.<BR>
<BR>
Neural Activity Scanners detect and classify life forms based on brain<BR>
activity. They are extremely short-ranged, expensive, and fragile.<BR>
At each TL two basic models are available - a lightweight (portable)<BR>
model and a somewhat larger ranged device.<BR>
<BR>
TL Range MW Vol MCr<BR>
13 0.010 0.004 0.002 0.02<BR>
13 0.100 40.0 50.0 20.0<BR>
14 0.050 0.005 0.002 0.02<BR>
14 0.200 50.0 50.0 20.0<BR>
15 0.100 0.006 0.002 0.02<BR>
15 0.400 60.0 50.0 20.0<BR>
<BR>
Range: Typical range in km<BR>
MW: power required in MW<BR>
Vol: volume in m3. All NAS mass 2 tonnes per m3<BR>
Antenna area (m2) = MW x 100<BR>
<BR>
Neutrino scanners attempt to detect neutrinos emitted by nuclear power plants.<BR>
Pracitcal high-efficiency neutrino sensors are made possible by the<BR>
increasing mastery of nuclear forces at TL12; however, they are generally<BR>
too short ranged to be useful in starship combat. In addition, they function<BR>
only as scanners - dececting targets but not providing a precise enough<BR>
position for fire control.<BR>
<BR>
Neutrino scanner volume is given by the following table:<BR>
<BR>
Sensitivity Volume by TL       Typical Range<BR>
  12-13  14-15<BR>
8  10.0  5.0       50 km<BR>
8.5  50.0  20.0   160 km<BR>
9  500.0  200.0   500 km<BR>
9.5  50000.0  20000.0   1600 km<BR>
<BR>
Neutrino scanners mass 2 tonnes per m3 and cost MCr 5/m3. They require<BR>
0.1 MW per m3. They require no surface area.<BR>
<BR>
For detection purposes, neutrino signature can be calculated by totalling<BR>
the power of all nuclear<BR>
(fusion, fission, and fusion+) power plants on the vehicle and comparing<BR>
to table 13. At TL13+, power plants can be constructed with neutrino<BR>
shielding. Neutrino shielding requires 0.1 m3 per m3 of power plant<BR>
volume, masses 1 tonne per m3, cost MCr 1.0 per m3 and require 0.01 MW<BR>
per m3, and reduces the neutrino signature by 1.0.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Gravitic scanners detect both static gravitational fields and gravitational<BR>
radiation. The ability of grav sensors to detect<BR>
static fields is limited to strong fields or anomalies such as those caused<BR>
by large mineralogical anomalies, or large astronomical objects.<BR>
Their ability to detect graviational radiation, however, gives them<BR>
some sensitivity to the gravity waves produced by thruster plates and<BR>
contra-grav propulsion. Like neutrino scanners, they are not accurate<BR>
enough to provide a fire-control solution, and are somewhat short-ranged.<BR>
Despite the impressions of certain science-fiction authors, gravitational<BR>
radiation travels only at the speed of light.<BR>
<BR>
Gravitic scanner volume is given by the following table:<BR>
<BR>
Sensitivity Volume by TL       Typical Range<BR>
  12-13  14-15<BR>
7.0   ---  0.01    5 km<BR>
7.5   0.5  0.05   16 km<BR>
8   5.0  0.50       50 km<BR>
8.5        100.0  5.00   160 km<BR>
9       5000.0  100.0   500 km<BR>
9.5     500000.0  2000.0   1600 km<BR>
10.0  ---  200000.0  5000 km<BR>
<BR>
Mass is 2 tonnes per m3. Price is MCr 8 per m3. Power required is 0.01 MW<BR>
per m3. Antenna area is 0.5 m2 per m3.<BR>
<BR>
Gravitic sensors operating on a planetary surface or on a ship with<BR>
active thruster plates have their sensitivity reduced by 0.5<BR>
<BR>
The gravitic signature of a vehicle may be calculated from the following<BR>
table:<BR>
<BR>
    Thrust (kn)                Signature<BR>
          1 -           10      -2.0<BR>
         10 -          100 -1.5<BR>
        100 -        1,000 -1.0<BR>
      1,000 -       10,000 -0.5<BR>
     10,000 -      100,000  0.0<BR>
    100,000 -    1,000,000  0.5<BR>
  1,000,000 -   10,000,000       1.0<BR>
 10,000,000 -  100,000,000       1.5<BR>
100,000,000 -1,000,000,000       2.0<BR>
<BR>
(As a rule of thumb, thrust in kn = (G-rating)*(size in Td)*(100.)<BR>
Vehicles propelled by contra-grav instead of thruster plates have their<BR>
signature reduced by 0.5.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2842<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yd01.mx.aol.com (rly-yd01.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.1]) by air-yd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:53:03 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yd01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:52:40 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA92812;<BR>
	Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:52:36 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:52:33 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA92774<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:52:33 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:52:33 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007302052.QAA92774@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2842<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2843</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/30/00 4:46:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, July 30 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2843<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: FFS2<BR>
Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
Re: Should I Get MT?<BR>
Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
LIDARS and Sand<BR>
Re : Fusion Power and Nuclear Dampers (was : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
Re : Fusion Power and Nuclear Dampers (was : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Chaos!<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:05:03 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
[Discussing radiating in limited directions and/or somehow<BR>
mimicking the background radiation]<BR>
>Yes, it won't work in all cases, but it will work in many cases<BR>
>of interest.  Combined with directional<BR>
>emmission and other tricks, it shows that detection is _not_<BR>
>automatic.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
It only "shows" this if you actually do some math to back up<BR>
your claims.<BR>
<BR>
(1) How narrow an angle is your radiator radiating in? What<BR>
hardware defines the angle? What<BR>
fraction of the power comes out outside that angle?<BR>
Since you've reduced how much power can get out per<BR>
square meter of radiators, how much bigger/hotter do the<BR>
radiators get?<BR>
<BR>
(2) What exactly do you mean by "emitting at the same<BR>
wavelengths as the background?" It can be shown (entropy/<BR>
thermodynamics) that you can't get rid of more waste heat per<BR>
square meter at the<BR>
effective temperature of your radiators than a blackbody at<BR>
those temperatures. That being said, runninng your radiators cool<BR>
so more heat comes out in the mid-IR, where it's harder to see,<BR>
does help. However, it requires much bigger radiators. This is<BR>
allowed in the FFS2 rules - that's what IR masking buys you.<BR>
It's a hard game to play. In particular, it is a tradeoff against the<BR>
narrow-angle beaming you want to do above...<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
P.S. Before anyone invokes David Brin ("Sundiver")'s refrigerator<BR>
laser - that doesn't work; it violates the laws of thermodynamics.<BR>
Laser beams have such low entropy that they can't carry away<BR>
waste heat.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:07:41 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
<BR>
>Verily. I have found [the DSR] , and they are good. Cheers.<BR>
<BR>
>So sensitivity 14 PEMS for a destroyer and sensitivity 13 PEMS for a<BR>
>fighter are about in the right ballpark?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Roughly. My rule of thumb is to spend 5-50% of the cost of the ship<BR>
on sensors, depending on mission, and as much as the surface area<BR>
will carry. Those do sound about right.<BR>
<BR>
However, be sure to buy the single biggest LIDAR you can afford<BR>
(for the fighter) or several LIDARs (two per thousand tons) for the<BR>
bigger ships. LIDARs are by far the best fire control sensor, and<BR>
they're relatively compact.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:03:38 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
> I assume you are referring to M0 with the fighter ref? The fighter is<BR>
> devastating in that Milieu particularly against pirates (ie small<BR>
> ships). The TL size limit for ships (HG2) means that they are more<BR>
> effective as their opponents are smaller (generally).<BR>
<BR>
I think so - at least, I'm paraphrasing the description in the T4 rulebook<BR>
(where everything's TL-12).<BR>
<BR>
I can't find the table of size limits in HG2 (I really ought to know my way<BR>
around the book better - could somebody post a page number?) but surely the<BR>
size limit for TL-12 still allows pretty big ships? At the moment fighters<BR>
aren't a lot of good against anything past about a thousand tons.<BR>
<BR>
Not that I'm saying this is Bad And Wrong; fighters may very well suck<BR>
against capital ships. It's just that they're trumpeted as the best thing<BR>
since contragravity, and they don't really seem to live up to that.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
Hmm...on reflection this post doesn't really contain much actual expressed<BR>
opinion. I'll send it anyway and try and explain better during the daytime.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:07:33 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
<BR>
Ahah, The Sensors Man lives!<BR>
<BR>
> My first note is that Andrew Akin's remarkable spreadsheet gets<BR>
> all the FFS2 rules right for ship design. Find it and use it.<BR>
<BR>
Oh, I have it and I use it. I'm a big fan of spreadsheets. Between the<BR>
sheet and carryover knowledge from FFS1 I could create a ship'even before I<BR>
actually bought FFS2, but I wasn't sure if I was arming it with sun cracker<BR>
weapons or popguns, or whether I was mounting the Arecibo array or a video<BR>
camera on the sensor mounts.<BR>
<BR>
Without a context to put the sensitivity ratings into (and without any<BR>
examples) it was difficult to make sense of certain things, particularly<BR>
sensors. But now I have the DSR (I found them in the Missouri Archives) and<BR>
I was able to quickly generate a couple of examples which didn't seem too<BR>
unreasonable.<BR>
<BR>
Cheers - I think I'm beginning to see the dawn of understanding.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:17:16 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
<BR>
> Roughly. My rule of thumb is to spend 5-50% of the cost of the ship<BR>
> on sensors, depending on mission, and as much as the surface area<BR>
> will carry. Those do sound about right.<BR>
<SNIP><BR>
<BR>
Thankin'you sor. Rules of thumb are good They have been filed.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 16:15:16 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 09:57 AM,  "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>All you guys knew that if you kept talking about sensors, sooner or later<BR>
>you'd invoke me, right?<BR>
<BR>
Why do you think we've been doing this, if not to lure you back to<BR>
the list.  <g><BR>
<BR>
>The short answer is that current-tech fire control, mostly<BR>
>concerned about how to put missiles near a target or hit it with a<BR>
>wobbly gun shell at short range, isn't a good model for lasers at<BR>
>100,000 km.<BR>
<BR>
>The long answer is:  passive/visible or IR sensors are actually<BR>
>much more accurate than radar in terms of their ability to measure<BR>
>a angle or bearing.  A lot of this has to do with physics; radar<BR>
>beams are big and fuzzy compared to light beams.<BR>
<BR>
>In fact, I don't personally believe that radar will be accurate<BR>
>enough to use at space combat ranges - I left AEMS active sensors<BR>
>in FFS2/DSR (a) to keep people from arguing, and (b) because at<BR>
>high TL they may implicitly include a laser-based component (radar<BR>
>for search, LIDAR for targetting.)<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
>Of course, pure passive sensors don't give you a good range to the<BR>
>target.  To get that you either need two sensor platforms (so you<BR>
>can triangulate) or a long time (to build up a fire-control<BR>
>solution based on accelerations).  Or a LIDAR; I think in practice<BR>
>the real fire control sensors >will be LIDARs (and everyone<BR>
>designing an FFS2 ship probably realizes this.)<BR>
<BR>
So, are you saying that IYO, we should drop AEMS as a space sensor<BR>
platform?  Actives, of course, should still be available for some<BR>
functions, but you don't think they are appropriate as long range<BR>
space sensors.<BR>
<BR>
Instead when we design ships (and the systems to design ships) we<BR>
should install PEMS and use them for detection and recognition.<BR>
Perhaps have a LIDAR as an extension of our PEMS, and/or have a Fire<BR>
Control Sensor based on LIDAR that is used to "lock" targets<BR>
detected with the PEMS.  The "beam pointers" from FFS being an<BR>
expression of what you are proposing.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 15:58:46 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 09:41 AM,  "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> One thousand MW per meter!  Does it strike anyone as even remotely<BR>
>> reasonable?  It looks like magic radiators arrive at TL 14, and<BR>
>> suddenly make huge ships possible to me.<BR>
<BR>
>Part of what's implied is that the percentage of energy from a powerplant<BR>
>that goes into waste heat is going down with TL. (After all, lots of<BR>
>power goes into things like thruster plates whose efficiency we can't<BR>
>even begin to estimate, since they violate conservation of energy.) So<BR>
>TL12 plants have about 10%  of their energy as waste heat, TL14 1%. TL12<BR>
>radiators run at 2000K, radiating about 1 MW/square meter.<BR>
<BR>
So by TL14 only 1% of the power plant's output is waste heat and the<BR>
other 99% is converted to some usable form, like electricity.  That<BR>
I can accept.  It's when the electricity is sent to equipment<BR>
scattered around the ship with 0% lost to heat and is then used to<BR>
power the equipment with 0% lost to internal heat that gives me big<BR>
suspension of belief problems.  I can't help but think that, unless<BR>
there is a magic heat sink in here somewhere, 100% of whatever power<BR>
is produced by the power plant still ends up as waste heat that has<BR>
to be radiated away from the ship.<BR>
<BR>
Okay, we can eliminate some of it.  A substantial fraction of this<BR>
heat can be radiated out from the Mdrive (whether Tplate, Heplar, or<BR>
fusion torch), but there is a limit to what can leave out the<BR>
drive's surface area.  Portions might leave via active sensors and<BR>
beam weapons, but active sensors and beam weapons aren't on all the<BR>
time and they are certain to radiate away only part of the energy<BR>
they consume.  Everything else has to be handled with a cooling<BR>
system that radiates from either the hull or something attached to<BR>
the hull.<BR>
<BR>
How much is left for the ship's cooling system to handle is the<BR>
question.  Personally, I think the percentage that is left is<BR>
certainly in the double digits, and not the low double digits<BR>
either.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:31:26 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 12:15 PM,  "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> And now we have the opportunity for "rigging fire." <g>  They aren't<BR>
>sails, but knocking the wings off stops the ship as surely as taking down<BR>
>the sails did in the age of sail.<BR>
<BR>
>Exactly! At the moment the light fighter (the 'main strategic advantage<BR>
>the Imperium has over its neighbours') is almost entirely useless,<BR>
>because it can't do a damn thing to a major warship.<BR>
<BR>
>Fighters might become useful again!<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, yeah, yeah! ;-p<BR>
<BR>
I'm not a fighter fanatic, myself, but I do like it from the POV of this making it possible to cripple a ship badly enough so it can't maneuver or fire without destroying it. From there it's a hop, skip and jump to being able to force a boarding, capture the ship, and then make field repairs. Aarg, and you know where that takes us Matey! <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 13:12:49 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 09:21 AM,  Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> said:<BR>
<BR>
>         WARNING:  MONSTER OVERSIMPLIFICATION AHEAD.<BR>
<BR>
Simple works for me. <g><BR>
<BR>
>         The biggest difference between a communications signal and a <BR>
>sensor signal is frequency and energy.  A comms signal only has to go one<BR>
> way and needs to carry *lots* of information.  A sensor signal has to be<BR>
> able to go at least twice the distance the same comms signal does, and <BR>
>needs to be a "pure tone" to allow a good picture to be created.<BR>
<BR>
>         Because you need four times as much energy to go twice as far<BR>
>and  still have a "legible" signal, the sensor beam needs *at least*<BR>
>*eight*  times as much energy as the comms beam.  That is why turning a<BR>
>sensor  active on a battlefield is *suicide*;  they can see you on<BR>
>passives long  before you see them on actives.<BR>
<BR>
Interesting!  So, would it be fair to say that if a radio with a<BR>
Short range of 300,000 km requires 1 MW of power, a radar with an<BR>
equal Short range would require ~8 MW?<BR>
<BR>
>         The comms signal will initially, by almost requirement, be a <BR>
>modulated "Hi, I'm a comms beam" carrier pattern.  The ship's computer <BR>
>getting peppered with it will recognize that pattern and classify it as <BR>
>such and then trigger the appropriate things with the communications<BR>
>system  to beam its own carrier back down the bearing that the originator<BR>
>came from.<BR>
<BR>
A comment:  Wouldn't it be true that with a Laser Comm simply being<BR>
able to receive the signal is a priori evidence that the sender has<BR>
what she needs to target your ship?  And if you reply she has even<BR>
better targeting on you.  So, prior to an attack if the other ship<BR>
orders you to surrender by laser comm, then (a) she is demonstrating<BR>
that she has the data needed to hit you with a beam weapon as easily<BR>
as a beam comm and (b) she has just given you the same advantage.<BR>
<BR>
>         The sensor signal will be a stream of distinct pulses at a <BR>
>comparatively high energy level.  Again, the ship being peppered won't<BR>
>find  a carrier pattern, will find a pattern and energy level consistent<BR>
>with a  LIDAR on "search" mode and warn the sensor ops team.<BR>
<BR>
That I can see, and you might see something like that in the game<BR>
before long.  <g><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:27:47 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Arthur Boff <ajboff@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Should I Get MT?<BR>
<BR>
Peter Trevor said:<BR>
<BR>
<<While TNE and GT are completely separate rule<BR>
systems both MT and T4 can be thought of as CT+.  MT<BR>
builds on  the  CT  system  with some major <BR>
enhancements:  first  DGPs  task  system  (which  was<BR>
originally an optional add-on for CT)  is  now  fully <BR>
integrated into the rules (the task system is the<BR>
"best thing  since  sliced bread" of the RPG world). <BR>
Second  there  is  a  unified  vehicle construction<BR>
system which covers everything from ground  vehicles<BR>
up to starships.  Note that although the starship <BR>
combat  system is basically High Guard (CT Book  5), <BR>
starship  construction  is very different and IMHO<BR>
more realistic ... no more 1 million  ton battleships<BR>
with 6G, Jump-6, Agility 6!  Personal combat is  also<BR>
much improved (with armour and weapon  penetration <BR>
treated  much more rationally).>><BR>
<BR>
<Homer>Mmmm... unified vehicle design...</Homer><BR>
<BR>
<<As for the MT background: many don't like it but<BR>
there's  nothing to stop you using a different<BR>
background (I use MT rules  and  CT setting) and there<BR>
are useful nuggets of information throughout.>><BR>
<BR>
Wait, didn't Peter Newman say that MT refs weren't<BR>
allowed to do that? ;-P<BR>
<BR>
<<MT supplements by  DGP  are  worth  their  weight <BR>
in  gold,  and represented  the  high  point  in<BR>
Traveller.   (The  recent   GT supplements are also<BR>
first class  but  suffer  some  cross-system<BR>
compatability issues with CT.)>><BR>
<BR>
I heard about that.<BR>
<BR>
<<- - CT is for pureists>><BR>
<BR>
And for the hip new generation of Trav addicts who<BR>
prefer to use GURPS for other things...<BR>
<BR>
<<- - MT is best (but get the eratta)>><BR>
<BR>
I had heard bad things about errata...<BR>
<BR>
<<- - TNE was a failed experiment (or deviation)>><BR>
<BR>
I got into gaming at about the same time as TNE came<BR>
out. It didn't impress me. (My initial thought was<BR>
"Ah, an intelligent virus that meddles with circuitry?<BR>
This is an SF RPG by people who know no science." Hey,<BR>
I was new to RPGs, quit staring at me!)<BR>
<BR>
<<- - T4 was an attempt to return to Traveller's roots<BR>
 ...  hampered by production issues>><BR>
<BR>
I seem to remember not being too impressed by T4<BR>
either. It might have been that at that time I just<BR>
wasn't interested in SF RPGs, but perhaps at the back<BR>
of my mind I remembered hearing about GDW going bust<BR>
six months previously and thinking "hey, they're<BR>
awfully quick about releasing this. Sounds like a rush<BR>
job."<BR>
<BR>
The final straw was reading the rave review in arcane<BR>
magazine, then going down to my local game store and<BR>
flicking through a copy, and noticing the advert for<BR>
arcane in the back.<BR>
<BR>
<<- - GT is for those weird people who like GURPS>><BR>
<BR>
Yeah! Any game that makes you pay character points for<BR>
being friends with the other PCs is just stupid! ;-P<BR>
<BR>
Serious point: I wonder if the CT Reprints will<BR>
actually outsell any of the other incarnations of<BR>
Traveller?<BR>
<BR>
Arthur<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 17:06:59 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:20:05 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
>From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
>Subject: FF&S2 question<BR>
<BR>
>multiplication, I was a bit surprised to find that pages 65-80 are<BR>
>missing, and that to compensate I have extra copies of pages 49-64.  Are<BR>
>all FF&S2 books screwed up in this way, or is mine even more thoroughly<BR>
>botched than most?<BR>
<BR>
I must have one from the same print run, as it has the identical flaw.<BR>
<BR>
Most annoying.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:06:36 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 stuff<BR>
<BR>
> From: Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: Trav-Tech Mailing list<BR>
> I'd like to participate in the FF&S3 (re)write. I've never seen FF&S1/2<BR>
> so I have no comments on the original. OTOH if part of this exercise is<BR>
> to make the book useable by others, a fresh perspective may be helpful.<BR>
<BR>
You're in.<BR>
<BR>
So far, we have people assigned to Lo-tech space propulsion, life support,<BR>
maintainence, medical, fission and chemical propelled small arms.<BR>
<BR>
I'd like someone to put up their hand for armour (as in, the stuff between<BR>
you and damage).<BR>
<BR>
I'd like someone to do radiators as well, as heat output is pretty important<BR>
for power plants in general and starship power plants in specific, and we've<BR>
seperated 'waste heat' out in power plants.<BR>
<BR>
I would like to keep this on the TML, as we are picking up interest from<BR>
people I didnt expect. I feel taking it to a seperate mailing list would<BR>
limit the number of people involved.<BR>
<BR>
And I feel it beats much of the crap thats been on the list lately.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:13:01 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: LIDARS and Sand<BR>
<BR>
OK, so how does sand actually work ? What size cloud do you need ? How far<BR>
from the ship is it ? I think 99.999% of the time, the cloud will be much<BR>
closer to the target than to the firing/LIDAR using ship.<BR>
<BR>
As I see it, if clouds of sand are 'small', then using it will be a<BR>
two-edged sword - if you have to hide behind a small cloud of sand, then you<BR>
wont do any accelerating, or much dodging, and therefore 'shoot at the PAW<BR>
at the cloud of sand' sounds like a pretty decent plan.<BR>
<BR>
If the clouds are large, then this is less of an issue.<BR>
<BR>
Also, how do we handle 'burn-through' ? Under FFS2, sand clouds seem to be<BR>
quite vulnerable to high-powered lasers. Maybe we could argue that sand does<BR>
not merely diffuse, but also 'bends' the laser beam ?<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:08:18 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Fusion Power and Nuclear Dampers (was : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> I wonder if electrostatic confinement rather than magnetic confinement<BR>
> would work better for these? <BR>
<BR>
The design in the article is fairly 'tight', as the proposed<BR>
efficiencies for the colliding beam reactor as described in the article<BR>
were high :-<BR>
<BR>
> The design of a 100-MW (electric) reactor [13] has been considered on the basis of Q = 4.3 by assuming a<BR>
> converter efficiency of 0.9 for alpha particles, 0.4 for radiation, and 0.7 for accelerators.<BR>
<BR>
The Q value was for p-11B fusion.<BR>
<BR>
This assumes spin polarisation of the fuel and superconducting magnets.<BR>
The rebuttal (reference posted earlier) presumes that the radiative loss<BR>
figure is... overly optimistic.<BR>
<BR>
John Snead wrote :-<BR>
> However, if we don't want folks using <BR>
> NDs to shut down another ship's power plant we have an easy <BR>
> handwave.  At TL 12 and above the increase in fusion pp efficiency <BR>
> seems almost certain to be due to small scale nuclear dampers <BR>
> being used to moderate and control the fusion.<BR>
Absolutely. p-p/CNO cycle fusion needs special conditions to happen in<BR>
anything smaller than a star and generate useful power at the same time.<BR>
<BR>
Dampers are the key. ISTR that a change in the value of the strong force<BR>
by less than 1% accelerates the rate of fusion reactions by millions, if<BR>
not billions of times.<BR>
<BR>
> Also, do we have any reason to believe that NDs work at a range <BR>
> greater than a few kilometers? <BR>
Difficult. You may need to damp things at longer ranges.<BR>
<BR>
I wonder if high-altitude detonations of nukes to scramble the<BR>
ionosphere is a useful planetary invasion tactic at TTLs where dampers<BR>
will be available ; in very nasty conflicts, salting the stratosphere<BR>
with cobalt/strontium/caesium etc. isotopes might be another (bomb<BR>
optional with the latter).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:10:42 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Fusion Power and Nuclear Dampers (was : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> I wonder if electrostatic confinement rather than magnetic confinement<BR>
> would work better for these? <BR>
<BR>
The design in the article is fairly 'tight', as the proposed<BR>
efficiencies for the colliding beam reactor as described in the article<BR>
were high :-<BR>
<BR>
> The design of a 100-MW (electric) reactor [13] has been considered on the basis of Q = 4.3 by assuming a<BR>
> converter efficiency of 0.9 for alpha particles, 0.4 for radiation, and 0.7 for accelerators.<BR>
<BR>
The Q value was for p-11B fusion.<BR>
<BR>
This assumes spin polarisation of the fuel and superconducting magnets.<BR>
The rebuttal (reference posted earlier) presumes that the radiative loss<BR>
figure is... overly optimistic.<BR>
<BR>
John Snead wrote :-<BR>
> However, if we don't want folks using <BR>
> NDs to shut down another ship's power plant we have an easy <BR>
> handwave.  At TL 12 and above the increase in fusion pp efficiency <BR>
> seems almost certain to be due to small scale nuclear dampers <BR>
> being used to moderate and control the fusion.<BR>
Absolutely. p-p/CNO cycle fusion needs special conditions to happen in<BR>
anything smaller than a star and generate useful power at the same time.<BR>
<BR>
Dampers are the key. ISTR that a change in the value of the strong force<BR>
by less than 1% accelerates the rate of fusion reactions by millions, if<BR>
not billions of times.<BR>
<BR>
> Also, do we have any reason to believe that NDs work at a range <BR>
> greater than a few kilometers? <BR>
Difficult. You may need to damp things at longer ranges.<BR>
<BR>
I wonder if high-altitude detonations of nukes to scramble the<BR>
ionosphere is a useful planetary invasion tactic at TTLs where dampers<BR>
will be available ; in very nasty conflicts, salting the stratosphere<BR>
with cobalt/strontium/caesium etc. isotopes might be another (bomb<BR>
optional with the latter).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:11:01 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Many thanks to Bruce Mac for the reposting.<BR>
<BR>
A small gripe :-<BR>
> Neural Activity Scanners detect and classify life forms based on brain<BR>
> activity. They are extremely short-ranged, expensive, and fragile.<BR>
<BR>
I know we're probably trying to detect and analyse microvolt potential<BR>
differences*, but :-<BR>
'Extremely short-ranged' is right! With an upper range limit of 400m,<BR>
it'd be easier in most cases to observe the suspect lifeforms with TTL 3<BR>
telescopes and an experienced eye.<BR>
<BR>
They're a little large as well ; I'm going to notice a 6000m^2 antenna<BR>
at 400m. If I can see in the infrared, the 60MW powerplant is going to<BR>
stick out like a sore thumb, if the heat haze around it doesn't give it<BR>
away.<BR>
<BR>
* - another alternative is to estimate brain metabolic rate as a<BR>
proportion of total metabolic rate and use this as an 'intelligence<BR>
index' in conjunction with the eye of experience (?pattern recognition<BR>
soft/hardware, as used in contemporary [TTL13+] robotics?). <BR>
Could high resolution near-infrared spectroscopy fit the bill?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:11:54 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Many thanks to Bruce Mac for the reposting.<BR>
<BR>
A small gripe :-<BR>
> Neural Activity Scanners detect and classify life forms based on brain<BR>
> activity. They are extremely short-ranged, expensive, and fragile.<BR>
<BR>
I know we're probably trying to detect and analyse microvolt potential<BR>
differences*, but :-<BR>
'Extremely short-ranged' is right! With an upper range limit of 400m,<BR>
it'd be easier in most cases to observe the suspect lifeforms with TTL 3<BR>
telescopes and an experienced eye.<BR>
<BR>
They're a little large as well ; I'm going to notice a 6000m^2 antenna<BR>
at 400m. If I can see in the infrared, the 60MW powerplant is going to<BR>
stick out like a sore thumb, if the heat haze around it doesn't give it<BR>
away.<BR>
<BR>
* - another alternative is to estimate brain metabolic rate as a<BR>
proportion of total metabolic rate and use this as an 'intelligence<BR>
index' in conjunction with the eye of experience (?pattern recognition<BR>
soft/hardware, as used in contemporary [TTL13+] robotics?). <BR>
Could high resolution near-infrared spectroscopy fit the bill?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:13:29 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Many thanks to Bruce Mac for the reposting.<BR>
<BR>
A small gripe :-<BR>
> Neural Activity Scanners detect and classify life forms based on brain<BR>
> activity. They are extremely short-ranged, expensive, and fragile.<BR>
<BR>
I know we're probably trying to detect and analyse microvolt potential<BR>
differences*, but :-<BR>
'Extremely short-ranged' is right! With an upper range limit of 400m,<BR>
it'd be easier in most cases to observe the suspect lifeforms with TTL 3<BR>
telescopes and an experienced eye.<BR>
<BR>
They're a little large as well ; I'm going to notice a 6000m^2 antenna<BR>
at 400m. If I can see in the infrared, the 60MW powerplant is going to<BR>
stick out like a sore thumb, if the heat haze around it doesn't give it<BR>
away.<BR>
<BR>
* - another alternative is to estimate brain metabolic rate as a<BR>
proportion of total metabolic rate and use this as an 'intelligence<BR>
index' in conjunction with the eye of experience (?pattern recognition<BR>
soft/hardware, as used in contemporary [TTL13+] robotics?). <BR>
Could high resolution near-infrared spectroscopy fit the bill?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:46:59 +0100<BR>
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Chaos!<BR>
<BR>
I've just returned from a week out of town to discover that the F&F site<BR>
died just after I announced the Traveller fiction. Typical, that.<BR>
<BR>
Anyway, the site is back up now - though it's rather poorly thanks to<BR>
problems with the new server.<BR>
<BR>
You can find the first Traveller tale up now  at this address:<BR>
http://www.fiction-fantasy.net/game_fiction/traveller_fiction.shtml<BR>
<BR>
Three more should be up imminently, with several others about to go in over<BR>
the next few days.<BR>
<BR>
Go look, and feel free to comment.....<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Martin J Dougherty<BR>
Creative Director, Fiction & Fantasy Network<BR>
www.fiction-fantasy.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 17:04:46 -0700<BR>
From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> In actual fact, there are many species of fish and birds with more than 3<BR>
> pigment types.  Gold fish have four, and one of them goes into the UV.<BR>
> Why?  One theory is that making subtle color-distinctions is advantageous<BR>
<BR>
Some humans have 4 (tetrchromicity).  It may help in spotting how<BR>
healthy a baby is.  The fourth pigment is magenta.<BR>
<BR>
Kristian<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2843<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc05.mx.aol.com (rly-yc05.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.37]) by air-yc04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:46:33 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:45:35 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id TAA99624;<BR>
	Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:45:25 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:45:09 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id TAA99577<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:45:09 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:45:09 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007302345.TAA99577@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2843<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2844</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/30/00 8:02:34 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, July 30 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2844<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Chaos!<BR>
Re: ffs2 sensor errata<BR>
Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
Re:Sensors<BR>
Re: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
DSR: Natural objects<BR>
Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
Re: The Definitive Sensor Rules<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Should I get MT?<BR>
RE: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2843<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:05:47 -0500<BR>
From: "D. Smart" <dsmart@imagin.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Chaos!<BR>
<BR>
MJ Dougherty posted:<BR>
><BR>
>You can find the first Traveller tale up now  at this address:<BR>
>http://www.fiction-fantasy.net/game_fiction/traveller_fiction.shtml<BR>
><BR>
>Three more should be up imminently, with several others about to go in over<BR>
>the next few days.<BR>
><BR>
>Go look, and feel free to comment.....<BR>
<BR>
Looks like it's still chaotic, Martin.  :(<BR>
I just tried the link and got only a half<BR>
page of HTML.<BR>
<BR>
David<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:09:17 -0500<BR>
From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@hex.net><BR>
Subject: Re: ffs2 sensor errata<BR>
<BR>
At 03:58 PM 07/30/2000, you wrote:<BR>
><snip><BR>
Bruce,<BR>
<BR>
IIRC it was discussed the use of excessive computer processing power to <BR>
modify the sensors rules a bit. Sorry I too have lost the messages <BR>
concerning that.<BR>
<BR>
I believe that each sensor had rating of computer processing power, and if <BR>
you used computer processing power beyond that, you could increase <BR>
detection, resolution etc but only to a certain point, like .5 increase in <BR>
sensitivity.<BR>
<BR>
Put me down for assistance/input/heretic on FFS3's computer system, the one <BR>
in FFS2 was not developed due time and resource constraints. I would also <BR>
like to help/assist with the sensor rules.<BR>
<BR>
Sinbad Sam<BR>
Until The Reality or version of the rpg.<G><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:29:06 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 has a bad layout and How I do Sensors (was Re: FFS2)<BR>
<BR>
At 16:32 -0400 30/7/00, "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
> > Nick, you have to get a copy of Bruce Macintosh's Definitive Sensor<BR>
> > Rules (DSR) off the net someplace.  Dom, you have them on the BITS<BR>
> > site...yes?<BR>
><BR>
>Verily. I have found them, and they are good. Cheers.<BR>
>So sensitivity 14 PEMS for a destroyer and sensitivity 13 PEMS for a<BR>
>fighter are about in the right ballpark?<BR>
<BR>
You didn't find them at BITS did you? Cos if you did the little <BR>
buggers are hiding from me!<BR>
<BR>
Although part of the DSR is in MayDay M4.1's Acrobat file with <BR>
Bruce's permission.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 17:45:20 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re:Sensors<BR>
<BR>
>So, are you saying that IYO, we should drop AEMS as a space sensor<BR>
>platform?  Actives, of course, should still be available for some<BR>
>functions, but you don't think they are appropriate as long range<BR>
>space sensors.<BR>
Not quite as strong as that. AEMS may still well be good for<BR>
*detecting* targets out to some plausible range. What was less<BR>
clear was whether they could *localize* targets well enough to<BR>
allow laser fire; and also what that plausible range is. Since I<BR>
know a lot less about radar (and what I do know has to do with<BR>
detecting asteroids and suchlike) than about IR, I couldn't answer<BR>
what the plausible range was; and I don't know how tricks with<BR>
moving the sensor to make a synthetic aperture can improve<BR>
resolution; so I sort of punted and left AEMS in there but not<BR>
very useful, except for looking for small cold things in the dark.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Instead when we design ships (and the systems to design ships) we<BR>
>should install PEMS and use them for detection and recognition.<BR>
>Perhaps have a LIDAR as an extension of our PEMS, and/or have a Fire<BR>
>Control Sensor based on LIDAR that is used to "lock" targets<BR>
>detected with the PEMS.  The "beam pointers" from FFS being an<BR>
>expression of what you are proposing.<BR>
I would keep the LIDAR as seperate hardware - nice distinction between<BR>
civ ships and military ships, for example. Alternatively, like the FFS<BR>
"beam pointers" (which were always ill-defined - I visualized them as<BR>
tracking hardware rather than a sensor) they could be required to be<BR>
built into mounts, although that abstracts a lot of stuff one might want out<BR>
in the open.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 21:35:04 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
<BR>
At 03:12 PM 7/30/00, you wrote:<BR>
> >         Because you need four times as much energy to go twice as far<BR>
> >and  still have a "legible" signal, the sensor beam needs *at least*<BR>
> >*eight*  times as much energy as the comms beam.  That is why turning a<BR>
> >sensor  active on a battlefield is *suicide*;  they can see you on<BR>
> >passives long  before you see them on actives.<BR>
><BR>
>Interesting!  So, would it be fair to say that if a radio with a<BR>
>Short range of 300,000 km requires 1 MW of power, a radar with an<BR>
>equal Short range would require ~8 MW?<BR>
<BR>
         Presuming the target had a surface reflectivity of 1, yes.  Lower <BR>
reflectivity to your sensor beam (RAM pads for RADAR, etc) decrease the <BR>
amount of energy reflected, requiring a more powerful beam to start <BR>
with.  In other words, with a target that is only 50% reflective to your <BR>
sensor beam, you would need 16+ MW.  See the problem?  Its cheaper for me <BR>
to get into stealthing and things like active black jamming  than for you <BR>
to build a sensor suite capable of defeating it.  Why?  Because you get <BR>
killed and I don't.<BR>
<BR>
         Just FYI and semi-related, the point in EW where the real <BR>
reflected signal strength overwhelms active jamming noise is called "burn <BR>
through", and is a function of this principle.<BR>
<BR>
> >         The comms signal will initially, by almost requirement, be a<BR>
> >modulated "Hi, I'm a comms beam" carrier pattern.  The ship's computer<BR>
> >getting peppered with it will recognize that pattern and classify it as<BR>
> >such and then trigger the appropriate things with the communications<BR>
> >system  to beam its own carrier back down the bearing that the originator<BR>
> >came from.<BR>
><BR>
>A comment:  Wouldn't it be true that with a Laser Comm simply being<BR>
>able to receive the signal is a priori evidence that the sender has<BR>
>what she needs to target your ship?  And if you reply she has even<BR>
>better targeting on you.  So, prior to an attack if the other ship<BR>
>orders you to surrender by laser comm, then (a) she is demonstrating<BR>
>that she has the data needed to hit you with a beam weapon as easily<BR>
>as a beam comm and (b) she has just given you the same advantage.<BR>
<BR>
         No.  All it means is that the sender knows that some time ago you <BR>
were seen down this bearing from them.  Both of you have moved an <BR>
indeterminate distance.  Why?  They still don't have an echo to give them <BR>
the range.  So, all they can guess is where you were and where you were <BR>
last seen pointing.  They don't even know, based on light lad, how old the <BR>
info is.<BR>
<BR>
         Well, quibble correction.  If you are flying a "Standard" <BR>
configuration hull ship, I suppose it  wouldn't be hard to do the math to <BR>
resolve to a margin of error based on real ship length vs apparent length <BR>
what your range is.  However, because of the way the math works, the <BR>
further you are away, the bigger (we're talking km here) the margin of <BR>
error is.<BR>
<BR>
         In fact, until you reply, they don't even know that you have <BR>
*gotten* the message.  And with light-lag, unless you are in the low <BR>
double-digits of megametres range, you have no idea if they got your reply.<BR>
<BR>
> >         The sensor signal will be a stream of distinct pulses at a<BR>
> >comparatively high energy level.  Again, the ship being peppered won't<BR>
> >find  a carrier pattern, will find a pattern and energy level consistent<BR>
> >with a  LIDAR on "search" mode and warn the sensor ops team.<BR>
><BR>
>That I can see, and you might see something like that in the game<BR>
>before long.  <g><BR>
<BR>
         I presume.  Of course, Angor doesn't know anything about any of <BR>
this.  He's always been a passenger at a card table with a "Regina Express" <BR>
on the go.  <g><BR>
<BR>
>Eris<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 17:50:13 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
>So by TL14 only 1% of the power plant's output is waste heat and the<BR>
>other 99% is converted to some usable form, like electricity.  That<BR>
>I can accept.  It's when the electricity is sent to equipment<BR>
>scattered around the ship with 0% lost to heat and is then used to<BR>
>power the equipment with 0% lost to internal heat that gives me big<BR>
>suspension of belief problems.<BR>
<BR>
The thought (at TL12, where it's 90%) is that the power plant<BR>
is probably 95% efficient and the hardware (with mostly superconducting<BR>
electronics) is also 95%, though see below.<BR>
<BR>
The other side of the coin, though, is Traveller power requirements,<BR>
which are way, way, way too high for most systems - especially under<BR>
FFS1 but even FFS2. Sickbays and machine shops requiring<BR>
megawatts of power; radios requiring hundreds of kilowatts just for<BR>
AUs of range; lifesupport requiring megawatts - it's all way, way too high.<BR>
That's part of what drives Traveller vehicles to have such big power<BR>
plants. In reality, most systems should use much less power, vastly<BR>
reducing amount of power needed and hence radiator area needed for<BR>
the (admittedly much worse than 99%) efficient interior hardware.<BR>
<BR>
The bits that still should use lots of power are weapons - which<BR>
aren't continuously in use - active sensors, and the drive, which<BR>
since it violates conservation of energy anyway it's hard to estimate<BR>
the efficiency of. Before one condemns the radiator assumptions you have<BR>
to rationalize the rest of the power consumptions, then put in plausible<BR>
radiators. Since no-one was willing to do the former, we just stuck on<BR>
handwavy radiators, sized to still allow big ships<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 17:53:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
>> Neural Activity Scanners detect and classify life forms based on brain<BR>
>> activity. They are extremely short-ranged, expensive, and fragile.<BR>
<BR>
>I know we're probably trying to detect and analyse microvolt potential<BR>
>differences*, but :-<BR>
>'Extremely short-ranged' is right! With an upper range limit of 400m<BR>
<BR>
I don't actually know what the damn things are detecting. Maybe they're<BR>
some kind of psi device? In any event, I wanted them big and bulky; otherwise<BR>
they detect all the infantry hiding in the bushes, and infantry's military<BR>
usefulness<BR>
goes away. Still, maybe I went to far. Alternative sizes/prices would be<BR>
welcomed...<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 18:00:56 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: DSR: Natural objects<BR>
<BR>
One final piece that David Smart kindly sent were the rules for signatures<BR>
of naturally-occuring bodies:<BR>
<BR>
Executive summary:<BR>
Detection ranges in an empty hex for a "typical"<BR>
sensor (PEMS-13, AEMS-11) are as follows:<BR>
<BR>
Object                  Passive Range           Active Range<BR>
200-m iceball           50,000 km               500,000 km<BR>
Small Gas Giant         100 AU                  -----<BR>
        (1 billion years old)<BR>
Small Gas Giant         3 AU                    -----<BR>
        (5 billion years old)<BR>
Large Gas Giant         3000 AU                 -----<BR>
        (1 billion years old)<BR>
Large Gas Giant         300 AU                  -----<BR>
        (5 billion years old)<BR>
<BR>
Small military sensors (PEMS-13.5) multiply ranges by x3; big military<BR>
or science sensors multiply range by x10. These imply that almost all<BR>
large gas giants will have been charted by the Imperium but that small<BR>
gas giants will often have escaped detection.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
In more detail, here are signatures on the FFS2 scale for all these<BR>
objects:<BR>
<BR>
Object                  Passive/Vis     Passive/IR      Active<BR>
Rocky asteroid          +0.5            +0.0            +0.5<BR>
        (habitable zone)<BR>
Rocky asteroid          +1.0            +1.5            +0.5<BR>
        (inner zone)<BR>
Rocky asteroid          -0.5            -2.0 *          +0.5<BR>
        (outer zone)<BR>
Rocky asteroid          -2.5            -5.5 *          +0.5<BR>
        (Oort cloud or empty hex)<BR>
<BR>
C-type asteroid         +0.0            +0.0            +0.5<BR>
        (habitable zone)<BR>
C-type asteroid         +0.5            +1.5            +0.5<BR>
        (inner zone)<BR>
C-type asteroid         -1.0            -2.0 *          +0.5<BR>
        (outer zone)<BR>
C-type asteroid         -3.0            -5.5 *          +0.5<BR>
        (Oort cloud or empty hex)<BR>
<BR>
* indicates that science-grade sensors get an additional +0.5 to<BR>
detect these objects using passive/IR.<BR>
<BR>
Rocky asteroids are greyish (albedo 0.2 - 0.3).<BR>
C-type asteroids are dark asteroids (albedo 0.05) mostly consisting of<BR>
carbon compounds.<BR>
Comet nucleii and Kuipter belt objects roll 1d6; on 1 use the rocky<BR>
asteroid values, on 2-4 use the C-type values, on 5-6 use c-type with an<BR>
additional -1 to visible signature. (Ice exposed to cosmic rays becomes<BR>
extremely dark.)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
These values assume a 1-m radius asteroid. For larger or smaller asteroids<BR>
use the following modifiers:<BR>
<BR>
Asteroid Size modifiers:<BR>
Asteroid Radius         Passive/Vis     Passive/IR      Active<BR>
1 m                     -2.0            -2.0            -1.0<BR>
10 m                    -1.0            -1.0            -0.5<BR>
100 m                    0.0             0.0            +0.0<BR>
1 km                    +1.0            +1.0            +0.5<BR>
10 km                   +2.0            +2.0            +1.0<BR>
100 km                  +3.0            +3.0            +1.5<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
For people who want to do prospecting, a detailed mineralogical scan<BR>
requires a second roll at the original detection difficulty, +2<BR>
difficulty levels for a non-science sensor, and 1 full 30-minute turn<BR>
in which the sensor looks only at the target.<BR>
<BR>
(In more precise DSR terms, scanning for minerals<BR>
reduces the signature by 2 points and requires a roll on the usual<BR>
detection table, at +2 difficulty levels for a non-science sensor.<BR>
Note that the reduction of 2 points is usually offset by the<BR>
tracking-already-detected target modifier (+1.5) and the scanning-a-single-<BR>
arc modifier (+1.0))<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Gas giants in empty hexes or Oort clouds use the following chart:<BR>
<BR>
Object                  Passive/Vis     Passive/IR      Active<BR>
Small Gas Giant         +2.0            +3.5 *          **<BR>
        (0.05 jupiter mass, 1 billion years old, empty hex)<BR>
Small Gas Giant         +2.0            +2.0 *          **<BR>
        (0.05 jupiter mass, 1 billion years old, empty hex)<BR>
Large Gas Giant         +3.0            +5.0 *          **<BR>
        (1 jupiter mass, 1 billion years old, empty hex)<BR>
Large Gas Giant         +3.0            +4.0 *          **<BR>
        (1 jupiter mass, 5 billion years old, empty hex)<BR>
Very Large Gas Giant    +3.0            +6.0            **<BR>
        (5 jupiter mass, 1 billion years old, empty hex)<BR>
Very Large Gas Giant    +3.0            +5.0 *          **<BR>
        (5 jupiter mass, 5 billion years old, empty hex)<BR>
Brown Dwarf             +3.0            +8.0            **<BR>
        (40 jupiter mass, 1 billion years old, empty hex)<BR>
Brown Dwarf             +3.0            +7.5            **<BR>
        (40 jupiter mass, 5 billion years old, empty hex)<BR>
<BR>
* indicates that science-grade sensors get an additional +0.5 to<BR>
detect these objects using Passive/IR.<BR>
<BR>
** gas giant planets and brown dwarfs have radar signature sufficiently<BR>
low that they have not yet been measured from the Earth, and I'm not sure<BR>
how to calculate them; in all practical circumstances the target would be<BR>
detected visually or in the infra-red first. Some gas giants may have<BR>
moons or rings (active signature +0.5 to +4.0) that will be detectable<BR>
instead. (Roll 11+ on 2d6 to have reatined a moon, +1 for large gas<BR>
giants and +2 for very large; roll 1d6/2 for the moon's active signature.)<BR>
<BR>
Small gas giant numbers are extrapolations due to the lack of evolutionary<BR>
tracks for objects below Saturn's mass.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
So, for example, a typical scout (Sensitivity=13.0) scanning for a<BR>
rocky asteroid (passive (vis) signature = 0.5) at a range of 1 AU would<BR>
have a signal of (13.0) + (0.5) - 13.5 = 0.0, for an<BR>
Impossible task to detect the asteroid.<BR>
<BR>
A labship with a science-grade PEMS-14 looking for old gas giants in an<BR>
empty hex would have a signal of 14.0 (sensor) + 0.5 (empty hex science bonus)<BR>
+ 4.5 (signature with science bonus) - 19 (range) = 0.5, a Staggering<BR>
task.<BR>
<BR>
Remember the following modifiers to sensor sensitivity (taken from<BR>
the most recent version of the DSR) based on sensor location:<BR>
<BR>
Sensor Location         Passive/Vis     Passive/IR      Active<BR>
Inner zone              -0.5            -0.5             0.0<BR>
Habitable zone           0.0             0.0             0.0<BR>
Outer zone              +0.5            +0.0             0.0<BR>
Oort cloud/empty hex    +1.0            +0.0 (normal)    0.0<BR>
                                        +0.5 (sci-grade)<BR>
<BR>
(The full DSR also includes modifiers for long scans (1 day) and for<BR>
scanning only a single arc, which if combined allow a +1.0 for taking<BR>
2 weeks to do a scan.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 18:01:25 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2000 11:20:05 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
>>From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
>>Subject: FF&S2 question<BR>
><BR>
>>multiplication, I was a bit surprised to find that pages 65-80 are<BR>
>>missing, and that to compensate I have extra copies of pages 49-64.  Are<BR>
>>all FF&S2 books screwed up in this way, or is mine even more thoroughly<BR>
>>botched than most?<BR>
><BR>
> I must have one from the same print run, as it has the identical flaw.<BR>
<BR>
Now you know why I try to *always* read thru books when I get them.<BR>
That way I can return them if they have printing errors. <BR>
<BR>
One time, I took at book with that sort of defect back, and the<BR>
bookstore owner and I wound up going thru every copy he had in stock.<BR>
Turns out that out of 2 dozen copies, he had *3* that didn't have the<BR>
duplicated pages. I bet the publisher was real thrilled to get 20+<BR>
books returned as defective.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:12:18 -0500<BR>
From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@hex.net><BR>
Subject: Re: The Definitive Sensor Rules<BR>
<BR>
At 03:56 PM 07/30/2000, Bruce wrote:<BR>
><snip><BR>
>Unfortunately, while I know a lot about visible/IR sensors, I know very<BR>
>little about radar - in the absence of a radar expert, Dave and I put together<BR>
>active sensor rules through the ancient Vilani technique of "Making It Up."<BR>
>In particular we tried to adjust<BR>
>things so that active sensors were roughly game-balanced with passive sensors<BR>
>(though I guess that this somewhat overrates active sensors.)<BR>
<BR>
Two very hard rules for RADAR, the lower the frequency the greater the <BR>
detection range but has decreased resolution(ie can detect that something <BR>
is there, just not number shape etc.), the higher the frequency the greater <BR>
the resolution(ie number of bogeys, shape of reflected surface etc).<BR>
<BR>
Their are law of diminishing returns ie after you put so much power in to <BR>
RADAR, you gain no benefits at all. So you can only put so much power in to <BR>
a higher freq RADAR, your detection range will greater for lower freq RADAR <BR>
of the same power level.<BR>
<BR>
This is due the wave(photon) propagation laws, not to atmospheric effects.<BR>
<BR>
Typically the lower freq RADAR will detect a bogey, then hand off the track <BR>
to a higher freq RADAR when in effective range for the higher freq sensor.<BR>
<BR>
I was operator/supervisor/technician for RADAR systems in the USN, mostly <BR>
Fire Control, but some search systems also.<BR>
<BR>
I do not recall the power input required for the systems that I used, just <BR>
the power outputs.<BR>
<BR>
Sinbad Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 18:05:39 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> First of all, I agree that enforcing radiator requirements is probably the <BR>
> best way to limit Star Destroyers.  (The thing we have to watch out for is <BR>
> making Scout/Couriers impossible too...)<BR>
<BR>
Which is why even I am willing to bend reality some to maintain the<BR>
"feel" of the game. <BR>
<BR>
> As far as repairing/replacing radiators go, I have a possibly fanciful and <BR>
> impractical image:  a redundant bank of long rods, mounted flush with the <BR>
> hull.  You shoot one out on its own RCS jet, dragging a 'curtain' behind it <BR>
> that's the radiator surface.  Stop it once it's drawn the curtain <BR>
> tight.  Have another bank like it on the other side of the hull, where they <BR>
> can't see each other.<BR>
<BR>
There's a sort of similar idea proposed for things like antimatter<BR>
rockets. Liquid drop radiators. <BR>
<BR>
At the nose of the ship you have a setup that emits a flat spray of<BR>
droplets of molten metal (something with a low vapor pressure, so it<BR>
won't evaporate into space :-). At the tail, there's a collection<BR>
trough sticking out from the hull. <BR>
<BR>
The spray is at right angles to the hull and widens as it approaches<BR>
the tail. Sort of like a big triangular fin sticking out from the hull.<BR>
<BR>
The droplets start out yellow or even white hot as they leave the<BR>
sprayer, and will have cooled to red by the time it hits the trough.<BR>
Rather colorful, eh? (a bitch to do on models though :-)<BR>
<BR>
Obviously, this is for rejecting high temp heat (lasers, fusion<BR>
reactor, gas core fission reactors, etc). <BR>
<BR>
For entering atmosphere, the troughs would fold forward against the<BR>
hull. <BR>
<BR>
In normal operation, you'd use a radiator on each side of the ship. But<BR>
to allow for damage, etc, I'd have *at least* a second set at right<BR>
angles to the first set. <BR>
<BR>
Weapons effects on these would be as follows:<BR>
<BR>
1. impaired function. A laser or PAW "shining" on the "flat" of the<BR>
   spray will greatly reduce the amount of heat that can be radiated,<BR>
   perhaps even *adding* heat. Note that a "defocused" beam could<BR>
   easily do this, even though it isn't powerful enough to damage<BR>
   anything. A good use for *beam* lasers.<BR>
<BR>
2. At higher power levels, some of the coolant could be lost by<BR>
   evaporation. Since there are limits to how much you can carry, you'd<BR>
   *have* to make a choice between shutting the radiator down now, and<BR>
   reducing power, or have it fail later, and being stuck with a *lot*<BR>
   of heat that isn't going anywhere soon.<BR>
<BR>
3. damage to the sprayer. You'd have to deploy another radiator until<BR>
   you can fix it.<BR>
<BR>
4. damage to the trough. You have to stop the sprayer, and hope you<BR>
   don't loose *too* much coolant. And switch to another radiator.<BR>
<BR>
Luckily, things like xray laser pulses will burn a pretty small hole<BR>
in the droplet spray. So you won't lose too much coolant from that. <BR>
<BR>
What I like is that with a beam laser, an "ethically challenged<BR>
merchant" can force a ship to heave to by making it impossible to run<BR>
the radiators. Especially if he has a buddy, so they can hit the victim<BR>
from two different directions. <BR>
<BR>
And you can bet that every "customs cutter" will have a *powerful* beam<BR>
laser for use as a "heat ray" to slow up folks who don't want to be<BR>
inspected. <BR>
<BR>
This may make fighters more viable, as they won't need to get as close<BR>
since they can "aim" at a much broader target. In fact they'd *prefer*<BR>
to have the beam spread over a good chunk of the ship. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 18:50:21 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Fighters are just an expendable missile screen and a way to damage <BR>
> surface fittings in Classic/MegaTraveller.<BR>
><BR>
> Real ships have spinal mounts ;-)<BR>
><BR>
> I'd argue for small ships like missile boats and Weber's LACs rather <BR>
> than light fighters for normal operations, as the modern day naval <BR>
> surface combatant analogy isn't good for Traveller starships.<BR>
<BR>
True, but there *are* roles for them.<BR>
<BR>
In fact, if we worry about heat, even hits that do no damage still<BR>
deposit a lot of heat. Enough to make the engineer in charge of heat<BR>
management curse a blue streak at every one of them.<BR>
<BR>
"Yes, I know your links to the weapons pointer for turret 5 are out.<BR>
But the coolant lines are out too. You can't fire the turret anyway<BR>
until those are working again. Now if you'll be so kind as to let me<BR>
get back to fixing them, *sir*..."<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:30:57 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Should I get MT?<BR>
<BR>
Arthur Boff <ajboff@yahoo.com> inquired:<BR>
<BR>
>>I may be in a position to get a copy of MegaTraveller.<BR>
<BR>
The question I want to ask is: Is it worth it?<<<BR>
<BR>
Okay, my fundamental position is this (and please read my further comments<BR>
in light of this): MT is my favorite version of Traveller. You should<BR>
definitely aquire it, and use it to run your games :)<BR>
<BR>
>>I've heard that MT was merely all the CT rules brought<BR>
together. So is the reprint of the CT Books<BR>
effectively The Game MT Was Meant To Be?<<<BR>
<BR>
Yes and no, no.<BR>
<BR>
MT collects much of the *background* info of CT into several books. However,<BR>
the rules are in many cases substantially revised. Sometimes this is just to<BR>
conform to the task system, sometimes this changes rules in important ways<BR>
from CT.<BR>
<BR>
The CT reprints are CT. A great, elegant system. Also, a sometimes clunky<BR>
system that occasionally shows its age, unfortunately.<BR>
<BR>
Now for what I love about MT:<BR>
<BR>
The Task System. PLST has already praised this, so I just want to point out<BR>
some things that make it better than almost any other task system I know of.<BR>
First, it is simple, with an elegant system to handle mishaps. Secondly, the<BR>
+/- 8 cap to die modifiers means that moving the difficulty level can<BR>
radically effect your chances of success, i.e. even some one who can only<BR>
fumble a Difficult task still only succeeds at a Formidible task on 7+.<BR>
<BR>
Character Generation: Under the two CT systems, you often had the problem of<BR>
using the basic system, and getting characters with a very few skills, or<BR>
using Merc, High Guard etc. and generating walking encyclopedias who had too<BR>
many skills. The basic MT system gives more skills, and uses more cascades<BR>
to give (IMHO) characters that balance these two extremes.<BR>
<BR>
The Ship and Vehicle generation system isn't too hard to work with, and does<BR>
indeed work from groundcar to 1,000,000 dton battlewagon. Unfortunately, the<BR>
results are not at all compatible with many of the assumptions of either<BR>
version of FFS.<BR>
<BR>
Downsides: I don't like the combat system as written. Interrupts are arcane,<BR>
I don't like not rolling for damage right away, I don't like "half damage"<BR>
penetration results. I DO like the idea of splitting penetration and damage,<BR>
which avoids a lot of the artificiality of the T4 blowthrough rule. I have<BR>
my own "thought-experiment" rules for fixing MT damage that I can explain if<BR>
you're interested.<BR>
<BR>
Space Combat is completely FUBAR. Ships can circle in one hex no matter what<BR>
their speed is (which would surprise Sir Isaac Newton, among others); and<BR>
why go through all the trouble of calculating the hit point values of each<BR>
system when the damage results call for percentage reductions? I won't<BR>
comment on the sensor rules except to say they're pretty messed up to, I<BR>
suspect.<BR>
<BR>
The Background. The Rebellion looks promising in the main text, but by the<BR>
time of the Rebellion Sourcebook, it was clear to me that it had been rigged<BR>
so that no faction could possibly win. In addition, there seemed an effort<BR>
to mess with the "rules" of certain Traveller traditions (Oekhsos comes to<BR>
mind.) Happily, you can play in the GT timeline with the MT rules--I would<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
Overall: get MT. Play it as written (except for the space combat!) if you<BR>
like, or create your own homebrew rules. But the task system, chargen, and<BR>
compilation of CT rules (not to mention the Imperial Encyclopedia's massive<BR>
collection of gear!) make it a worthwhile acquisition.<BR>
<BR>
Fred "Formidible Task Roll" Ramen<BR>
<BR>
Arthur<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:45:45 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >> Neural Activity Scanners detect and classify life forms based on brain<BR>
> >> activity. They are extremely short-ranged, expensive, and fragile.<BR>
><BR>
> >I know we're probably trying to detect and analyse microvolt potential<BR>
> >differences*, but :-<BR>
> >'Extremely short-ranged' is right! With an upper range limit of 400m<BR>
><BR>
> I don't actually know what the damn things are detecting. Maybe they're<BR>
> some kind of psi device? In any event, I wanted them big and<BR>
> bulky; otherwise<BR>
> they detect all the infantry hiding in the bushes, and infantry's military<BR>
> usefulness<BR>
> goes away. Still, maybe I went to far. Alternative sizes/prices would be<BR>
> welcomed...<BR>
<BR>
A possible theory of operation for NASs.<BR>
<BR>
Brains are certainly non-linear devices, so if you blast a carrier, say at<BR>
frequency fc, through it, you are likely to get out components like fc+fb<BR>
and fc-fb, where fb is the frequency of the neural activity in the brain. So<BR>
effectively the brain activity is modulating the signal. The rest is just<BR>
engineering details. If you are an engineer, you are probably saying "But<BR>
those details are extremely hard!" right now, but that's why you don't get<BR>
the NASs until higher TLs.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe the frequency needed to get efficient operation requires a huge<BR>
antenna and gives a terrible spatial resolution.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:01:47 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2843<BR>
<BR>
<Kristian><BR>
> In actual fact, there are many species of fish and birds with more than3<BR>
> pigment types.  Gold fish have four, and one of them goes into the UV.<BR>
> Why?  One theory is that making subtle color-distinctions is<BR>
advantageous<BR>
<BR>
Some humans have 4 (tetrchromicity).  It may help in spotting how<BR>
healthy a baby is.  The fourth pigment is magenta.<BR>
</Kristian><BR>
<BR>
Interesting.  I've heard that it is theoretically possible for humans to<BR>
have four pigments. That is, there are several subtly-different pigments<BR>
out there in the normal population to be had, only most individuals only<BR>
have three of the set. The "magenta" one is probably one of the<BR>
high-wavelength variants.  It should be noted that only women could<BR>
potentially have this trait. <BR>
<BR>
Having said that, I'm not aware of any studies that have actually detected<BR>
tetrachromacy in humans.  I'd be interested in the references if you've<BR>
got them.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2844<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (rly-ye04.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.201]) by air-ye03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:02:34 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:01:53 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id XAA06875;<BR>
	Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:01:41 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:01:26 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id XAA06831<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:01:26 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:01:26 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007310301.XAA06831@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2844<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2845</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 12:19:46 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2845<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Re : Fusion Power and Nuclear Dampers (was : Bunch of tech stuff for  FFS3)<BR>
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: LIDARS and Sand<BR>
Ship advice sought<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
RE: Ship advice sought<BR>
Passive Sensors<BR>
RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:32:31 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> <Leonard><BR>
> As for IR/UV, as I've noted before, there are severe problems with<BR>
> chromatic abberation once the visual range is more than a single<BR>
> octave. One interesting solution proposed over on rec.arts.sf.science<BR>
> </Leonard><BR>
><BR>
> True, but this is only a problem is one assumes a 'unified' visual system.<BR>
> There's nothing stopping a creature from having several visual senses<BR>
> which don't get re-integrated except at a very high level (the way our<BR>
> hearing and sight don't really get re-integrated until they hit 'higher<BR>
> fucntions').  In fact, these different senses could arise from the same<BR>
> retina, potentially.<BR>
<BR>
Sure, but aliens set up that way are going to be *very* alien, and hard<BR>
to interact with. I was confining myself to species that have visual<BR>
senses that more or less correspond to "vision".<BR>
<BR>
> <Leonard><BR>
> during the "O Superman" thread was having several sets of eyelids (many<BR>
> creatures have this), transparent to different "bands". Could that<BR>
> evolve? Damned if I know.<BR>
> </Leonard><BR>
><BR>
> Several eyelids aren't necessary.  Many creatures have evolved colored oil<BR>
> droplets which sit on top of individual receptor types.  You could have an<BR>
> IR receptor with oil that filters out lower frequencies. This way you can<BR>
> have your several visual systems simultaneously.  THe only problem might<BR>
> be embryological.  It might be difficult for such a system to organize<BR>
> itself.  Not sure. <BR>
<BR>
I was talking about the fact that with any likely "evolved" lens, the<BR>
different wavelengths focus at different distance. The human visual<BR>
system is on the ragged edge for this. A blue shape on a red field (or<BR>
vice versa) can be used to demonstrate this. If the blue is in focus,<BR>
the red isn't, and vice versa. <BR>
<BR>
So as long as you have the sensors in the same eye, past a certain<BR>
point, it gets impractical to use all the bandwidth at the same time.<BR>
Having selectable filters for differend "bands", means that you can<BR>
flip the filter into place and refocus without too much trouble.<BR>
Without the filters, you could still refocus, but the badly blurred<BR>
stuff at the other wavelengths would tend to make spotting stuff a lot<BR>
harder. <BR>
<BR>
> <Leonard><BR>
> An alien with different visual pigments might not even agree that there<BR>
> *was* a continuum. Sort of like trying to have a bar that's red at one<BR>
> end, green at the other, and with a smooth shift from one end to the<BR>
> other. Our visual system doesn't map colors that way. Theirs might.<BR>
> </Leonard><BR>
><BR>
> Our visual system uses two color continua:  Red-Green and Blue-Yellow. <BR>
> The 'quick intuitive' proof of this is that you can't imagine a<BR>
> "reddish-green" or a "bluish yellow". These result in qualitatively<BR>
> different sensations (yellow and green, respectively). <BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, this means that blue shades into green nicely. Red<BR>
shades into orange that way too. And maybe purple to blue? Oh yeah,<BR>
yellow shades into green too. <BR>
<BR>
And some humans *can* imagine a "reddish green". Of course, that's<BR>
because they lack one of the pigments used to define the red-green<BR>
axis. :-)<BR>
<BR>
> This is a result of the three receptor types opposing each other in R-G<BR>
> and (R+G)-B channels. With more receptors types, there can be more<BR>
> continua, and thus color concepts that humans will have a very hard time<BR>
> understanding even theoretically. <BR>
<BR>
Yeah. At the very least "color co-ordinated" outfits that look<BR>
positively *weird* to us.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 19:51:40 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Charles Collin wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> In actual fact, there are many species of fish and birds with more than 3<BR>
>> pigment types.  Gold fish have four, and one of them goes into the UV.<BR>
>> Why?  One theory is that making subtle color-distinctions is advantageous<BR>
><BR>
> Some humans have 4 (tetrchromicity).  It may help in spotting how<BR>
> healthy a baby is.  The fourth pigment is magenta.<BR>
<BR>
Are there any problems associated with it, other than the obvious?<BR>
<BR>
And has anyone done any studies on how the color perceptions of such<BR>
people differ from normal? If so, I'd *love* to see it. It'd give us<BR>
some good info for alien design.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:23:40 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
(This is a proposal designed to be thought provoking and may contain ideas<BR>
that are eithe non-canonical or are loose interpretations of canon.  Please<BR>
feel free to comment and poiint out canonical  contradictions so that I am<BR>
aware of them at least.  I am doing this to elaborate on the Solomani<BR>
concept and make it more intellectually appealing, even if it is<BR>
reprehensible).<BR>
<BR>
I'm very interested in the CRI, mainly because it presents a vision of the<BR>
Solomani Sphere (The Solomani State) as something more interesting than one<BR>
might initially suspect by reading the Traveller Supplements.<BR>
<BR>
- -Perhaps the State represents the ultimate manifestation of oppression, but<BR>
like the Zhodani Consulate, produces a society that works (for its pure<BR>
Solomani members at least).<BR>
<BR>
- -Let's assume that the Solomani aren't fascist thiugs for a second.  That's<BR>
too simple-minded a concept for me to accept.  I'm not saying that it isn't<BR>
possible, after all the Nazis exemplified something along those lines and<BR>
they were real enought.  Nevertheless, I think that the Solomani as written<BR>
are boring.<BR>
<BR>
- -What reasons could  we arrive at that could "explain" their attitudes.<BR>
Obviously they feel the way they do for a strong reason<BR>
<BR>
One of the things I always disliked about the Solomani was the mindset of<BR>
painting them as loudmouth racists.  Why not make them extremely<BR>
intimidating "sophisticated" racists instead.  Elaborate on their attitudes<BR>
and remove the Black and White melodramatic element.<BR>
<BR>
Here is a possible vision of Solomani society.  (Creative comments are<BR>
welcome!).<BR>
<BR>
- -While not as old as the Vilani Imperium, the Solomani rapdily expanded and<BR>
established a strong militaristic state during the Interstellar Wars.  I<BR>
have always felt that Babylon 5 (a show I like and respect but don't watch<BR>
often) borrowed partially on this setting (substituting the Mbari for the<BR>
Vilani) when depicting earth after the first Mbari contact.<BR>
<BR>
- -While all regions of the 2nd Imperium were affected by the Long Night, the<BR>
Old Earth Union and other core regions of the old Terran Confederation were<BR>
not subject to the mass migrations of the Vilani which caused the ultimate<BR>
collapse of the 2I.  I remember saying one source saying that the Long Night<BR>
had little effect on Terra.  So why didn't Solomani TL's continue to rise?<BR>
<BR>
- -With their already advanced TL (12 for canonical purists) intact, these<BR>
worlds retained the resources which allowed them to advance while the rest<BR>
of the old territories languished or died out.  Several pockets such as<BR>
these existed, notably the Sylean region which continued to advance, albeit<BR>
more slowly due to the Vilani cultural influence (which wasn't a factor in<BR>
SolSpace).<BR>
<BR>
- -The Solomani lagged the Viliani initially in several technology areas and<BR>
without a vigorous expanding frontier (such as Sylea developed) devoted more<BR>
of their creative energies to biotechnology, computronics and the fus8ion of<BR>
the two.  In the meantime, Sylea experienced rapid growth in energy<BR>
production technology (fusion-plus).<BR>
<BR>
- -The Solomiani developed small pocket states, with the most advanced being<BR>
centered around the old Terran core worlds and certain other worlds that<BR>
were reltively unscathed by the Long Night.<BR>
<BR>
- -After he birth of the #1, it advanced rapidly having the impetus to<BR>
reconquer/reaquire the previous territories of the Ziru Sirka/RoM.  When<BR>
recontact with the Solomani /Terran reabsorption occurred (~588?), Terra and<BR>
the Solomani states were of comparable or higher TL, already engaged in<BR>
limited trade, but unable to unify due to a lack of incetive to do so.<BR>
Although the 3I was nominatively lower in TL (~13), it enjoyed advantages in<BR>
biomedical , computer and other "introspective technologies."  One of the<BR>
conditions for Terran/Solomani aquiescence to reabsorption heterogeneous<BR>
might have been influence at court somewhat disproprtionate to its size (via<BR>
the nobility and already influential Solomani nobility in the Imperial<BR>
hierarchy).<BR>
<BR>
- -As Solomani interests were neglected by the 3I over the next several<BR>
hundred years, the people of the Rim would have felt abandoned and betrayed.<BR>
<BR>
- -The Solomani party would have grown in influence much as the Nazi's did in<BR>
the 1920's, relying on "Stab in the Back" type propaganda.  Solomani nobles<BR>
might have encouraged this activity as disunion from the 3I would have<BR>
resulted in huge gains in their own power base.<BR>
<BR>
- -Ther is no reason to believe that Solomani TL's shouldn't have advanced at<BR>
a comparatively higher rate than the rest of the 3I, because the inherent<BR>
anti-tech bias of the Vilani was practically non-existent in those regions.<BR>
Perhaps this is why a potential TL-H world like de Hamylton exists.  I<BR>
personally believe that the Solomani would be extremely advanced (moreso<BR>
than the 3I) in the following areas:<BR>
<BR>
    -Biomedical & Genetics (this is canonical) +1 to +2 TL's<BR>
    -Terraforming (This may be canonical) +1 to +2 TL's<BR>
    -Computronics & Information processing (this would be a closer match) +1<BR>
TL's<BR>
<BR>
(In other areas, they would have at least broad parity with the 3I).<BR>
<BR>
- -This leads to the CRI:<BR>
<BR>
I imagine the SolState as the apotheosis of human manipulation, mind control<BR>
and obliteration of personal privacy.  As with the Vilani, privacy may not<BR>
exist any longer as a viable concept.  Of course the SolState is only a<BR>
coupe hundred years old, so perhaps it would be too early for this to be the<BR>
case.<BR>
<BR>
In any case, I imagine the populace to be extremely well educated, computer<BR>
and genetically enhanced (to a dgree proprtional to wealth, power, heritage<BR>
and prestige).  The system is perpetuated by SolSec's ability to manipulate<BR>
the populace.  Law levels could frequently exceed C. On the Hi pop, Hi tech<BR>
worlds, all aspects of peopls's lives could be monitored.  This has the<BR>
effect of producing peace, since any individuals with anti-regime policies<BR>
are quickly andidentified and quietly removed for re-education.  Unlike the<BR>
case with the Zhodani, this re-education propbably results in a complete<BR>
memory erasure or reprogramming.<BR>
<BR>
The CRI are perhaps products of this process, which includes genetic and<BR>
physica "refinement" as well.  After serving the Cause for a predetermined<BR>
period, or perhaps after certain heroic actions in dfense of the cause, CRI<BR>
and other SolMil members may graduate to compartively high Party status.<BR>
This is why the SolState might, I say MIGHT work.  Because it is in effect a<BR>
meritocracy.<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps the essence of the Cause is that the Vilani are unfit to rule<BR>
because they reject progress at the scale the Solomani are comfortable with.<BR>
<BR>
In this sense, I can see that the SolState may be incredibly oppressive, but<BR>
not simplely a neo-Nazi racist state.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:33:36 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
Charles Colin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Having said that, I'm not aware of any studies that have actually detected<BR>
> tetrachromacy in humans.  I'd be interested in the references if you've<BR>
> got them.<BR>
<BR>
I would be very interested in a reference also. I did quite a bit of<BR>
research several years ('91 or so) back into the eye as a sensor. If you are<BR>
going to design an optical sensor system, it's extremely interesting. It's<BR>
very elegant, with only one glaring design flaw. It's basically optimized to<BR>
view things illuminated from above with bright sunlight. The frequency<BR>
response of the eye, for example, closely matches the spectral output of the<BR>
sun.<BR>
<BR>
Alien races are likely to have a similar optimization. And their constraints<BR>
are likely to similar. For example, we can't really go any further out into<BR>
the IR because of absorption by water, and I seem to recall that we are<BR>
limited in the UV by some protein in the lens of our eye.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:45:00 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
My handwave for ignoring any possible heat issues.<BR>
<BR>
We know that jump drives consume massive quantities of liquid hydrogen to<BR>
perform jumps. Tons and tons of the stuff. I am, of course, assuming that<BR>
you are burning the stuff in your fusion power plant, or its equivanent in<BR>
your jump drive. If the efficency of the process is even 99%, we still have<BR>
lots of heat to worry about. Where does it go? Perhaps somewhere into jump<BR>
space, or into some other place where physics as we know it is different. In<BR>
any case, I seriously doubt whether a few laser zaps or even the usual power<BR>
plant operation will overload a system which is designed to deal with these<BR>
levels of heat dumping.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:53:21 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Re : Fusion Power and Nuclear Dampers (was : Bunch of tech stuff for  FFS3)<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
 <BR>
> > Also, do we have any reason to believe that NDs work at a range<BR>
> > greater than a few kilometers?<BR>
<BR>
> Difficult. You may need to damp things at longer ranges.<BR>
<BR>
Accurding to FF&S2 (58), one can build nuclear damper projectors to<BR>
protect against det-laser missiles (suggested minimum range is 30,000<BR>
km).  Table 144 (ibid, 100) provides predesigned damper projectors; the<BR>
ones intended for starship combat have a range of 50,000 km.<BR>
<BR>
Damper _fields_, OTOH, tend to have a range of about 1000 meters,<BR>
because "the power requirements to make the field large enough to<BR>
protect against detonation lasers a thenth of a light second away are<BR>
prohibitive" (ibid, 58).<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 23:55:13 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 11:23:49 +0100<BR>
>From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
><BR>
>At 3:25 -0400 30/7/00, "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
>>Anybody know where I can get a good mac emulator for the pc?<BR>
>>Or baring that is there any chance of porting Mr. Prior's code to the<BR>
>>pc.<BR>
><BR>
>Porting may happen, but we haven't succeeded in cloning Rob yet to<BR>
>get a higher output from him.<BR>
><BR>
>I mean, he's really prolific at JTAS, has just updated 101 Starships<BR>
>and is still writing software. GT Metator was planned for the next<BR>
>few weeks too but his Mac laptop screen just died :-/<BR>
><BR>
>Personally, I'd look out for an old Mac with a processor >68020,<BR>
>preferably with System 7.5+ so you can:<BR>
><BR>
>a) run it native<BR>
>b) save it in Windows format.<BR>
><BR>
>BITS presently uses a 10Mb RAM Apple  LC (68020 processor) to<BR>
>demonstrate at conventions - I'd go for an LC2 or 3 or an early<BR>
>PowerPC in preference now.... with the iMac at $649 the second hand<BR>
>value of Macs is quite low.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
This looks like the best option at the moment. Thanks for the info all.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:29:04 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>So by TL14 only 1% of the power plant's output is waste heat and the<BR>
>>other 99% is converted to some usable form, like electricity.  That<BR>
>>I can accept.  It's when the electricity is sent to equipment<BR>
>>scattered around the ship with 0% lost to heat and is then used to<BR>
>>power the equipment with 0% lost to internal heat that gives me big<BR>
>>suspension of belief problems.<BR>
><BR>
> The thought (at TL12, where it's 90%) is that the power plant<BR>
> is probably 95% efficient and the hardware (with mostly superconducting<BR>
> electronics) is also 95%, though see below.<BR>
><BR>
> The other side of the coin, though, is Traveller power requirements,<BR>
> which are way, way, way too high for most systems - especially under<BR>
> FFS1 but even FFS2. Sickbays and machine shops requiring<BR>
> megawatts of power; radios requiring hundreds of kilowatts just for<BR>
> AUs of range; lifesupport requiring megawatts - it's all way, way too high.<BR>
> That's part of what drives Traveller vehicles to have such big power<BR>
> plants. In reality, most systems should use much less power, vastly<BR>
> reducing amount of power needed and hence radiator area needed for<BR>
> the (admittedly much worse than 99%) efficient interior hardware.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, those figures *are* pretty silly. I think somebody was<BR>
extrapolating from the power levels used by commercial broadcast<BR>
stations, not realizing that curvature of the earth has some effects,<BR>
and that between being omindirectional transmitters and *cheap*, mostly<BR>
*small* omnidirectional antennas on recievers, there's a *huge* amount<BR>
of wasted power there.<BR>
<BR>
> The bits that still should use lots of power are weapons - which<BR>
> aren't continuously in use - active sensors, and the drive, which<BR>
> since it violates conservation of energy anyway it's hard to estimate<BR>
> the efficiency of. <BR>
<BR>
Yeah. Also, *reaction* drives tend to be sinfully efficient, with 99%<BR>
of the energy going into the exhaust. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 20:01:02 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: LIDARS and Sand<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> OK, so how does sand actually work ? What size cloud do you need ? How far<BR>
> from the ship is it ? I think 99.999% of the time, the cloud will be much<BR>
> closer to the target than to the firing/LIDAR using ship.<BR>
><BR>
> As I see it, if clouds of sand are 'small', then using it will be a<BR>
> two-edged sword - if you have to hide behind a small cloud of sand, then you<BR>
> wont do any accelerating, or much dodging, and therefore 'shoot at the PAW<BR>
> at the cloud of sand' sounds like a pretty decent plan.<BR>
><BR>
> If the clouds are large, then this is less of an issue.<BR>
<BR>
The rules state that manuevering takes you out of the sand (with the<BR>
vector movement system, it keeps the vector you had when you deployed it).<BR>
<BR>
> Also, how do we handle 'burn-through' ? Under FFS2, sand clouds seem to be<BR>
> quite vulnerable to high-powered lasers. Maybe we could argue that sand does<BR>
> not merely diffuse, but also 'bends' the laser beam ?<BR>
<BR>
Here's my ideas about sand (which are in the archives somewhere). <BR>
<BR>
"Sand" is composed of tiny spheres of carefully formulated material.<BR>
Probably several types to cover the likely laser bands.<BR>
<BR>
Transparent spheres are what makes traffic signs and the like reflect<BR>
the light from your headlights back at you so strongly. The light<BR>
bounces around and emerges heading more or less back towards the<BR>
source.<BR>
<BR>
So the spheres reflect the laser energy back towards the sender<BR>
(helping to blind sensors), they also absorb energy (not being<BR>
perfectly transparent). That heats them up. And they'll melt. But being<BR>
in free fall, the drops will still be spherical, and thus keep<BR>
reflecting.<BR>
<BR>
Of course, this won't last long, and they'll vaporize (actually, they<BR>
are likely to go straight to plasma if it's a weapons pulse). The<BR>
chemicals used will be chosen to require a *lot* of energy to go from<BR>
solid to plasma. And so that the plasma will be as opaque as possible<BR>
at laser frequencies, absorbing even more energy.<BR>
<BR>
A laser hitting a cloud of sand will be pretty spectacular. From the<BR>
firing ship there'll be a bright flash as some energy is reflected<BR>
back, and tiny glowing spot from the expanding plasma along the beams<BR>
path thru the cloud. <BR>
<BR>
From the side, there'll be a fine glowing line, getting fuzzier as it<BR>
goes, and (if the cloud is "deep" enough, fading out at the end.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 02:32:38 +1000<BR>
From: "Karen and Michael Hughes" <kmhughes@dynamite.com.au><BR>
Subject: Ship advice sought<BR>
<BR>
Hey dudes,<BR>
<BR>
I made up a 400 ton corsair variant for an MT campaign. Are there any MT<BR>
ship loving dudes out there who would like to check the numbers etc. and see<BR>
if said design is kosher?<BR>
<BR>
It's called a Corvus class (named after that bridge with the spike in it<BR>
Roman galleys used to forcibly board rival galleys - apologies if the name<BR>
is wrong) and designed to grapple a disabled 200 ton merchie then 'jump'<BR>
with it, dealing with remaining opposition in jump space (it has grapples<BR>
and other fun stuff to 'power' the captured craft's jump grid and enough<BR>
jump drives to 'jump' an extra 200 tons).<BR>
<BR>
If you are interested, please email above as I am a slack wad who rarely<BR>
reads the TML.<BR>
<BR>
BTW - I got a Credit in my first pol/history subject. Not too dusty.....<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:19:38 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
on 7/30/00 8:23 PM, Dan Lane at danielrlane@home.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
Dan,<BR>
<BR>
I'll post a longer, more detailed response when I have more time.  A brief<BR>
random series of thoughts now, and I'll touch on my CRI and the (minor  role<BR>
they play in Solomani space<BR>
<BR>
> -Perhaps the State represents the ultimate manifestation of oppression, but<BR>
> like the Zhodani Consulate, produces a society that works (for its pure<BR>
> Solomani members at least).<BR>
<BR>
IMTU, human inhabitants of the confederation don't, for the most part, view<BR>
it as an oppressive state.  Allusions to the Nazies or Soviets is just pain<BR>
wrong.  Those were very unsophisticated totalitarian regimes.  In the age of<BR>
high-tech and mass media, things will be very different IMHO.<BR>
> <BR>
> -Let's assume that the Solomani aren't fascist thiugs for a second.  That's<BR>
> too simple-minded a concept for me to accept.  I'm not saying that it isn't<BR>
> possible, after all the Nazis exemplified something along those lines and<BR>
> they were real enought.  Nevertheless, I think that the Solomani as written<BR>
> are boring.<BR>
> <BR>
> -What reasons could  we arrive at that could "explain" their attitudes.<BR>
> Obviously they feel the way they do for a strong reason<BR>
> <BR>
> One of the things I always disliked about the Solomani was the mindset of<BR>
> painting them as loudmouth racists.  Why not make them extremely<BR>
> intimidating "sophisticated" racists instead.  Elaborate on their attitudes<BR>
> and remove the Black and White melodramatic element.<BR>
<BR>
Yes! Yes!  Ask a Solomani, and he'll explain the historical and scientific<BR>
reasons for the dominant place of humaniti.  And other races can't help<BR>
their inferior position.  They're just children who need to be help, lead if<BR>
you will.  Think smiling helpful platitute spouting racists,<BR>
> -The Solomani party would have grown in influence much as the Nazi's did in<BR>
> the 1920's, relying on "Stab in the Back" type propaganda.  Solomani nobles<BR>
> might have encouraged this activity as disunion from the 3I would have<BR>
> resulted in huge gains in their own power base.<BR>
<BR>
IMTU, the only Solomani nobles are planetary one.  The confederation as a<BR>
whole has advanced beyond the need of any such primitive notions of a<BR>
hereditary ruling elite.  Any Solomani will point to this as yet another<BR>
example of the 'backwardness' of the Imperium.  I mean, really.  Giving<BR>
someone rank and title because of who his ancestors were?!<BR>
> <BR>
> -Ther is no reason to believe that Solomani TL's shouldn't have advanced at<BR>
> a comparatively higher rate than the rest of the 3I, because the inherent<BR>
> anti-tech bias of the Vilani was practically non-existent in those regions.<BR>
> Perhaps this is why a potential TL-H world like de Hamylton exists.  I<BR>
> personally believe that the Solomani would be extremely advanced (moreso<BR>
> than the 3I) in the following areas:<BR>
> <BR>
> -Biomedical & Genetics (this is canonical) +1 to +2 TL's<BR>
> -Terraforming (This may be canonical) +1 to +2 TL's<BR>
> -Computronics & Information processing (this would be a closer match) +1<BR>
> TL's<BR>
<BR>
Absolutely right.  Take the case of the US in the late 20th century.<BR>
Advancement in computer technology was very much driven by the requirements<BR>
of intelligence agencies, particularly the NSA.  SolSec requirements for<BR>
tracking 'questionables' and maintaining reports on trillions of Solomanis<BR>
is going to require massive computing architecture. IMTU, the Solomani LEAD<BR>
the Imperium and Consulate in this area, for this reason.<BR>
<BR>
And, as you say, there is not resistance to technological advancement like<BR>
there is in Vilani soace.<BR>
> <BR>
> (In other areas, they would have at least broad parity with the 3I).<BR>
> <BR>
> -This leads to the CRI:<BR>
> <BR>
> I imagine the SolState as the apotheosis of human manipulation, mind control<BR>
> and obliteration of personal privacy.  As with the Vilani, privacy may not<BR>
> exist any longer as a viable concept.  Of course the SolState is only a<BR>
> coupe hundred years old, so perhaps it would be too early for this to be the<BR>
> case.<BR>
<BR>
Personal privacy will change just because of the population density (look at<BR>
notions of privacy in Japan).  SolSec will effect the masses through media<BR>
and other means, but 'problem' individuals won't just be removed and<BR>
reprogrammed.  Someone has to run SolSec, and loyal drones aren't up to all<BR>
the tasks.  IMTU, talented individuals are identified at a young age, and<BR>
rerouted to key career paths.  Those most likely to challenge the system,<BR>
are brought in and made a key part of it!<BR>
<BR>
> In any case, I imagine the populace to be extremely well educated, computer<BR>
> and genetically enhanced (to a dgree proprtional to wealth, power, heritage<BR>
> and prestige).  The system is perpetuated by SolSec's ability to manipulate<BR>
> the populace.  Law levels could frequently exceed C. On the Hi pop, Hi tech<BR>
> worlds, all aspects of peopls's lives could be monitored.  This has the<BR>
> effect of producing peace, since any individuals with anti-regime policies<BR>
> are quickly andidentified and quietly removed for re-education.  Unlike the<BR>
> case with the Zhodani, this re-education propbably results in a complete<BR>
> memory erasure or reprogramming.<BR>
<BR>
The term I use is "normalization".  These people can't help it.  They are<BR>
sick, or have been unduly influenced by the whisperings of aliens who seek<BR>
undermine our great Solomani society out of jealousy.  But our friends,<BR>
neighbors, family who fall prey to this misinformation are not traitors!<BR>
They're ill.  They can be helped.  Help your neighbor before he get himself<BR>
into trouble, before she hurts herself or someone else.  SolSec is there to<BR>
assist these people and help them see the error of there ways.<BR>
<BR>
'Troublemakers' are removed, and "normalized" by SolSec before being<BR>
returned right back to there old neighborhood, of ship or whatever.  These<BR>
people will gladly tell their old comrades that they were 'confused' etc,<BR>
but that the nice people at SolSec help them realize they had a problem and<BR>
help them overcome it.<BR>
> <BR>
> The CRI are perhaps products of this process, which includes genetic and<BR>
> physica "refinement" as well.  After serving the Cause for a predetermined<BR>
> period, or perhaps after certain heroic actions in dfense of the cause, CRI<BR>
> and other SolMil members may graduate to compartively high Party status.<BR>
> This is why the SolState might, I say MIGHT work.  Because it is in effect a<BR>
> meritocracy.<BR>
<BR>
CRI are merely very elite Solomani military.  They are the logical result of<BR>
long term genetic refinement of physiology couple with SolSec's abilities to<BR>
select the population for that 2% pathological types who make such damn good<BR>
soldiers.  Then subject these pre-selects to the most advanced training,<BR>
that included the kind of mental conditioning that most Imperials would<BR>
abhor (including literal classical and operant conditioning -- shoot target,<BR>
get jolt to pleasure center, miss, pain center -- you get the idea).  For<BR>
the most part these super loyal, super elite troops are the pets of SolSec<BR>
<BR>
> In this sense, I can see that the SolState may be incredibly oppressive, but<BR>
> not simplely a neo-Nazi racist state.<BR>
<BR>
It's all a question of viewpoint. IMTU, a Solomani Citizen would not say he<BR>
live in an oppressive society. He or she lives in a highly civilized,<BR>
ordered and safe society.  And they like it that way, thank you very much.<BR>
<BR>
If you get the chance, you might read the interview with the Solomani Consul<BR>
to Regina at http://www.travellercentral.com.  See the press section,<BR>
Democracia and look for issue #10 "Interview with a careful man", or see the<BR>
game notes (do a search on Solomani, SolSec or Blaelok -- a truly evil man<BR>
who represents the darkest imaginations of the 3I man-on-the-street when<BR>
they visualize the SolSec agent.<BR>
<BR>
Your thoughts are great, so what if they're not canon!  Perhaps you'd care<BR>
to contribute to http://solsec.org?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 22:40:45 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship advice sought<BR>
<BR>
I used to do a ton of MT stuff -<BR>
<BR>
I would be more then happy to look it over...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Karen and<BR>
Michael Hughes<BR>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 9:33 AM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Ship advice sought<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Hey dudes,<BR>
<BR>
I made up a 400 ton corsair variant for an MT campaign. Are there any MT<BR>
ship loving dudes out there who would like to check the numbers etc. and see<BR>
if said design is kosher?<BR>
<BR>
It's called a Corvus class (named after that bridge with the spike in it<BR>
Roman galleys used to forcibly board rival galleys - apologies if the name<BR>
is wrong) and designed to grapple a disabled 200 ton merchie then 'jump'<BR>
with it, dealing with remaining opposition in jump space (it has grapples<BR>
and other fun stuff to 'power' the captured craft's jump grid and enough<BR>
jump drives to 'jump' an extra 200 tons).<BR>
<BR>
If you are interested, please email above as I am a slack wad who rarely<BR>
reads the TML.<BR>
<BR>
BTW - I got a Credit in my first pol/history subject. Not too dusty.....<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:05:10 +0300<BR>
From: "Ken J. Kazinski" <kjkazinski@ksaits.com><BR>
Subject: Passive Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Actually in today's environment you get enough RF from other source that<BR>
passive sensors do give you all the information you need for a firing<BR>
solution (3D).  This comes from the fact that there are so many<BR>
radiators out there that you do not need to radiate.<BR>
<BR>
Kaz<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>>Of course, pure passive sensors don't give you a good range to the<BR>
target. To get that you either need two sensor platforms (so you can<BR>
triangulate) or a long time (to build up a fire-control solution based<BR>
on accelerations). Or a LIDAR; I think in practice the real fire control<BR>
<BR>
sensors<BR>
will be LIDARs (and everyone designing an FFS2 ship probably realizes<BR>
this.)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 02:09:57 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 08:45 PM,  Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>My handwave for ignoring any possible heat issues.<BR>
<BR>
>We know that jump drives consume massive quantities of liquid hydrogen to<BR>
>perform jumps. Tons and tons of the stuff. I am, of course, assuming that<BR>
>you are burning the stuff in your fusion power plant, or its equivanent<BR>
>in your jump drive. If the efficency of the process is even 99%, we still<BR>
>have lots of heat to worry about. Where does it go? Perhaps somewhere<BR>
>into jump space, or into some other place where physics as we know it is<BR>
>different. In any case, I seriously doubt whether a few laser zaps or<BR>
>even the usual power plant operation will overload a system which is<BR>
>designed to deal with these levels of heat dumping.<BR>
<BR>
You are making an assumption that is not universally accepted.  Many<BR>
of us don't burn all (or even most) of the H2 consumed at jump.  We<BR>
use it as mass to inflate a jump bubble that is held in place by the<BR>
hull jump grid. <BR>
<BR>
Even if there is some sort of magic heat sink in jump space that<BR>
doesn't help you in real space.  Many ships are generating GW's of<BR>
electricity, and I argue that much of that ends up as waste heat in<BR>
the ship. You've got to get rid of that somehow.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2845<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (rly-yb03.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.3]) by air-yb02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 03:19:45 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 03:19:14 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id DAA15944;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 03:19:05 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 03:17:36 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id DAA15889<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 03:17:36 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 03:17:36 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007310717.DAA15889@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2845<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2846</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 5:10:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2846<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
LIDAR<BR>
RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: [BITS] Heaven and Earth Mirror Site active!<BR>
RE: Downloading CC2<BR>
RE: Greyscale(was Re:Alien vision)<BR>
RE: Alien Vision<BR>
Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
FFS3 computers<BR>
re : FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Heat Issues (was re: Ship Size Limits)<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
RE: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
Re: the Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (long)<BR>
RE: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
RE: Native Morans<BR>
Re: funky radiator ideas (was re:Ship Size Limits)<BR>
RE: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
RE: Native Morans<BR>
Radiators in space<BR>
RE: Native Morans<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2844<BR>
A survey...?<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:22:40 +0300<BR>
From: "Ken J. Kazinski" <kjkazinski@ksaits.com><BR>
Subject: LIDAR<BR>
<BR>
Bruce,<BR>
<BR>
I am not a visible sensor expert, I work on radars, but doesn't light<BR>
spread at the same radar as a radar wave (cube the area each time you<BR>
double the distance).  In space where you would not have anything to<BR>
keep the light beam from spreading you still have a problem getting an<BR>
very accurate angle.  I need to do some research here to make sure my<BR>
initial thought is correct.<BR>
<BR>
Kaz<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>>However, be sure to buy the single biggest LIDAR you can afford<BR>
(for the fighter) or several LIDARs (two per thousand tons) for the<BR>
bigger ships. LIDARs are by far the best fire control sensor, and<BR>
they're relatively compact.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 02:09:57 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
On 07/30/00 at 08:45 PM,  Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>My handwave for ignoring any possible heat issues.<BR>
<BR>
>We know that jump drives consume massive quantities of liquid hydrogen to<BR>
>perform jumps. Tons and tons of the stuff. I am, of course, assuming that<BR>
>you are burning the stuff in your fusion power plant, or its equivanent<BR>
>in your jump drive. If the efficency of the process is even 99%, we still<BR>
>have lots of heat to worry about. Where does it go? Perhaps somewhere<BR>
>into jump space, or into some other place where physics as we know it is<BR>
>different. In any case, I seriously doubt whether a few laser zaps or<BR>
>even the usual power plant operation will overload a system which is<BR>
>designed to deal with these levels of heat dumping.<BR>
<BR>
You are making an assumption that is not universally accepted.  Many<BR>
of us don't burn all (or even most) of the H2 consumed at jump.  We<BR>
use it as mass to inflate a jump bubble that is held in place by the<BR>
hull jump grid. <BR>
<BR>
Even if there is some sort of magic heat sink in jump space that<BR>
doesn't help you in real space.  Many ships are generating GW's of<BR>
electricity, and I argue that much of that ends up as waste heat in<BR>
the ship. You've got to get rid of that somehow.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 00:48:47 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] Heaven and Earth Mirror Site active!<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 7/30/00 9:15 AM, dom@cybergoths.u-net.com issued<BR>
forth:<BR>
<BR>
> If you have a Windows machine, check out this excellent piece of software!<BR>
<BR>
Seems to work fine on VPC with a Mac as well, except for full sector "all<BR>
the goodies" generation, but this is true on the windoze side too. Except<BR>
for Stuarts machine, which handles it fine.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:06:19 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Downloading CC2<BR>
<BR>
CC2 is produced by ProFantasy. Their website is www.profantasy.com . You can<BR>
get the reader and demo for free but the full program is about $50 and<BR>
allows you to save and print your maps. The site has plenty of freebie<BR>
add-ons, including a Traveller SubSector template with icons for Zones etc.<BR>
Personally, I like it. :)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Joseph J Alberti Jr [mailto:albertijjr@juno.com]<BR>
Sent: 29 July 2000 03:47<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Sector Maps<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Joseph J Alberti Jr <albertijjr@juno.com> writes:<BR>
> I am looking to create a sector map of Corridor Sector using Corridor<BR>
> Sector data.  Does a program exist that takes sector data and creates <BR>
> a sector map which cab be printed out?  I have seen sub-sector map<BR>
> creators, but have not found one that makes sector maps.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Many thanks to all of you who have given me help on this matter.  I will<BR>
try each of your suggestions over the weekend to determine which suits me<BR>
best (probably the one requiring the least programming skills, as a <BR>
historian by education, I have no practical experience in computer<BR>
programming of any sort; well ,come to think of it, I did learn FORTRAN<BR>
about 10 years ago, but have forgotten all of it, I do think it is even<BR>
used anymore.)<BR>
<BR>
To John Wood:  I like your idea of color coding the star systems within<BR>
the individual hexagon to give a clue to planetary characteristics.  I do<BR>
not have CC2, where is the best place to download it?<BR>
<BR>
Joe Alberti<BR>
"Long Live Emperor Dulinor!" <BR>
________________________________________________________________<BR>
YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET!<BR>
Juno now offers FREE Internet Access!<BR>
Try it today - there's no risk!  For your FREE software, visit:<BR>
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:05:12 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Greyscale(was Re:Alien vision)<BR>
<BR>
"Black", "white", and "gray" are definiable regardless of spectrum.<BR>
<BR>
The thought occurred to me 2 hours after leaving my PC for the weekend.<BR>
D'oh!<BR>
<BR>
Non-"grayscale" stuff rapidly gets weird. For one thing, even two races<BR>
that have the same upper and lower limits on their visual range, and<BR>
can both see colors, may *not* see the same colors. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
You see, color vision requires at least two sets of receptors with<BR>
notably *different* response curves to differing wavelengths. We use<BR>
three (I think). Folks with one missing set of receptors are partially<BR>
color blind. They can see colors, but to them colors we consider<BR>
different look the same (for example, red & green).<BR>
<BR>
So aliens with more receptors will draw distinctions we'll be unable to<BR>
see. And we'll draw distinctions that aliens with fewer receptors won't<BR>
see.<BR>
<BR>
Worse yet, if the aliens use *different* visual pigments than we do,<BR>
they'll experience colors differently than we do. At a guess, what we<BR>
see as differing "shades" of a particular color they might see as<BR>
unrelated colors. And vice versa. <BR>
<BR>
Yup, I'd go along with that.<BR>
<BR>
Now consider that color displays are designed around the sensitivy<BR>
curves of *human* visual pigments. They mix red, green and blue light<BR>
to produce a *sensation* the same as a particular color. But to an<BR>
alien with different visual pigments, the "color balance" (hue &<BR>
chroma?) is likely to be *way* off. <BR>
<BR>
This means problems with color displays in starports. Or any time one<BR>
species tries to use color displays set up for another species.<BR>
<BR>
Thankfully, since you'd likely need to have displays in different<BR>
languages in port facilities, you might as well have them on seperate<BR>
monitors, adjusted appropriately for the species in question.<BR>
<BR>
Ooh! detail added for the next major port my characters call at :)<BR>
<BR>
Interior decor could get interesting as well. Colors that seem muted to<BR>
one species may be "neon" to another. Likewise, colors that "go<BR>
together" are apt to be *very* species dependent.<BR>
<BR>
That nicely co-ordinated burgundy and dark blue outfit may be horribly<BR>
clashing in the eyes of some other species. And you'll want to avert<BR>
your eyes at the screaming red and green pattern on their clothes. <BR>
<BR>
eg the Vargr, right?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:06:02 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
And has anyone done any studies on how the color perceptions of such<BR>
people differ from normal? If so, I'd *love* to see it. It'd give us<BR>
some good info for alien design.<BR>
<BR>
I think I saw someting in New Scientist a while ago. I'll try dig it out<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:38:47 +0100<BR>
From: "Ben Aaronovitch" <bem@imaginaryfilms.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
<BR>
I'm creating a character for G:T, a former colonial or SDB commander<BR>
now turned Free Trader (Captain but not the owner who is on board).<BR>
I've<BR>
given him the the flashback disadvantage but my cannon knowledge has<BR>
some holes.<BR>
<BR>
Did the 5thFW get as far as Mora and if not can anyone suggest a nice<BR>
little<BR>
PTSD generating skirmish or battle that will do.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
<BR>
Ben Aaronovitch<BR>
<BR>
'Let's be honest here - you paid for the women.'<BR>
                                       Bill Murrey - Scrooged<BR>
<BR>
'Let's be honest here - you paid for the women.'<BR>
                                       Bill Murrey - Scrooged<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 02:08:17 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
"Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> Anyone have an idea of why I'm being refused a connection to this site?  <BR>
<BR>
Press [HELP] Key for SolSec approved computer help:<BR>
<BR>
Q: Anyone have an idea of why I'm being refused a connection <BR>
to this site? <BR>
<BR>
A: Access to SolSec.org is limited to 100% pure Solomani. <BR>
Imperial Mongrel Men and their alien masters may not access it. <BR>
Site access requires a genome scan demonstrating 100% Solomani <BR>
heritage. Before attempting to access the site you must slide <BR>
your right hand into your computers gene scanner. [1] Failure <BR>
to do so is double plus ungood and will result in SolSec action. <BR>
Should the genetic scan reveal that your genome is tainted by <BR>
the alien filth of an unclean subhuman Mongrel Man background <BR>
the explosive bolts will trigger the hand guillotine and summon <BR>
an SolSec Rapid Response Team. Thank you for using SolOS, <BR>
happiness is mandatory.<BR>
<BR>
[1] If your computer does not have a SolSec approved gene<BR>
scanner attached please turn yourself in to SolSec, Thank<BR>
You, happiness is mandatory.<BR>
<BR>
Press [Resume] Key.<BR>
Insert right hand in gene scanner.<BR>
Press [Security] Key to begin genome scan<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:45:20 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
> From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@hex.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: ffs2 sensor errata<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
> I believe that each sensor had rating of computer processing power, and if<BR>
> you used computer processing power beyond that, you could increase<BR>
> detection, resolution etc but only to a certain point, like .5 increase in<BR>
> sensitivity.<BR>
><BR>
> Put me down for assistance/input/heretic on FFS3's computer system, the<BR>
one<BR>
> in FFS2 was not developed due time and resource constraints. I would also<BR>
> like to help/assist with the sensor rules.<BR>
<BR>
Fine. You are in as Head of IT.<BR>
<BR>
I kinda assume that part of those insanely expensive sensor arrays are<BR>
dedicated sensor data processing computers.<BR>
<BR>
BTW I actually dont mind the 'traditional' sizes of Trav computers. If you<BR>
do want them small, can you also include 'optional' extras like climate<BR>
control, redundant power and space to allow someone to crawl in and replace<BR>
bits (preferably in combat. Even better, while it's in use in combat ...).<BR>
<BR>
A Book 2 software system will at least be looked at wistfully :)<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:51:02 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: re : FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
><BR>
> The thought (at TL12, where it's 90%) is that the power plant<BR>
> is probably 95% efficient and the hardware (with mostly superconducting<BR>
> electronics) is also 95%, though see below.<BR>
<BR>
My gut feeling is that we're probably off putting all the inefficiency at<BR>
the power plant level - it's simpler to say "90% power, 10% heat", rather<BR>
than "95% power, 5% heat, but when you use the 95% power you lose 8% heat".<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> The other side of the coin, though, is Traveller power requirements,<BR>
> which are way, way, way too high for most systems - especially under<BR>
> FFS1 but even FFS2. Sickbays and machine shops requiring<BR>
> megawatts of power; radios requiring hundreds of kilowatts just for<BR>
> AUs of range; lifesupport requiring megawatts - it's all way, way too<BR>
high.<BR>
<BR>
Right. As FFS3 dictator, all power demands for things that arent weapons,<BR>
maneuver drives or sensors are hereby cut by a factor of five.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:34:26 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Heat Issues (was re: Ship Size Limits)<BR>
<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
> In fact, if we worry about heat, even hits that do no damage still<BR>
> deposit a lot of heat. Enough to make the engineer in charge of heat<BR>
> management curse a blue streak at every one of them.<BR>
><BR>
> "Yes, I know your links to the weapons pointer for turret 5 are out.<BR>
> But the coolant lines are out too. You can't fire the turret anyway<BR>
> until those are working again. Now if you'll be so kind as to let me<BR>
> get back to fixing them, *sir*..."<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
How much heat ? Can we work on the ballpark of a third of weapon output ?<BR>
<BR>
I'm thinking of a 'heat impact' from being hit in combat, which then goes<BR>
onto your 'heat budget'.<BR>
<BR>
This should be an optional rule, as many ships will have 'overbuilt'<BR>
radiator arrays (anything that wants to use aggressive baffling, for a<BR>
start), making doing heat budgets excessive.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, it may be really important for lo-tech space combat, if<BR>
we jig the radiator efficiencies right.<BR>
<BR>
The other issue is lasers as heat beams. Given that the 'effective range' of<BR>
a laser is the range at which it can hold an armour-punching 1cm^2 spot, at<BR>
what multiple of this range could you use a laser as a 'heat hose' ? If it's<BR>
a multiple of 10, then TL9 lasers may well be used as 'heat hoses' as much<BR>
as direct damage weapons.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:44:29 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
> From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
> Subject: RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
><BR>
> My handwave for ignoring any possible heat issues.<BR>
><BR>
> We know that jump drives consume massive quantities of liquid hydrogen to<BR>
> perform jumps. Tons and tons of the stuff. I am, of course, assuming that<BR>
> you are burning the stuff in your fusion power plant, or its equivanent in<BR>
> your jump drive.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. Too much energy. If we can do that with a jump drive, then why cant we<BR>
pour that energy into a spinal mount ?<BR>
<BR>
Me, I'm a follower of the 'hyperspace hates neutrons' theory - you need to<BR>
keep a buffer of LHyd between you and it, and thats why all that LHyd is<BR>
used.<BR>
<BR>
It's not really jump fuel, but I'm sure we can all think of other examples<BR>
of loose use of language :)<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:50:45 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
<BR>
GT:BTC mentions a wayward Zhodani light cruiser that found its way to Hexos<BR>
(possibly the result of a misjump, we may never know)and was brought down.<BR>
Given Hexos' distance from the Lunion border and the 73rd Fleet HQ at Mora,<BR>
it seems likely to be the work of local SDBs, although I have no direct<BR>
evidence to support this. Good enough? :)<BR>
<BR>
BTW, is that Ben 'Also People' Aaronovitch?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Ben Aaronovitch [mailto:bem@imaginaryfilms.demon.co.uk]<BR>
Sent: 31 July 2000 10:39<BR>
To: Traveller Mailing List<BR>
Subject: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'm creating a character for G:T, a former colonial or SDB commander<BR>
now turned Free Trader (Captain but not the owner who is on board).<BR>
I've<BR>
given him the the flashback disadvantage but my cannon knowledge has<BR>
some holes.<BR>
<BR>
Did the 5thFW get as far as Mora and if not can anyone suggest a nice<BR>
little<BR>
PTSD generating skirmish or battle that will do.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
<BR>
Ben Aaronovitch<BR>
<BR>
'Let's be honest here - you paid for the women.'<BR>
                                       Bill Murrey - Scrooged<BR>
<BR>
'Let's be honest here - you paid for the women.'<BR>
                                       Bill Murrey - Scrooged<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 21:16:45 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: the Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (long)<BR>
<BR>
> From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
> IMTU, human inhabitants of the confederation don't, for the most part,<BR>
view<BR>
> it as an oppressive state.  Allusions to the Nazies or Soviets is just<BR>
pain<BR>
> wrong.  Those were very unsophisticated totalitarian regimes.  In the age<BR>
of<BR>
> high-tech and mass media, things will be very different IMHO.<BR>
<BR>
The inhabitants of the Solomani Confederation will probably perceive it as<BR>
'normal'.<BR>
<BR>
The difficulties only really cut in in the 'fringe' areas of the Sphere,<BR>
where some individuals can get 'infected'.<BR>
<BR>
> > One of the things I always disliked about the Solomani was the mindset<BR>
of<BR>
> > painting them as loudmouth racists.  Why not make them extremely<BR>
> > intimidating "sophisticated" racists instead.  Elaborate on their<BR>
attitudes<BR>
> > and remove the Black and White melodramatic element.<BR>
><BR>
> Yes! Yes!  Ask a Solomani, and he'll explain the historical and scientific<BR>
> reasons for the dominant place of humaniti.  And other races can't help<BR>
> their inferior position.  They're just children who need to be help, lead<BR>
if<BR>
> you will.  Think smiling helpful platitute spouting racists,<BR>
<BR>
Go the Interesting Villians :)<BR>
<BR>
> And, as you say, there is not resistance to technological advancement like<BR>
> there is in Vilani soace.<BR>
<BR>
But change represents danger to those who are running a totalitarian state.<BR>
<BR>
I would expect a pro-technology ideology, but a system that works quite<BR>
differently in practice. A Sakharov type physicist/dissenter would probably<BR>
suffer at least the same fate as the original. Technological developments<BR>
would be hidden, and used as chips in Party power struggles ('It is not to<BR>
our advantage to have this discovery exposed just yet' ... 'Working along<BR>
these lines would advantage those of the Reagan Teknic-Schule. This will<BR>
reflect too well on their patron, Andressen. It would be better for your<BR>
career, Akademican, if you worked according to the Iosephus Conjecture').<BR>
<BR>
> The term I use is "normalization".  These people can't help it.  They are<BR>
> sick, or have been unduly influenced by the whisperings of aliens who seek<BR>
> undermine our great Solomani society out of jealousy.  But our friends,<BR>
> neighbors, family who fall prey to this misinformation are not traitors!<BR>
> They're ill.  They can be helped.  Help your neighbor before he get<BR>
himself<BR>
> into trouble, before she hurts herself or someone else.  SolSec is there<BR>
to<BR>
> assist these people and help them see the error of there ways.<BR>
<BR>
"The medicalisation of dissent". Think of some of the nastier ways<BR>
psychotherapy was used in the old Soviet Union.<BR>
<BR>
> Your thoughts are great, so what if they're not canon!  Perhaps you'd care<BR>
> to contribute to http://solsec.org?<BR>
<BR>
I'll second that.<BR>
<BR>
But I think that SolSec is probably not the major power center within<BR>
the Confederation. Note that the current Andropov and Putin are the only<BR>
heads of the KGB and it's predecessors and successor to have made it to<BR>
executive power (both of the men that ran the Terror for Stalin were<BR>
victimised by it, Beria was arrested by Zhukov et al after Stalin's death,<BR>
etc).<BR>
<BR>
Basically, SolSec would probably be regarded as an exteremly dangerous tool<BR>
by the rulers of the Confederation, who would be careful to make sure that<BR>
it does not over-reach itself.<BR>
<BR>
Re-reading chunks of Krushchev's Secret Speech could be useful to get some<BR>
perspective.<BR>
<BR>
Krushchev knew in person about the damage an out-of-control secret police<BR>
can do - after all, for a while he was in charge of the liquidation of the<BR>
CPSU in Moscow.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:45:50 +0100<BR>
From: Matt Bond <MBOND@karpad.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Ben Aaronovitch [mailto:bem@imaginaryfilms.demon.co.uk]<BR>
> Sent: 31 July 2000 10:39<BR>
> To: Traveller Mailing List<BR>
> Subject: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> I'm creating a character for G:T, a former colonial or SDB commander<BR>
> now turned Free Trader (Captain but not the owner who is on board).<BR>
> I've<BR>
> given him the flashback disadvantage but my cannon knowledge has<BR>
> some holes.<BR>
> <BR>
> Did the 5thFW get as far as Mora and if not can anyone suggest a nice<BR>
> little<BR>
> PTSD generating skirmish or battle that will do.<BR>
> <BR>
> Thanks<BR>
> <BR>
> Ben Aaronovitch<BR>
<BR>
I think the closest the action got to Mora would be the climactic<BR>
actions at Porozlo and Rhylanor.<BR>
<BR>
Almost all the action was to Spinward and Coreward of Rhylanor, and<BR>
almost any system in that area would have seen skirmishes.<BR>
<BR>
As PTSD can be caused by even a very small scale action (indeed, it is<BR>
not limited to combat situations) you could justify it almost anywhere.<BR>
<BR>
If you want 5FW flashbacks for a native Moran, then I suppose your<BR>
former SDB commander may have been called up to replace losses elsewhere<BR>
than Mora, or volunteered for active duty in the War Zone, before being<BR>
traumatised.<BR>
<BR>
Also, bear in mind that you don't necessarily have to be a native of a<BR>
system to man it's system defence boats. You may be from Mora, but have<BR>
been in an SDB squadron elsewhere.<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:37:03 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Native Morans<BR>
<BR>
If you want 5FW flashbacks for a native Moran, then I suppose your<BR>
former SDB commander may have been called up to replace losses elsewhere<BR>
than Mora, or volunteered for active duty in the War Zone, before being<BR>
traumatised.<BR>
<BR>
Thought: If a native of Mora is a Moran, what is a native of Moran (Mora<BR>
2924) called? :)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 21:44:41 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: funky radiator ideas (was re:Ship Size Limits)<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
> Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
> Anyway, the image of a starship "spreading its wings" before getting<BR>
> underway, or cutting one loose in battle and deploying a replacement, is<BR>
> very appealing to me.  Anyone want to shoot it down?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
A possibly less challenging variant of this would be a 'radiator tail'.<BR>
<BR>
We have an armoured ball, that contains the important stuff. We have a<BR>
looong radiating tail off the back, or a series of heat-conducting<BR>
filaments, or something.<BR>
<BR>
The idea is to provide more surface area that doesnt need to be armoured.<BR>
<BR>
If you have a bunch of these tubes/filaments/whatever, then weapons fire<BR>
shouldnt be that effective against them (it'll just slice some of them, as<BR>
blow-through will be pretty much irrelevant).<BR>
<BR>
I'm thinking of about 10cm thick black tubes, with some sort of pump that<BR>
carries hot liquid from the ship around the tube, where it can radiate, and<BR>
then back.<BR>
<BR>
Could someone better at physics than me do some numbers on such systems ?<BR>
Either Kelly St Clair's 'Disposable Radiator Arrays' or my 'Radiating Tail'.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:45:59 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
<BR>
> Ben Aaronovitch wrote:<BR>
> Did the 5thFW get as far as Mora and if not can anyone suggest<BR>
> a nice little PTSD generating skirmish or battle that will do.<BR>
<BR>
During the 5FW none of the *major* attacking fleets reached Mora.<BR>
The nearest Zhodani fleet was the Zhodani 40th Fleet which  broke<BR>
past Imperial lines, crossed the  Abyss  and  went  for  Rhylanor<BR>
(where it was stopped by the Imperial Corridor Fleet).  The Sword<BR>
Worlds never made it across the Abyss and were eventually  pushed<BR>
back by the Imperial 100th Fleet.<BR>
<BR>
However, all sides  used  commerce  raiding  independant  of  the<BR>
*major* fleet action.  Imperial commerce raiders tried to disrupt<BR>
military supply traffic in the Chronor  subsector  and  even  the<BR>
Foreven Sector.  Zhodani commerce raiders hit trade routes behind<BR>
the Imperials' lines (usually destroying  all  ships  they  could<BR>
find in a system before moving on).  The Sword  Worlds  preferred<BR>
terror bombing of surface targets  (cities  and  supply  depots).<BR>
The Vargr just went for outright piracy.  I  don't  remember  any<BR>
specific incidances being reported at  Mora  ...  which  I  would<BR>
interpret as meaning nothing larger than the odd  probing  attack<BR>
of little overall significance occurred.  This does not  preclude<BR>
a 'minor' incident which would seem very  significant  personally<BR>
to those few involved.  (Perhaps a deep space encounter between a<BR>
lone SDB and a heavily armed Zhodani spy ship ... with no  chance<BR>
of reinforcements or rescue.  Maybe cat and mouse around a frozen<BR>
moon of the outer system.)<BR>
<BR>
If you want details of what fleets were where during  the  5FW  I<BR>
recommend GDW's "The Spinward Marches Campaign".<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:50:40 +0100<BR>
From: Matt Bond <MBOND@karpad.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: Native Morans<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Jones, Dean [mailto:Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com]<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
> Thought: If a native of Mora is a Moran, what is a native of <BR>
> Moran (Mora<BR>
> 2924) called? :)<BR>
<BR>
Moranian?<BR>
<BR>
Matt <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:48:48 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
Don't radiators mostly work by conduction and convection within an<BR>
atmosphere? Sure, I guess there would be plenty of radiation from a big<BR>
enough array, but wouldn't the efficiency of a radiator be severly limited<BR>
in a vaccuum, with only an average 4 Hydrogen atoms per square meter?<BR>
Physicists, please comment.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:50:04 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Native Morans<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
> Thought: If a native of Mora is a Moran, what is a native of <BR>
> Moran (Mora<BR>
> 2924) called? :)<BR>
<BR>
Moranian?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Better than Moranan <G><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:32:22 +0100<BR>
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2844<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Looks like it's still chaotic, Martin.  :(<BR>
>I just tried the link and got only a half<BR>
>page of HTML.<BR>
><BR>
>David<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Damn... when I looked last night it seemed to be working. <BR>
<BR>
Hopefully the tech brigade can fix the problem soonest.<BR>
<BR>
MJD<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:30:35 +0100<BR>
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: A survey...?<BR>
<BR>
Would anyone care to go look at the F&F site for me and report (privately?)<BR>
what they see - or don't. It looks fixed to me, the boss says it's working<BR>
but  wounded... but maybe some browsers are struggling or something<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
<BR>
MJD<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Martin J Dougherty<BR>
Creative Director, Fiction & Fantasy Network<BR>
www.fiction-fantasy.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2846<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za04.mx.aol.com (rly-za04.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.100]) by air-za02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:10:40 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:10:09 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id IAA26181;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:10:01 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:07:51 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id IAA26119<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:07:51 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:07:51 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007311207.IAA26119@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2846<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2847</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 7:31:05 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2847<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Native Morans<BR>
FFS3 radiator draft numbers<BR>
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
Re: Greyscale(was Re:Alien vision)<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
RE: Greyscale(was Re:Alien vision)<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: Heat Issues (was re: Ship Size Limits)<BR>
Re: FFS3 radiator draft numbers<BR>
Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 04:36:04 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Native Morans<BR>
<BR>
> "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> Thought: If a native of Mora is a Moran, what is a native of Moran (Mora<BR>
> 2924) called? :)<BR>
<BR>
A Moranic?<BR>
<BR>
Naturally this name is often mispronounced by offworlders,<BR>
because of the resulting fights all natives of Moran<BR>
get Brawling 1 for free but must accept a - 1 to all<BR>
Promotion and Renlistment rolls because their service records<BR>
reflect this constant brawling. :)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:37:17 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 radiator draft numbers<BR>
<BR>
 From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
><BR>
> Part of what's implied is that the percentage of energy from a powerplant<BR>
> that goes into waste heat is going down with TL. (After all, lots of power<BR>
> goes into things like thruster plates whose efficiency we can't even<BR>
> begin to estimate, since they violate conservation of energy.)<BR>
> So TL12 plants have about 10%  of their energy as waste heat,<BR>
> TL14 1%. TL12 radiators run at 2000K, radiating about 1 MW/square<BR>
> meter.<BR>
<BR>
OK, lets stay with that number. TL12 radiators deal with 1 MW/square meter.<BR>
<BR>
Lets assume that TL9 radiators are 400 kW, TL10 600 kW, TL11 800 kW per m2.<BR>
<BR>
If we enforce power plant power == radiator capability (and Happy Fun<BR>
Balls), then we get ...<BR>
<BR>
Type S scout ; 100 dtons, 60 MW power ; 605 m2 surface area. We're kinda<BR>
fine at as little as 200K radiators (100 kW per square meter)<BR>
<BR>
Type A2 Far Trader ; 200 dtons, 120 MW power ; 960 m2 surface area. We're<BR>
fine at 400K radiators.<BR>
<BR>
5 000 dton warship ; 5000 dtons, 3000 MW power ; 8214 m2 surface area. 400K<BR>
radiators will use up 7500 m2 of surface area.<BR>
<BR>
20 000 dton warship ; 20 000 MW power ; 20698 m2 surface area. We need 1 MW<BR>
per m2 radiators to make this work.<BR>
<BR>
Lets deal with tails for a second.<BR>
<BR>
Lets assume that a tail is half as efficient as a hull-mounted plate<BR>
radiator.<BR>
<BR>
(feel free to correct my maths. I'm braindead right now)<BR>
<BR>
Lets take a 2cm wide tail 10 km long. Thats a surface area of ummm<BR>
0.02*pi*1000 m or 600m^2. At half of 600kW efficiency (ie a TL10 tail<BR>
radiator), that will cope with 360 MW of power. The volume of the tail is<BR>
ummm pi cm^2 * 10 000m or 314 m3.<BR>
<BR>
Also, we need to think about armoured radiators. How much of an efficiency<BR>
loss should you take from building radiators out of laser-resistant<BR>
materials like crystaliron ? Maybe a one TL penalty ?<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 05:36:30 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>Personally, I'd look out for an old Mac with a processor >68020,<BR>
>>preferably with System 7.5+ so you can:<BR>
>><BR>
>>a) run it native<BR>
>>b) save it in Windows format.<BR>
>><BR>
>>BITS presently uses a 10Mb RAM Apple  LC (68020 processor) to<BR>
>>demonstrate at conventions - I'd go for an LC2 or 3 or an early<BR>
>>PowerPC in preference now.... with the iMac at $649 the second hand<BR>
>>value of Macs is quite low.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> This looks like the best option at the moment. Thanks for the info all.<BR>
<BR>
Are you part of the "Portland branch" of the TML? If so, I can<BR>
recommend a couple of folks who could likely set you up.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 05:39:22 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Greyscale(was Re:Alien vision)<BR>
<BR>
Just a note, you need to mark the sections you quoted from my message.<BR>
Otherwise it's hard for *me* to follow it, much less anybody else. A<BR>
simple search and replace command can do it in most editors (search for<BR>
end-of-line char, replace with EOL followed by a ">" and a space).<BR>
<BR>
I've taken the liberty of editing in the "quote markers".<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> "Black", "white", and "gray" are definiable regardless of spectrum.<BR>
><BR>
> The thought occurred to me 2 hours after leaving my PC for the weekend.<BR>
> D'oh!<BR>
><BR>
>> Non-"grayscale" stuff rapidly gets weird. For one thing, even two races<BR>
>> that have the same upper and lower limits on their visual range, and<BR>
>> can both see colors, may *not* see the same colors. <BR>
><BR>
>> You see, color vision requires at least two sets of receptors with<BR>
>> notably *different* response curves to differing wavelengths. We use<BR>
>> three (I think). Folks with one missing set of receptors are partially<BR>
>> color blind. They can see colors, but to them colors we consider<BR>
>> different look the same (for example, red & green).<BR>
>><BR>
>> So aliens with more receptors will draw distinctions we'll be unable to<BR>
>> see. And we'll draw distinctions that aliens with fewer receptors won't<BR>
>> see.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Worse yet, if the aliens use *different* visual pigments than we do,<BR>
>> they'll experience colors differently than we do. At a guess, what we<BR>
>> see as differing "shades" of a particular color they might see as<BR>
>> unrelated colors. And vice versa. <BR>
><BR>
> Yup, I'd go along with that.<BR>
><BR>
>> Now consider that color displays are designed around the sensitivy<BR>
>> curves of *human* visual pigments. They mix red, green and blue light<BR>
>> to produce a *sensation* the same as a particular color. But to an<BR>
>> alien with different visual pigments, the "color balance" (hue &<BR>
>> chroma?) is likely to be *way* off. <BR>
>><BR>
>> This means problems with color displays in starports. Or any time one<BR>
>> species tries to use color displays set up for another species.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Thankfully, since you'd likely need to have displays in different<BR>
>> languages in port facilities, you might as well have them on seperate<BR>
>> monitors, adjusted appropriately for the species in question.<BR>
><BR>
> Ooh! detail added for the next major port my characters call at :)<BR>
<BR>
Glad to be of service. :-)<BR>
<BR>
>> Interior decor could get interesting as well. Colors that seem muted to<BR>
>> one species may be "neon" to another. Likewise, colors that "go<BR>
>> together" are apt to be *very* species dependent.<BR>
>><BR>
>> That nicely co-ordinated burgundy and dark blue outfit may be horribly<BR>
>> clashing in the eyes of some other species. And you'll want to avert<BR>
>> your eyes at the screaming red and green pattern on their clothes. <BR>
><BR>
> eg the Vargr, right?<BR>
<BR>
Vargr are derived from terran canine stock, and as such have the<BR>
same sort of visual equipment. Though they likely were "upgraded" to<BR>
color vision (as I recall dogs don't have color vision) by Grandfather.<BR>
<BR>
Still, it seems that they just *like* garish colors. Not like the alien<BR>
in the subdued mlap and gwarg outfit. Not his fault that while his<BR>
species sees mlap and gwarg as going together the way green and blue do<BR>
for us, *we* see them as scarlet and neon green. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 05:48:16 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Don't radiators mostly work by conduction and convection within an<BR>
> atmosphere? Sure, I guess there would be plenty of radiation from a big<BR>
> enough array, but wouldn't the efficiency of a radiator be severly limited<BR>
> in a vaccuum, with only an average 4 Hydrogen atoms per square meter?<BR>
> Physicists, please comment.<BR>
<BR>
You've gotten confused by two *different* meanings of the word<BR>
radiator. One is that thing on front of your car,<BR>
<BR>
We are using it in the sense of "something that emits radiation". In<BR>
this case *heat*. <BR>
<BR>
In space there's *no* convection or conduction. All heat loss is by<BR>
emission of radiation (IR, unless the object is hot enough to emit<BR>
visible light). Vacuum is a damn good insulator.<BR>
<BR>
If you've ever been near a *really* hot object, you can *feel* the IR<BR>
on your skin even when you are off to the side (where neither<BR>
conduction nor convection bring the heat to you).<BR>
<BR>
Likewise, on cold night, sitting near even a double pane window, you<BR>
can feel cold on the side near the window because the IR from your body<BR>
can go out thru the window, while the rest of the room is radiating IR<BR>
*back* at you. <BR>
<BR>
Radiating away heat is a *lot* less efficient than conduction and<BR>
convection. That's why heat is such a problem in space. For instance,<BR>
you may have noted all the panels lining the inside surface of the<BR>
cargo bay doors on the Space Shuttle? That's the radiator system for<BR>
the Shuttle. <BR>
<BR>
First thing they do upon achieving orbit is open those doors so they<BR>
can get rid of the heat from the people and equipment. <BR>
<BR>
Likewise, upon landing, they have to attach what amounts to a huge<BR>
portable air conditioner to the Shuttle. If it ever has to make a<BR>
forced landing at one of the emergency sites outside the US the crew<BR>
will have to get out *fast* and stay out until the heat is gone<BR>
(hours). <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:01:25 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
> Physicists, please comment.<BR>
<BR>
RADIATORS<BR>
<BR>
"Radiators" on modern (TL7) ships utilize two methods of cooling,<BR>
atmospheric and liquid convection.  Both are extremely efficient.  Power<BR>
plant limitations are based primarily on heat exchanger requirements ice<BR>
heat source size.  To give you an example of this, a typical steam or<BR>
nuclear plant's heat exchanger and support machinery is 10 times the volume<BR>
of the heat source.  Sink is always larger than Source on modern closed<BR>
cycle (steam, nuclear) plants.<BR>
<BR>
On gas turbines and diesels, the thermodynamic cycle is "open" so these<BR>
effectively uses its own exhaust to remove much of the waste heat.  There<BR>
are still cooling air fans, however, and equipment will fail if these don't<BR>
operate properly.  The air stream is itself usually uncooled, but some<BR>
installations may incorporate a sea water heat exchanger.<BR>
<BR>
Conversely, space based applications are entirely radiative based.  Space is<BR>
not cold, but instead a vacuum and this an excellent insulator.  A possible<BR>
table for cooling efficiencies of various thermal radiator arrays (black<BR>
body model, single sided) is:<BR>
<BR>
TL     T(K)          Q (MW/m^2)<BR>
<BR>
7       866.3          .0009365<BR>
8       1299.45      .0047410<BR>
9       1732.6        .0149840<BR>
10     2165.75      .0365820<BR>
11     2598.9        .0758565<BR>
12     3032.05      .1405335<BR>
13     3465.2        .2397440<BR>
14     3898.35      .3840235<BR>
15     4331.5        .5853125<BR>
<BR>
These values are based on an extrapolation of material heat tolerances and<BR>
the Stefan Bozeman Law:<BR>
<BR>
Power radiated = e*s*Rt*T^4<BR>
e  = Emissivity, 0 to 1<BR>
s  = Surface Area, m^2<BR>
Rt= (5.67x10^-8 W/(m^2*K^4)<BR>
<BR>
Note that for a "grey body", e = 0.6<BR>
<BR>
The calculation asumes that arrays in "shadowed space" are at 100K, and if<BR>
there is no heat generation internal to the radiators (fission plates in an<BR>
nuclear reactor are examples of radiators that DO generate heat), then :<BR>
<BR>
Tave = sT^4 = (a/e)(A/s)S where S = 1353 W/m at the orbital redaius of earth<BR>
with Sol as the local environmental radiant energy source<BR>
<BR>
Note that for radiative heat tranfer, these temperatures have profound<BR>
implications:<BR>
<BR>
1000K - Visible Light radiated<BR>
1800K - Yellow light radiated (steel furnace temperatures)<BR>
2800K - White light radiated (tungsten bulb filament temperatures)<BR>
3000K - Violet light radiated<BR>
Higher temperatures take one into the UV and higher regimes<BR>
<BR>
So TL15 ships utilizing radiators would be quite visible in the Violet-UV<BR>
spectrum.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
THERE MAY BE OTHER METHODS OF COOLING, HOWEVER.<BR>
<BR>
Some possibilities might include<BR>
- -Laser radiative cooling<BR>
- -Quantum cooling - Transferring energy to the vacuum - my personal favorite<BR>
(say TL13+) - This is like a magic heat sink and is related to thruster<BR>
tech.<BR>
- -Gaseous-Fluidic cooling - Rejecting the working fluid and associated waste<BR>
heat into space -a good lower tech solution (say TL12-)<BR>
- -Electromagnetic cooling - Using a strongly coupled plasma around the ship<BR>
to increase the effective radiative area by orders of magnitude.  this might<BR>
be a precursor to the FF&S version of the black globe as well, so it has<BR>
some precedant.  It also is related to the sandcaster concept. I am not well<BR>
versed in plasmas, but it seems to me that one should be able to transmit<BR>
mechanical (thermal) vibrations to a plasma and heat it.  Perhaps this is<BR>
another form of G-F cooling mentioned above.<BR>
<BR>
A PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPT FOR THRUSTERS<BR>
<BR>
BTW, I disagree that thrusters violate Conservation of Energy and Momentum.<BR>
One needs to consider that our cuurent concept of total energy is incomplete<BR>
and that there is potential tremedous latent energy in the vacuum.<BR>
Extracting this energy is currently beyond our reach, just as the latent<BR>
energy within the atomicnucleus was beyond the reach of researchers in the<BR>
late 1900's, though they knew something was there.  IMTU, thrusters extract<BR>
this energy, producing a particle streamon the discharge side of the<BR>
thruster and imparting momentum to the generating ship.  The mechanism<BR>
involved is similar to pair production at the event horizon of a black hole<BR>
involves a large "stack" of ultradense plates (which function as shielding<BR>
and forward momentum sink) which accumulate a wavefront of increasing<BR>
particle density.  The energy extraction from free vacuum creates an<BR>
inflation state in the vacuum (energy deficit) and a corresponding potential<BR>
gradient.  Potential gradients are forces, and it is this force that propels<BR>
the ship.  Of course, thrusters are very visible. The created particle<BR>
stream is short lived and is reabsorbed into the vacuum after travelling<BR>
only a few hundred meters or so.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:12:52 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
<BR>
I haven't been following the thread on radiators very carefully, but has<BR>
anyone suggested the idea of heating some mass and then dumping it?  One<BR>
might keep a large mass of [something that holds heat well] and pump heat<BR>
into it, then just throw it out of the ship.  In a desperate situation,<BR>
you might do this with your jump fuel, small craft and anything else<BR>
non-vital, although it might be difficult to pump heat into some things...<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:15:10 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> > Fusion rockets are pretty practical. They're nuisances to use, but<BR>
> > that gives them flavour - which I think is important. If ships can get<BR>
> > HEPLAR like reaction drives with good efficiency and no side<BR>
> > effects at TL9, that removes any feeling of difference between TL9<BR>
> > and TL10. I think we don't want to smooth the tech curve but want to<BR>
> > make the early TLs as distinct as possible. So TL9 ships with fusion<BR>
> > rockets can't land on planets; that's kind of fun.<BR>
> <BR>
> They should be able to land. But not too close to anything you care<BR>
> about. That's why you need a body of water, or a big hunk of more or<BR>
> less exposed bedrock.<BR>
<BR>
What about using a fusion reactor to *heat up* plain old hydrogen.<BR>
The hydrogen wouldn't run *through* the reactor, so the exhaust stream<BR>
wouldn't be radioactive.  Less thrust would be produced (since much of<BR>
the heat of the ongoing fusion reaction wouldn't be transferred<BR>
successfully), but you could use it in an atmosphere, and for landing<BR>
on relatively sturdy surfaces.  This sounds like a good Tech Level 9<BR>
"precursor to HEPlaR" to me...<BR>
                                                          - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:17:00 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> > "It's not a spinal laser mount, it's my ship's main drive..."<BR>
> <BR>
> It all depends on which way it points. :-)<BR>
<BR>
This, of course, is why there are no Kzinti in the canonical<BR>
"Traveller" universe.<BR>
                                                 - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:18:07 +0100<BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Greyscale(was Re:Alien vision)<BR>
<BR>
>Just a note, you need to mark the sections you quoted from my message.<BR>
>Otherwise it's hard for *me* to follow it, much less anybody else. A<BR>
>simple search and replace command can do it in most editors (search for<BR>
>end-of-line char, replace with EOL followed by a ">" and a space).<BR>
<BR>
Oops! Sorry :)<BR>
<BR>
>I've taken the liberty of editing in the "quote markers".<BR>
<BR>
Thanks.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Vargr are derived from terran canine stock, and as such have the<BR>
>same sort of visual equipment. Though they likely were "upgraded" to<BR>
>color vision (as I recall dogs don't have color vision) by Grandfather.<BR>
<BR>
>Still, it seems that they just *like* garish colors.<BR>
<BR>
For some reason a few Solomani historians refer to this as 'Doctor Who<BR>
Syndrome'. Noone knows why :)<BR>
<BR>
>Not like the alien in the subdued mlap and gwarg outfit. Not his fault that<BR>
while his<BR>
>species sees mlap and gwarg as going together the way green and blue do<BR>
>for us, *we* see them as scarlet and neon green. :-)<BR>
<BR>
Yes, I've seen a few websites published with gwarg text on a mlap<BR>
background. Point taken.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:08:16 +1000<BR>
From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au><BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Dan Lane" <BR>
> - -Perhaps the State represents the ultimate manifestation of oppression,<BR>
> but like the Zhodani Consulate, produces a society that works (for its<BR>
> pure Solomani members at least).<BR>
> <BR>
> - -Let's assume that the Solomani aren't fascist thiugs for a second. <BR>
> That's too simple-minded a concept for me to accept.  I'm not saying that<BR>
> it isn't possible, after all the Nazis exemplified something along those<BR>
> lines and they were real enought.  Nevertheless, I think that the<BR>
> Solomani as written are boring.<BR>
<BR>
I tend to look at the Solomani Confederation as being a bit like the<BR>
Confederate States of America, with a secret police force.<BR>
<BR>
There is material in the original sources which supports this kind of<BR>
approach.  It's the stuff about the large-scale rivalries within the<BR>
Confederation.  The DGP Solomani & Aslan goes into this a bit, showing the<BR>
Confederation as being composed of a large number of smaller polities.<BR>
<BR>
Other good analogies are apartheid-era South Africa, which actually had the<BR>
secret police.<BR>
<BR>
The Solomani aren't fascist thugs - they're just decent folk protecting<BR>
their rights.  :-) <BR>
<BR>
Alan Bradley<BR>
alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:41:48 EDT<BR>
From: TDRandall@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
OK, here's a question.  It may be dumb, but at least something to keep this <BR>
interesting (I think) conversation going.<BR>
<BR>
Is red as we see it "red" because it is a set wavelength?  or is red "red" to <BR>
us because it is at the long end of our vision range and that's how our eyes <BR>
are attuned?<BR>
<BR>
If the former, then those with ranges outside of our own see "red" at its <BR>
bandwidth and actually see something even they, when translated would see as <BR>
"infrared" or even "radio"  (now THERE's a bright night sky, right?  And <BR>
wouldn't their moon(s) be a little less obvious in their sky at night since <BR>
it's "just" reflected light?).  If the latter, then they could be seeing <BR>
"red" when we are seeing "blue".  <BR>
<BR>
That would be a decorator's nightmare, finding shades that looked agreeable <BR>
in multiple vision ranges - unless it is a matter of deliberate fractions or <BR>
multiples of the length of the light in question.  Anyone know how they pick <BR>
their schemes?  Is it more art, or more science?<BR>
<BR>
Tony<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 05:59:06 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Heat Issues (was re: Ship Size Limits)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>> Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
>> In fact, if we worry about heat, even hits that do no damage still<BR>
>> deposit a lot of heat. Enough to make the engineer in charge of heat<BR>
>> management curse a blue streak at every one of them.<BR>
>><BR>
>> "Yes, I know your links to the weapons pointer for turret 5 are out.<BR>
>> But the coolant lines are out too. You can't fire the turret anyway<BR>
>> until those are working again. Now if you'll be so kind as to let me<BR>
>> get back to fixing them, *sir*..."<BR>
><BR>
> How much heat ? Can we work on the ballpark of a third of weapon output ?<BR>
<BR>
Easy. How many MJ were in the pulse? That's what gets added to the ship<BR>
as heat.<BR>
<BR>
> I'm thinking of a 'heat impact' from being hit in combat, which then goes<BR>
> onto your 'heat budget'.<BR>
<BR>
Any *hit* that does no damage should go 100% to the heat budget. Any<BR>
hit that does damage should only get 10% or so applied to the heat<BR>
budgt. That's to allow for most of the energy being carried away by the<BR>
part of the hull that vaporized. <BR>
<BR>
Don't hold me to the 10%, that's just a guess as to how the energy<BR>
divides up between "expanding plasma" and "shock wave thru hull".<BR>
<BR>
> This should be an optional rule, as many ships will have 'overbuilt'<BR>
> radiator arrays (anything that wants to use aggressive baffling, for a<BR>
> start), making doing heat budgets excessive.<BR>
<BR>
> On the other hand, it may be really important for lo-tech space combat, if<BR>
> we jig the radiator efficiencies right.<BR>
<BR>
Yep.<BR>
<BR>
> The other issue is lasers as heat beams. Given that the 'effective range' of<BR>
> a laser is the range at which it can hold an armour-punching 1cm^2 spot, at<BR>
> what multiple of this range could you use a laser as a 'heat hose' ? If it's<BR>
> a multiple of 10, then TL9 lasers may well be used as 'heat hoses' as much<BR>
> as direct damage weapons.<BR>
<BR>
At a guess, the range at which the beam size approaches the ship size.<BR>
Say the ship is 10 meters by 100 meters as seen by the firing ship. If<BR>
they can hold the beam under 10 meters, it won't *damage* the ship, but<BR>
all of it that is actually "on" the ship will deliver energy to the<BR>
ship. So if half (by area) of the spot hits the ship, it gets half the<BR>
energy of the pulse (or half the energy of the beam).<BR>
<BR>
The same holds true at larger spot sizes. J/m^2 of beam versus m^2 of<BR>
ship exposed to beam.<BR>
<BR>
At these lower energy densities, reflective coatings are a useful<BR>
defense. But they also make the ship stand out like a neon sign. <BR>
<BR>
So you can use ultrablack and hope you can handle the heat a bit<BR>
longer, or switch to white/silver and make it easier to target you.<BR>
<BR>
Decision, decisions... :-)<BR>
<BR>
It'd be fun getting all this into space combat simulator. Tradeoffs<BR>
always make things more interesting.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 06:17:23 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 radiator draft numbers<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Lets deal with tails for a second.<BR>
<BR>
Did you see my post about liquid drop radiators?<BR>
<BR>
Figure multi-*thousand* K radiator temps for them...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:55:11 -0400<BR>
From: "Smith, Walter" <SmithW@hartwick.edu><BR>
Subject: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
<BR>
I was watching Farscape on SciFi network Friday night.  John Crichton (the<BR>
show's irrepressible human, "getting my butt kicked over half the known<BR>
galaxy") is trapped on a soon-to-be destroyed spaceship.<BR>
<BR>
SPOILER WARNING<BR>
******<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
SPOILER WARNING<BR>
******<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
SPOILER WARNING<BR>
**********<BR>
Now, the bad guy has left in the only small craft, leaving John<BR>
behind without even a helmet.  There's another small craft floating<BR>
nearby, some tens of meters from the soon-to-be-toast ship John<BR>
is on now.<BR>
<BR>
Grabbing a rifle, John steps into the airlock, summons up his<BR>
courage - and his exasperation - and steps out into space.<BR>
<BR>
He floats.  He fires the rifle to provide thrust, spinning himself<BR>
all over the place in the process.  He bounces against the hull of<BR>
the small craft, manages to grab on to a protrusion, and painfully<BR>
drags himself through the airlock.  Once inside, he slumps to the<BR>
floor with a groan and awaits rescue.<BR>
<BR>
Some time later - less than a day, maybe a few hours - John is <BR>
in a bunk, with *very* bloodshot eyes, getting some kind of<BR>
minor-looking treatment from a string of lit-up wires lying on<BR>
his face.<BR>
<BR>
Now, the medical technology of the planet they were on may have<BR>
been highly advanced, John may have been critically injured<BR>
mere hours ago and now be almost fully healed.  I think that<BR>
since John was an experienced astronaut, he knew what would happen<BR>
and expected to survive the experience - it would be *very*<BR>
unpleasant, but he could make it.<BR>
<BR>
This seems to jibe with what I've heard on this group about the<BR>
effects of unprotected exposure to vacuum, and makes me like Farscape <BR>
even more - I think the last time I remember anyone surviving <BR>
explosive decompression without being wrecked was in _2001: A Space <BR>
Odyssey_.<BR>
<BR>
Walt Smith<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 07:25:34 -0700<BR>
From: Bill <beast@aracnet.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>This seems to jibe with what I've heard on this group about the<BR>
>effects of unprotected exposure to vacuum, and makes me like Farscape<BR>
>even more - I think the last time I remember anyone surviving<BR>
>explosive decompression without being wrecked was in _2001: A Space<BR>
>Odyssey_.<BR>
><BR>
>Walt Smith<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
There was a space exposure scene in the movie Event Horizon as well. <BR>
One of the crew managed to survive. He was badly injured and he did <BR>
not recover completely as I recall.<BR>
<BR>
The bad guy in this movie also survived exposure to space. But he had <BR>
help from an alien technology or something like that.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Bill<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:26:31 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
Todd, the CRI is perhaps the most refreshing concept I've ever seen for the<BR>
Solomani and I spent all last night thinking about it.<BR>
<BR>
I agree with virtually everything you've said about the SolState and the<BR>
relative importance of SolSec.<BR>
<BR>
> IMTU, human inhabitants of the confederation don't, for the most part,<BR>
view<BR>
> it as an oppressive state.  Allusions to the Nazies or Soviets is just<BR>
pain<BR>
> wrong.  Those were very unsophisticated totalitarian regimes.  In the age<BR>
of<BR>
> high-tech and mass media, things will be very different IMHO.<BR>
> ><BR>
<BR>
Yes, I concur.  I was speaking from the point of view of a present day<BR>
American and a circa 1100 Imperial citizen.<BR>
I stil believe that the Solomani are highly manipulated, but they accept<BR>
this a asthe price of having a large interstellar state, just as the<BR>
Imperials accept the existence of a nobility and disenfranchisement and the<BR>
Zhodani accept Psionic rule.  There are many viable solutions.<BR>
<BR>
I imagine that the Solomani accomplish what the Zhodani do through the use<BR>
of technology:  Neural modifications, sophisticated wet-ware and direct<BR>
interfaces to governmental AI's.  Imagine machine based telepathy,<BR>
telempathy, telekinesis.  Perhaps on worlds like de Hamylton, surgical<BR>
procedures are performed via matter transport (signal based).<BR>
<BR>
> Yes! Yes!  Ask a Solomani, and he'll explain the historical and scientific<BR>
> reasons for the dominant place of humaniti.  And other races can't help<BR>
> their inferior position.  They're just children who need to be help, lead<BR>
if<BR>
> you will.  Think smiling helpful platitute spouting racists,<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps they (or at least many of them) are really well intentioned?  After<BR>
all, they uplifted the Delphi and other Cetacea.<BR>
<BR>
> IMTU, the only Solomani nobles are planetary one.  The confederation as a<BR>
> whole has advanced beyond the need of any such primitive notions of a<BR>
> hereditary ruling elite.  Any Solomani will point to this as yet another<BR>
> example of the 'backwardness' of the Imperium.  I mean, really.  Giving<BR>
> someone rank and title because of who his ancestors were?!<BR>
<BR>
If even that.  I'm starting to imagine the SolState as some sort of Demos,<BR>
where all individuals get a vote, just as long as they don't vote against<BR>
the State itself.<BR>
This would explain other aspects of the Imperial background - the Ine Givar<BR>
in the Marches (radical democratists in a a Solomani colonized region).<BR>
<BR>
I suspect that they are rather suspicious of the Imperium, which vests its<BR>
rule in individuals based on who they are born to.  Noble based rule can<BR>
work if the nobles are truly dedicated, honorable and competent, but so can<BR>
democracy at very high TLs (where tech augmentation can enfranchise and<BR>
properly educate everyone).  I would say that at TL9-13, the only way to run<BR>
a large decentralized interstellat satte would be neo-feudalism, but at<BR>
higher TL's neo-democracy would also work.  You just have to figure out how<BR>
to provide a neo-demos direction and leadership.<BR>
<BR>
How about these as more elaborated reasons for historical Solomani<BR>
Separatism?:<BR>
<BR>
The Solomani broke with the Imperium after the changes in courts that<BR>
deemphasized their economic interests.  This resulted in a long term<BR>
depression in the region and fomented unrest similar to that which sparked<BR>
the Illelish revolt. Economic disenfranchisement and unrest are good reasons<BR>
for rebellion (i.e. follow the credit s).<BR>
It worked in 1776.<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps the Solomani believe they are the ones who should lead Humaniti<BR>
becasue they are naturally inclined to do so.  Based on their rim<BR>
explorations, maybe they know that the Ancients are STILL out there, that<BR>
there were more "Ancients" than just Yaskodray's Droyne, and that they are<BR>
inimical to Yaskodray's seed races.<BR>
<BR>
If I were aware of such a fact, I would want to be able to defend myself.<BR>
But the Vilani anti-tech bias retards Imperial technological growth, so the<BR>
Solomani opted to establish their own independant interstellar state to<BR>
progress rapidly and break free of the growing economic stagnation that led<BR>
to the Imperium's demise in the 1110's.<BR>
<BR>
Of course, the Imperials emphasized only the seemingly or truthfully racist<BR>
aspect of the Solomani position and ignored any legitimate concerns<BR>
<BR>
> is going to require massive computing architecture. IMTU, the Solomani<BR>
LEAD<BR>
> the Imperium and Consulate in this area, for this reason.<BR>
><BR>
I absolutely concur.  Given present day progress in the field, I predict<BR>
that we will hit TL17<BR>
<BR>
> Personal privacy will change just because of the population density (look<BR>
at<BR>
> notions of privacy in Japan).  SolSec will effect the masses through media<BR>
> and other means, but 'problem' individuals won't just be removed and<BR>
> reprogrammed.  Someone has to run SolSec, and loyal drones aren't up to<BR>
all<BR>
> the tasks.  IMTU, talented individuals are identified at a young age, and<BR>
> rerouted to key career paths.  Those most likely to challenge the system,<BR>
> are brought in and made a key part of it!<BR>
><BR>
I think this is a logical first means of perpetuating the system too.  I<BR>
just like the idea of knowing what might happen if an individual refuses to<BR>
be coopted or becomes an active threat to the state.<BR>
<BR>
> but that the nice people at SolSec help them realize they had a problem<BR>
and<BR>
> help them overcome it.<BR>
><BR>
At least this is the rationalization for it!  One could call it<BR>
"Compassionate Fascism."<BR>
<BR>
> the most part these super loyal, super elite troops are the pets of<BR>
SolSec.<BR>
<BR>
Well, I can accept this, mainly because the expense of tailoring the troops<BR>
I described would be exhorbitant and perhaps unprofitable in the long run.<BR>
I would argue that what you described is how the CRI are selected, but it<BR>
makes it more interesting if the SolMil or SolSec continues to develop their<BR>
natural talents through natural and artificial means to produce the most<BR>
elite soldiers in Charted Space, comparable and in many ways superior to<BR>
Imperial Marines.  Both organizations are equally well trained and<BR>
motivated, but the CRI have an advantage:  The Solomani are not as reluctant<BR>
to tamper with the human being as are the Imperials (a clasic Vilani<BR>
cultural stance). In a fight, this would mean the average CRI trooper is<BR>
stronger, faster and has more stamina.  His senses are heightened and he is<BR>
more focused.  He just doesn't think as freely as an Imperial Marine.<BR>
<BR>
I like the idea of soldiers who are the most formidable things this side of<BR>
battle dress and a real force to be reckoned with.  I draw inspiration for<BR>
this from the movie Universal Soldier, except that I don't imagine that<BR>
these guys are evenly remotely related to the walking dead.  They arre fully<BR>
functioning, rational people who are supremely dedicated and maintain a<BR>
channeled, controlled pathology (the concept makes the Solomani a real force<BR>
to be reckoned with).<BR>
<BR>
> It's all a question of viewpoint. IMTU, a Solomani Citizen would not say<BR>
he<BR>
> live in an oppressive society. He or she lives in a highly civilized,<BR>
> ordered and safe society.  And they like it that way, thank you very much.<BR>
><BR>
Yes, I suspect that this would be the (much debated) popular view. Much of<BR>
the Classic Traveller one-dimensional anti-Solomani slant is probably<BR>
Imperial Propaganda.  I have no doubt that the SolSphere is highly ordered,<BR>
peaceful and extremely advanced, even by ImpStandards.  Perhaps even the<BR>
TL14 preponderance in the Rim is part of an Imperial campaign to downplay<BR>
the Solomani areas of technical superiority.<BR>
<BR>
I really believe that Terra woiuld have been TL G+ (along with the OEU<BR>
worlds), but was reduced by the effects of the SolRimWar.<BR>
<BR>
> Your thoughts are great, so what if they're not canon!  Perhaps you'd care<BR>
> to contribute to http://solsec.org?<BR>
<BR>
Yes, I would.  I have some ideas about Solomani ships and naval strategy.<BR>
I'm on the road during most week however and seem to have trouble getting my<BR>
thoughts down.  Ultimately, I'm interested in making the most interesting<BR>
Traveller game that can be.  I hate stagnation and informations that smells<BR>
old or rings untrue/simplistic, as does most of the canon on the Solomani.<BR>
Lets make them as complex as the Zhodani, not quite what they seem at face<BR>
value.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2847<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (rly-zd02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.226]) by air-zd01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:31:05 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:30:24 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA31575;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:29:57 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:28:23 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id KAA31515<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:28:22 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:28:22 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007311428.KAA31515@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2847<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2848</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 9:02:29 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2848<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
RE: Dumping Heat<BR>
Re: LIDAR<BR>
Re: FFS3 power requirements<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Re: FFS3 radiator draft numbers<BR>
Re: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:32:48 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
>From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
>Subject: Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
>Press [Resume] Key.<BR>
>Insert right hand in gene scanner.<BR>
>Press [Security] Key to begin genome scan<BR>
<BR>
Are Solomani allowed to be left handed, or is that another sign of<BR>
genetic contamination?<BR>
<BR>
Good post...<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:32:54 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
><BR>
>- -Perhaps the State represents the ultimate manifestation of oppression, but<BR>
>like the Zhodani Consulate, produces a society that works (for its pure<BR>
>Solomani members at least).<BR>
<BR>
It's apparently been going for several centuries, so it would have to<BR>
"work".  <BR>
<BR>
However, as a purely personal thing I think that having one<BR>
"totalitarian state where everybody is smiling and happy" - the<BR>
Zhodani - is enough.  I'd prefer to see the SolCon as a very<BR>
*efficient* dictatorship a' la "1984", as a contrast.<BR>
<BR>
>- -Let's assume that the Solomani aren't fascist thiugs for a second.  That's<BR>
>too simple-minded a concept for me to accept.  I'm not saying that it isn't<BR>
>possible, after all the Nazis exemplified something along those lines and<BR>
>they were real enought.  Nevertheless, I think that the Solomani as written<BR>
>are boring.<BR>
<BR>
Then again, Hitler had most of Germany's fascist thugs rounded up<BR>
and/or shot in 1934...  Thugs are good for intimidating the<BR>
opposition, but once you've consolidated power there won't *be* an<BR>
opposition (except for the one you secretly control yourself...) so no<BR>
need for thugs, either.<BR>
<BR>
>One of the things I always disliked about the Solomani was the mindset of<BR>
>painting them as loudmouth racists.  Why not make them extremely<BR>
>intimidating "sophisticated" racists instead.  <BR>
<BR>
Agreed, except that with several trillion people there's room for all<BR>
sorts of different types of racist, from crude to the kind who would<BR>
indignantly deny that they're racist at all.<BR>
<BR>
>- -With their already advanced TL (12 for canonical purists) intact, <BR>
<BR>
I realise I'm treading on the ashes of old flame wars here (from<BR>
before my time on the TML), but the Solomani reached TL 12 before the<BR>
Rule of Man was even established.  Did all technological progress<BR>
cease in the four centuries or so of the Second Imperium?<BR>
<BR>
[snip proposed history - no arguments here, it sounds fine]<BR>
<BR>
>On the Hi pop, Hi tech<BR>
>worlds, all aspects of peopls's lives could be monitored.  This has the<BR>
>effect of producing peace, since any individuals with anti-regime policies<BR>
>are quickly andidentified and quietly removed for re-education.  <BR>
<BR>
Would the Solomani want "peace"?  An alternative view is that they<BR>
believe themselves to be permanently in a state of war;  they are the<BR>
True Humans besieged by a vastly more numerous mongrel Imperium, that<BR>
is only waiting for them to let their guard down before invading and<BR>
crushing them.  A government that encourages its citizens in such<BR>
beliefs can introduce whatever repressive measures it likes under the<BR>
guise of "temporary wartime security".  <BR>
<BR>
>Unlike the<BR>
>case with the Zhodani, this re-education propbably results in a complete<BR>
>memory erasure or reprogramming.<BR>
<BR>
Re-educating your dissidents is expensive compared to just killing<BR>
them, or using them as forced labour.  The Zhodani have an ideological<BR>
reason to swallow the expense and do it anyway:  they claim to have a<BR>
perfect society, so anybody who dissents must be ill.  In a more<BR>
paranoid nation, dissent is a sign that you are in league with The<BR>
Enemy, either as an actual traitor/wrecker or as a useful dupe.  Such<BR>
treachery must be cut out of society before it infects others...<BR>
<BR>
I've no doubt that SolSec *can* brainwash prisoners, but I would<BR>
expect it to be rare:  only done if the prisoner has unique skills<BR>
(such as the CRI), or is a major public figure (and so "converting<BR>
them to the Cause" will be a propaganda coup).<BR>
<BR>
Also, while Zhodani are mostly incorruptible due to the use of<BR>
psionics, there's no reason to expect SolSec to be similarly<BR>
"clean"... you know what they say about the effects of absolute power.<BR>
If the local Party leader's new girlfriend happens to have Vilani<BR>
blood, a word in the ear of the SolSec regional commander could get<BR>
her papers altered to show pure Solomani descent...<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>This is why the SolState might, I say MIGHT work.  Because it is in effect a<BR>
>meritocracy.<BR>
<BR>
Not necessarily a "meritocracy" - what you need to ensure is that your<BR>
ambitious and capable people feel that they can do better working<BR>
within the system that working outside it.  If the road to success<BR>
means becoming a Party member, or joining SolSec or SolMil, or even<BR>
just greasing the right palms, that's still enough to ensure a stable<BR>
society.  What would be fatal would be if any of those bodies became a<BR>
closed, hereditary elite.  (Of course, this assumes that all SolCon<BR>
citizens already meet the racial qualifications).<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:38:35 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Dumping Heat<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin writes:<BR>
>I haven't been following the thread on radiators very carefully, but has<BR>
>anyone suggested the idea of heating some mass and then dumping it?  One<BR>
>might keep a large mass of [something that holds heat well] and pump heat<BR>
>into it, then just throw it out of the ship.  In a desperate situation,<BR>
>you might do this with your jump fuel, small craft and anything else<BR>
>non-vital, although it might be difficult to pump heat into some things...<BR>
<BR>
	"Lieutenant, I want all dead crewmen cooked and ejected from the<BR>
	ship immediately!"<BR>
<BR>
:-o<BR>
Ian<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:02:33 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: LIDAR<BR>
<BR>
>I am not a visible sensor expert, I work on radars, but doesn't light<BR>
>spread at the same radar as a radar wave (cube the area each time you<BR>
>double the distance).<BR>
Actually, it's (x4) the area each time you (x2) the distance.<BR>
This means that beam size = c * (dist)^2<BR>
Any sort of propagating beam does in fact objey this relationship[1]<BR>
The main differences for a LIDAR are (a) you can make the initial<BR>
angle very small, so c is much smaller for LIDAR - this is because<BR>
c is given by (wavelength of beam) / (diameter of emitter), to first<BR>
order, so a 1000-nm LIDAR has a much smaller beam than even<BR>
a 1 mm radar, unless the radar emitter is huge; and then your<BR>
ability to tell the position of the target is again given by<BR>
wl/diameter, again favouring the LIDAR pulse.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:05:32 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 power requirements<BR>
<BR>
>Right. As FFS3 dictator, all power demands for things that arent weapons,<BR>
>maneuver drives or sensors are hereby cut by a factor of five.<BR>
<BR>
With all due respect, that's still handwaving. More thought is needed.<BR>
Some things did get adjusted in FFS2 (radio comms, although one<BR>
could imagine a cleaner system for communicators, based on the<BR>
same range factors in the DSR...) Others are much worse than x5<BR>
to high. I think probably everyone responsible for a component class<BR>
needs to examine it's power requirements. A good excercise is to<BR>
design a fairly low-tech ship and look at where all the power is<BR>
going. (For example, when I designed a TL8 Europa-and-back<BR>
cargo clipper, I ended up with a design that couldn't run its AEMS at<BR>
the same time the sickbay was "switched on", whatever that meant.)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:11:29 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
>TL     T(K)          Q (MW/m^2)<BR>
><BR>
>7       866.3          .0009365<BR>
>8       1299.45      .0047410<BR>
>9       1732.6        .0149840<BR>
>10     2165.75      .0365820<BR>
<BR>
I get (eg) Q=(5.7e-8)*(2165)^4=1.2e6 W/m^2;<BR>
for your TL10 temperature; not sure why we disagree -<BR>
have you checked your math? (I put in e=1 for<BR>
emissivity, but that's not the difference.)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:21:47 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 radiator draft numbers<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 10:37 PM,  "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
>OK, lets stay with that number. TL12 radiators deal with 1 MW/square<BR>
>meter.<BR>
<BR>
For gaming purposes, I think we should be a tad more generous than<BR>
that.  How about?<BR>
<BR>
  TL  MW/m^2<BR>
 -----------  <BR>
  8-    0.5<BR>
  9     1.0<BR>
 10     1.5<BR>
 11     2.0<BR>
 12     2.5<BR>
 13     3.0<BR>
 14     3.5<BR>
 15     4.0<BR>
 16     4.5<BR>
 17     5.0         <BR>
<BR>
Or is that too high?  Remembering you just reduced all<BR>
non-drive/weapon power by 90%.<BR>
<BR>
>Also, we need to think about armoured radiators. How much of an<BR>
>efficiency loss should you take from building radiators out of<BR>
>laser-resistant materials like crystaliron ? Maybe a one TL penalty ?<BR>
<BR>
Sounds okay to me.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:26:37 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 07:45 PM,  "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Fine. You are in as Head of IT.<BR>
<BR>
>I kinda assume that part of those insanely expensive sensor arrays are<BR>
>dedicated sensor data processing computers.<BR>
<BR>
>BTW I actually dont mind the 'traditional' sizes of Trav computers. If<BR>
>you do want them small, can you also include 'optional' extras like<BR>
>climate control, redundant power and space to allow someone to crawl in<BR>
>and replace bits (preferably in combat. Even better, while it's in use in<BR>
>combat ...).<BR>
<BR>
>A Book 2 software system will at least be looked at wistfully :)<BR>
<BR>
Not wistfully!  Something like a B2 software system needs to be a<BR>
requirement!  <BR>
<BR>
I'm focused on roleplaying, not wargaming.  Character skills *have*<BR>
to matter in operations, and I want a PC to have to worry about<BR>
juggling software into and out of the computer system. <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:32:45 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Smith, Walter wrote:<BR>
<BR>
I guess I'll leave the spoiler warning in here...<BR>
<BR>
> SPOILER WARNING<BR>
> ******<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> SPOILER WARNING<BR>
> ******<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> SPOILER WARNING<BR>
> **********<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Now, the medical technology of the planet they were on may have<BR>
> been highly advanced, John may have been critically injured<BR>
> mere hours ago and now be almost fully healed.  I think that<BR>
> since John was an experienced astronaut, he knew what would happen<BR>
> and expected to survive the experience - it would be *very*<BR>
> unpleasant, but he could make it.<BR>
<BR>
Not only that, but he seemed to be under the control of that voice in his<BR>
head.  This is actually the first episode I'd ever seen, so maybe someone<BR>
could explain that to me.<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> This seems to jibe with what I've heard on this group about the<BR>
> effects of unprotected exposure to vacuum, and makes me like Farscape <BR>
> even more - I think the last time I remember anyone surviving <BR>
> explosive decompression without being wrecked was in _2001: A Space <BR>
> Odyssey_.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
It was also done recently in Titan A.E.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:36:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
A few disorganized thoughts/responses regarding alien vision:<BR>
<BR>
IR or UV vision:<BR>
Leonard noted the problem with wide-ranging spectral sensitivity.<BR>
Different wave-lengths focus at different distances, so that things at the<BR>
middle of the spectrum might be in focus while light at the two ends will<BR>
be out of focus.  There are a couple of ways around this, though:<BR>
<BR>
1. Accept lower acuity for a given range.  The human visual system does<BR>
this with blue-light.  Ever notice those deep-blue signs on some buildings<BR>
that always seems a little out-of-focus?  That's due to a much lower<BR>
packing of low-wavelength sensitive receptors in the retina.  The<BR>
information is still useful, however.  Having low-acuity IR might still be<BR>
better than none at all, especially if it was kept internally seperate<BR>
from other visual information.<BR>
<BR>
2. Accept lower acuity for one range at a time.  The lens structure could<BR>
adjust itself to bring the IR end of the spectrum into focus while leaving<BR>
the others out of focus or vice-versa, depending on which was better at<BR>
the time.  Again, works best if information can be kept seperate<BR>
internally.<BR>
<BR>
3. Place receptors at different distances from the lens structure.  This<BR>
is a little trickier but could be done.  As it is, the human retina is<BR>
"inside out", with the receptors lying under a layer of<BR>
impulse-transmitting cells (except at the fovea).  One might be able to<BR>
have a second layer of receptors lying on top of this layer, bringing them<BR>
slightly closer to the lens structure.  The most difficult part of this<BR>
would be embryological: The human retina's structure is inverted that way<BR>
due to the manner in which the retina develops from a cupping in<BR>
developping CNS.  Also, the "high receptors" would be more vulnerable to<BR>
wear from aging (this happens at the fovea and is called Macular<BR>
Degeneration in humans, usually a disease of aging).<BR>
<BR>
Note that there are some problems with IR in any case due to the fact that<BR>
IR-detecting photo-chemicals are inherently unstable and can be set off by<BR>
the heat of the system (ie. your body) so there's a lot more noise in such<BR>
a system.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Ya, but What Would They _See_?<BR>
This is to some degree an unanswerable question.  No one knows what anyone<BR>
else sees internally (ie. science does not have access to qualia).<BR>
Everything we know is based on performance measures and analysis of<BR>
underlying physiological structures.  So it's impossible to say what<BR>
"color" IR would look like internally.  As for taste and interior decor, I<BR>
would guess that this would vary mostly on a cultural basis with only<BR>
minor contributions from physiology.  Or not... :-)<BR>
<BR>
One interesting possibility for creatures with IR/UV vision would be that<BR>
they don't see colors at all.  Their different receptors might be pooled<BR>
into one channel, with the least useful receptor types being suppressed<BR>
before pooling.  Humans have something like this, with all three color<BR>
channels being pooled into a single luminance channel, but with<BR>
low-wavelength receptors having little or no input.  It isn't a variable<BR>
system with us, but it could be in an alien visual system. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Cammo.<BR>
Cammouflage would be very difficult in a universe with many different<BR>
visual systems floating around.  Careful analysis of the full spectral<BR>
reflectivity of materials (not just the human range) would be necessary,<BR>
and this data would have to be convolved with the receptor sensitivity<BR>
curves of the different races you want cammo against.  There's an<BR>
interesting annecdote from one of the World Wars:  They would use<BR>
color-blind people as scouts in planes to back-up the pilots and the rest<BR>
of the crew.  Certain cammo which was invisible to trichromats would<BR>
appear as bright patches to them.  Creatures with only gray-scale vision<BR>
would be relatively easy to fool with cammo, however.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Cool thread!<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:03:26 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> OK, here's a question.  It may be dumb, but at least something to keep this <BR>
> interesting (I think) conversation going.<BR>
><BR>
> Is red as we see it "red" because it is a set wavelength?  or is red<BR>
> "red" to us because it is at the long end of our vision range and<BR>
> that's how our eyes are attuned?<BR>
<BR>
Neither. It's "red" because that's the term we've agreed to use for it.<BR>
"Red" is a *label* for a *perceived sensation*. <BR>
<BR>
Since we can't tell hoe a color looks to anyone else, we define red by<BR>
pointing to different objects and saying "that's red". We have more or<BR>
less general agreement on this, but it's virtually certain that you and<BR>
I draw the line between "red" and "orange" at different points. <BR>
<BR>
That's why professionals who have to deal with subtle color differences<BR>
have an entire terminology for specifying colors. And several<BR>
*different* scales for defining it. <BR>
<BR>
Wavelength/frequency is only *loosely* related to color. And that's<BR>
because of the way our eyes work. <BR>
<BR>
*Some* colors map directly to wavelength. Red, orange, yellow, green,<BR>
blue. Others don't. Brown, pink, etc.<BR>
<BR>
So the odds are in favor of being able to agree on "simple" colors,<BR>
even with aliens. We'll say that "mlap" and "red" are the same color,<BR>
even though it's at the bottom of our range, and near the middle of<BR>
theirs. <BR>
<BR>
Complex colors will get weird. <BR>
<BR>
> If the former, then those with ranges outside of our own see "red" at its <BR>
> bandwidth and actually see something even they, when translated would see as <BR>
> "infrared" or even "radio"  (now THERE's a bright night sky, right?  And <BR>
> wouldn't their moon(s) be a little less obvious in their sky at night since <BR>
> it's "just" reflected light?).  If the latter, then they could be seeing <BR>
> "red" when we are seeing "blue".  <BR>
<BR>
No, red is a *label*. If it means anything at all it has to mean the<BR>
same thing to all parties in the conversation. Like all words, it has<BR>
no *inherent* meaning. BTW, not all *human* cultures divide colors up<BR>
the same way. As I understand it a few don't draw some of the<BR>
distinctions we do. But they'lll agree that colors are similar or<BR>
different. <BR>
<BR>
So to use my example above of a species that has red in the *middle* of<BR>
their visual range (the position that green has in ours), it'd still be<BR>
"red". But the *connotations* of the word would be different. <BR>
<BR>
And the *sensations*? Heck there's no way short of telepathy (or neural<BR>
interface tech that's essentially the same thing) to tell if the<BR>
sensation I call red is the one you call green. But the *objective*<BR>
stimulus that *produces* the sensation is the same. So we go with that.<BR>
<BR>
> That would be a decorator's nightmare, finding shades that looked agreeable <BR>
> in multiple vision ranges - unless it is a matter of deliberate fractions or <BR>
> multiples of the length of the light in question. <BR>
<BR>
You are obviously thinking of the way harmonious/disharmonious sounds<BR>
work. Eyes and ears work *way* differently. And the wavelngth of of the<BR>
longest red we can see is only double that of the shortest wavelength<BR>
blue we can see. Just one "octave".<BR>
<BR>
> Anyone know how they pick their schemes?  Is it more art, or more science?<BR>
<BR>
A lot of it is art. But I think that the idea of what colors "go<BR>
together" and which "clash" is strongly affected by the way our eyes<BR>
work. <BR>
<BR>
BTW, getting back to the difference between eyes and ears, our ears<BR>
tend to to frequency analysis of the signals, that is how much energy<BR>
there is at each frequency. <BR>
<BR>
Our eyes do something like that, but with *spatial* frequency, not time<BR>
frequency. And in two dimensions, not one. If you don't understand,<BR>
it's kinda hard to explain, but basicly it involves looking for<BR>
repeated evens seperated in space, not time. For example, a picket<BR>
fence has a fairly high *horizontal* frequency but a much lower<BR>
*vertical* one (the two rails the pickets are nailed to). <BR>
<BR>
This frequency analysis stuff happens at a pretty low level in the<BR>
visual processing system. Far below conciousness. <BR>
<BR>
A lot of other stuff occurs at those "lower levels". Things like edge<BR>
detection (determining where the edges of all objects in the visual<BR>
field are) for example.<BR>
<BR>
Check the current (September) issue of Analog for an article about some<BR>
of the different ways alien senses and brains could work. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:37:28 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
Eris wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >My handwave for ignoring any possible heat issues.<BR>
><BR>
> >We know that jump drives consume massive quantities of liquid hydrogen to<BR>
> >perform jumps. Tons and tons of the stuff. I am, of course, assuming that<BR>
> >you are burning the stuff in your fusion power plant, or its equivanent<BR>
> >in your jump drive. If the efficency of the process is even 99%, we still<BR>
> >have lots of heat to worry about. Where does it go? Perhaps somewhere<BR>
> >into jump space, or into some other place where physics as we know it is<BR>
> >different. In any case, I seriously doubt whether a few laser zaps or<BR>
> >even the usual power plant operation will overload a system which is<BR>
> >designed to deal with these levels of heat dumping.<BR>
><BR>
> You are making an assumption that is not universally accepted.  Many<BR>
> of us don't burn all (or even most) of the H2 consumed at jump.  We<BR>
> use it as mass to inflate a jump bubble that is held in place by the<BR>
> hull jump grid.<BR>
><BR>
> Even if there is some sort of magic heat sink in jump space that<BR>
> doesn't help you in real space.  Many ships are generating GW's of<BR>
> electricity, and I argue that much of that ends up as waste heat in<BR>
> the ship. You've got to get rid of that somehow.<BR>
<BR>
From my POV, a great deal of the motivation for SF RPGs is to basically<BR>
allow the players to experience the worlds which they read about in SF books<BR>
or see in SF movies. Let's be honest, this is why many things in Traveller<BR>
are (or are not) there. Can anyone really justify psionics? Jump drives? The<BR>
ultimate reason that heat radiation is not really an issue in Traveller is<BR>
that it's not an issue in most SF books or movies, since that's what we are<BR>
recreating!<BR>
<BR>
I don't worry about details like the physics of heat on ships, because it's<BR>
the first step down a road where you don't really want to go down, since you<BR>
will *always* arrive at inconsistencies (psionics, jump drives, etc), no<BR>
matter how hard you try.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:11:01 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Many thanks to Bruce Mac for the reposting.<BR>
<BR>
A small gripe :-<BR>
> Neural Activity Scanners detect and classify life forms based on brain<BR>
> activity. They are extremely short-ranged, expensive, and fragile.<BR>
<BR>
I know we're probably trying to detect and analyse microvolt potential<BR>
differences*, but :-<BR>
'Extremely short-ranged' is right! With an upper range limit of 400m,<BR>
it'd be easier in most cases to observe the suspect lifeforms with TTL 3<BR>
telescopes and an experienced eye.<BR>
<BR>
They're a little large as well ; I'm going to notice a 6000m^2 antenna<BR>
at 400m. If I can see in the infrared, the 60MW powerplant is going to<BR>
stick out like a sore thumb, if the heat haze around it doesn't give it<BR>
away.<BR>
<BR>
* - another alternative is to estimate brain metabolic rate as a<BR>
proportion of total metabolic rate and use this as an 'intelligence<BR>
index' in conjunction with the eye of experience (?pattern recognition<BR>
soft/hardware, as used in contemporary [TTL13+] robotics?). <BR>
Could high resolution near-infrared spectroscopy fit the bill?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:51:09 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
> I get (eg) Q=(5.7e-8)*(2165)^4=1.2e6 W/m^2;<BR>
> for your TL10 temperature; not sure why we disagree -<BR>
> have you checked your math? (I put in e=1 for<BR>
> emissivity, but that's not the difference.)<BR>
><BR>
> Bruce<BR>
><BR>
thanks for the response Bruce.  I just rechecked that figure and it appears<BR>
correct.<BR>
<BR>
When I developed this, I used real world data as a basline and used the S-B<BR>
Law eqn to extrapolate from that point, assuming that radiator efficiency<BR>
would improve proportonal to the black body radiance of the unit.  I<BR>
recognize that this appoach probably has some flaws.<BR>
<BR>
I was not able to identify the values of e, but I managed a workaround, just<BR>
as you did by assigning it a value of unity.<BR>
<BR>
In hindsight after working backwards, the material emissivity appears to be<BR>
quite low, eh?<BR>
<BR>
In the S-B Law eqn, e, s and Rt are constants, so Q is proportional to<BR>
T(K)^4.<BR>
<BR>
To arrive at the quoted figures, I used the TL7 baseline (which was<BR>
developed from realworld space radiator values).<BR>
<BR>
Dividing 2165.75 by 866.3, I reached the dividend of 2.5<BR>
I then quaded this, i.e (2.5)^4 = 39.06.<BR>
<BR>
Multiplying this by the TL7 baseline Q=.0009365, I arrived at the figure of<BR>
0.03658...MW/m^2.<BR>
<BR>
The T(K) values are linear with respect to TL, advancing by a factor of .5<BR>
each TL step.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 08:32:29 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I haven't been following the thread on radiators very carefully, but has<BR>
> anyone suggested the idea of heating some mass and then dumping it?  One<BR>
> might keep a large mass of [something that holds heat well] and pump heat<BR>
> into it, then just throw it out of the ship.  In a desperate situation,<BR>
> you might do this with your jump fuel, small craft and anything else<BR>
> non-vital, although it might be difficult to pump heat into some things...<BR>
<BR>
It hasn't come up this time, but it has in the past. <BR>
<BR>
Basicly, it's *totally* impractical. You can only dump s much heat into<BR>
the mass, and once you've done that and dumped it, it's gone.<BR>
<BR>
At the power levels required for most ships, you'd be lucky to carry a<BR>
few turns worth of that sort of coolant. It may help to realize that<BR>
the power levels for ship power plants are similar to those for major<BR>
power generating facilities here on earth. Places like your local power<BR>
company's main generating stations, major dams, etc.<BR>
<BR>
In other words, a fairly small Traveller ship is capable of supplying<BR>
power to a major city...<BR>
<BR>
As I recall, it takes one kilogram calorie to raise the temp of a kilo<BR>
of (liquid) water by one K. It takes hundreds to convert a kilo of ice<BR>
to a kilo of water (both at 0 C). It takes hundreds more to convert a<BR>
kilo of water to a kilo of steam. So to go from 0 K to 273 K (0 C)<BR>
takes some number of kcal. Say it takes 300. Say it takes another 300<BR>
to melt the ice. Then 100 to get from 273 K to 373 K (100 C). Say it<BR>
takes another 300 to turn the water to steam. So we are now at 373 K,<BR>
and have used up 1100 kcal. Lets say it takes another 900 to raise the<BR>
steam to 1000 K. That's 2000 kcal total. Or 8400 Joules.<BR>
<BR>
Water has darn near the highest heat capacity known, if not the<BR>
highest. And using the (overly optimistic) figures figures above, we<BR>
can get rid of 8.4 kJ per kilo of water (assuming we start with it at<BR>
absolute zero).<BR>
<BR>
Ok, a 1 GW power plant produces 1 GJ of energy every second. And that'd<BR>
take 120 *tonnes* of water every *second* to get rid of the energy. See<BR>
the problem?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:02:44 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Sat, 29 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>> In mail you write:<BR>
>>> Fusion rockets are pretty practical. They're nuisances to use, but<BR>
>>> that gives them flavour - which I think is important. If ships can get<BR>
>>> HEPLAR like reaction drives with good efficiency and no side<BR>
>>> effects at TL9, that removes any feeling of difference between TL9<BR>
>>> and TL10. I think we don't want to smooth the tech curve but want to<BR>
>>> make the early TLs as distinct as possible. So TL9 ships with fusion<BR>
>>> rockets can't land on planets; that's kind of fun.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> They should be able to land. But not too close to anything you care<BR>
>> about. That's why you need a body of water, or a big hunk of more or<BR>
>> less exposed bedrock.<BR>
><BR>
> What about using a fusion reactor to *heat up* plain old hydrogen.<BR>
> The hydrogen wouldn't run *through* the reactor, so the exhaust stream<BR>
> wouldn't be radioactive.  Less thrust would be produced (since much of<BR>
> the heat of the ongoing fusion reaction wouldn't be transferred<BR>
> successfully), but you could use it in an atmosphere, and for landing<BR>
> on relatively sturdy surfaces.  This sounds like a good Tech Level 9<BR>
> "precursor to HEPlaR" to me...<BR>
<BR>
That's a "fusion heating" rocket (as opposed to a "fission heating" one<BR>
like NERVA). And actually, running it through the reactor isn't likely<BR>
to make it radioactive. It *is* likely to smother the fusion reaction. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2848<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (rly-zc02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.2]) by air-zc05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:02:29 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:01:44 2000<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id MAA35096;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:01:21 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:59:56 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id LAA34987<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:59:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:59:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007311559.LAA34987@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2848<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2849</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 10:14:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2849<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: Heat Issues (was re: Ship Size Limits)<BR>
Re: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
Camoflage and colour vision<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
RE: Native Morans<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Re: Greyscale(was Re:Alien vision)<BR>
Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 17:01:17 +0100<BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
Eris wrote:<BR>
> I'm focused on roleplaying, not wargaming.  Character skills<BR>
> *have* to matter in operations, and I want a PC to have to<BR>
> worry about juggling software into and out of the computer<BR>
> system. <BR>
<BR>
Today's space shuttle (and other manned spacecraft) are  probably<BR>
not good models.  They are reliant on large ground-based computer<BR>
facilities.  On-board computers are thin(ish) clients.  But  what<BR>
about other vehicle computer systems ... like  those  on  fighter<BR>
aircraft:  do modern fighter pilots (or their  co-pilots)  juggle<BR>
software at different stages of their missions?<BR>
<BR>
IMTU  juggling  software  is  only  relevant  during  maintenance<BR>
overhauls and upgrades, and is mainly firmware.  Starship control<BR>
system software must conform  to  ultrastrict  protocols  and  be<BR>
extremely fault tolerant.  Its  no  good  if,  when  attacked  by<BR>
pirates, the turret control software  causes  a  blue  screen  of<BR>
death on the nav console because of a missing DLL or somesuch!<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:16:00 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Heat Issues (was re: Ship Size Limits)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
> <BR>
> Any *hit* that does no damage should go 100% to the heat budget. Any<BR>
> hit that does damage should only get 10% or so applied to the heat<BR>
> budgt. That's to allow for most of the energy being carried away by the<BR>
> part of the hull that vaporized. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, in the no-damage case the heat added should also be a relatively small amount of the total heat.  In any laser hit, you're going to get an incredibly hot spot on the hull, and with sane design the vast majority of the heat will be reradiated directly back to space from the point the hit occurred.<BR>
<BR>
As a side point, grav-focus lasers are 20% efficient.  That means they're giving at least 4x as much heat to the firer as they are giving to the target...<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:21:17 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: LIDAR Warfare (was Re: Off Topic: On Topic)<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Interesting!  So, would it be fair to say that if a radio with a<BR>
> Short range of 300,000 km requires 1 MW of power, a radar with an<BR>
> equal Short range would require ~8 MW?<BR>
<BR>
No.  Actually, if a radio with a short range of 300,000 km really required 1 MW of power (which it doesn't; that's off by multiple orders of magnitude), the amount of power for a radar would be utterly off the wall, since that would imply that the target was _reflecting_ 1 MW of power, requiring a radar with a power output on the order of 10^20 watts (if detecting a 30m object)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:27:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Douglas Sinclair <dns@interlog.com><BR>
Subject: Camoflage and colour vision<BR>
<BR>
A remote sensing expert once told me:<BR>
"Not even vegitation looks like vegitation under hyperspectral imaging."<BR>
<BR>
Vinge's _A Deepness In The Sky_ deals with a race with at least<BR>
multispectral and possibly hyperspectral vision.<BR>
<BR>
Doug<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:25:33 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 05:01 PM,  "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Eris wrote:<BR>
>> I'm focused on roleplaying, not wargaming.  Character skills<BR>
>> *have* to matter in operations, and I want a PC to have to<BR>
>> worry about juggling software into and out of the computer<BR>
>> system. <BR>
<BR>
>Today's space shuttle (and other manned spacecraft) are  probably not<BR>
>good models.  They are reliant on large ground-based computer facilities. <BR>
>On-board computers are thin(ish) clients.  But  what about other vehicle<BR>
>computer systems ... like  those  on  fighter aircraft:  do modern<BR>
>fighter pilots (or their  co-pilots)  juggle software at different stages<BR>
>of their missions?<BR>
<BR>
>IMTU  juggling  software  is  only  relevant  during  maintenance<BR>
>overhauls and upgrades, and is mainly firmware.  Starship control system<BR>
>software must conform  to  ultrastrict  protocols  and  be extremely<BR>
>fault tolerant.  Its  no  good  if,  when  attacked  by pirates, the<BR>
>turret control software  causes  a  blue  screen  of death on the nav<BR>
>console because of a missing DLL or somesuch!<BR>
<BR>
Peter, I don't disagree with you "in the real world", but this is a<BR>
roleplaying game and juggling those programs around is something I<BR>
want to happen "in the game world."  You have a party of 6 aboard a<BR>
ship that is confronted by ethically challenged merchants,<BR>
realisticly maybe they sit back and let the automated systems handle<BR>
everything, but in this case realism is boring.  <BR>
<BR>
What I want is for 1 of the player's characters to have *actions* to<BR>
take.  I want one to have to make decisions about how to maneuver<BR>
the ship, another to have to juggle computer programs, a third to<BR>
move power resources around, a fourth to detect and lock their<BR>
opponent with the sensors, a fifth to work the sandcasters, and the<BR>
sixth to operate the laser turret.  I want all the PC's skills to<BR>
come into play.<BR>
<BR>
My idea of gearheading isn't to get real results, it's just to get<BR>
reasonable ones...and that's not the same thing.  I want design<BR>
sequences that produce reasonable and consistent weapons, ships and<BR>
vehicles, that provide the numbers needed to use them in a<BR>
roleplaying, and for the resulting designs to be fun for the players<BR>
to use.<BR>
<BR>
IMO, Book 2 computers were (and still are) perfectly acceptable for<BR>
use in a game.  What we haven't got is a design sequence that<BR>
produces custom computers that look and work like Book 2 computers.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:27:08 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
> >- -Perhaps the State represents the ultimate manifestation of oppression,<BR>
but<BR>
> >like the Zhodani Consulate, produces a society that works (for its pure<BR>
> >Solomani members at least).<BR>
><BR>
> It's apparently been going for several centuries, so it would have to<BR>
> "work".<BR>
<BR>
The "work" term was a reference to a description of Heinlein's exploration<BR>
of alternative societies that were functional and productive, and in a sense<BR>
good for their people.  Starship Troopers is perhaps the most notable (I<BR>
recall this refernce from a Starlog magazine article that I read when the<BR>
movie came out).<BR>
<BR>
> > However, as a purely personal thing I think that having one<BR>
> "totalitarian state where everybody is smiling and happy" - the<BR>
> Zhodani - is enough.  I'd prefer to see the SolCon as a very<BR>
> *efficient* dictatorship a' la "1984", as a contrast.<BR>
><BR>
That would work for me too.  I think Tod's view is somewhat more benign than<BR>
my own (perhaps he just means that the SolGov just wants it to seem that<BR>
way).Perhaps there is variance among the worlds, but I think the concept can<BR>
be explored either way.  All that I want is sophistcated SF/Social Fiction<BR>
that makes Solomani Society interesting to live in.<BR>
<BR>
I guess I think of "thugs" as an amusing term to descroibe all tyrants, but<BR>
truthfully, the term would best apply to the rabble rousers among them  .<BR>
<BR>
> Agreed, except that with several trillion people there's room for all<BR>
> sorts of different types of racist, from crude to the kind who would<BR>
> indignantly deny that they're racist at all.<BR>
<BR>
Yep.  This would vary throughout the SolCon, since it is far more<BR>
heterogeoneous that the 3I.  You esentially have isolated, powerful pocket<BR>
states probably grouped around local cultural & ideological ties (e.g.<BR>
cultural history on Terra as pointed out in the S&A sourcebook).  Wuan would<BR>
be a perfect "Asiatic" example (Chinese?)<BR>
<BR>
> >- -With their already advanced TL (12 for canonical purists) intact,<BR>
><BR>
> I realise I'm treading on the ashes of old flame wars here (from<BR>
> before my time on the TML), but the Solomani reached TL 12 before the<BR>
> Rule of Man was even established.  Did all technological progress<BR>
> cease in the four centuries or so of the Second Imperium?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I am deliberatly trying to skirt this issue to arrive at some consensus on<BR>
detailing the SolSphere.  Nevertheless, I wholeheartedly agree with your<BR>
statement on TL in the SolSphere and have already implemented it IMTU.  If<BR>
you want biomods, wetware, direct neural interface, AI, nanotech,<BR>
sophisticated comms and other exotics the, SolSphere, Massilia and similar<BR>
hi tech ImpWorlds are the places to go.  The Old Expanse and Massilia have<BR>
strong ties to the Solomani and are more welcoming to tech innovation than<BR>
other areas of the Imperium.  Even so, the heart of biomed & computer tech<BR>
advancement remains the SolSphere.<BR>
<BR>
IMTU, most core SolSphere worlds are TL F-G. And these subTL's can be found:<BR>
<BR>
Biomedical: J or L (19 - Advaced Bioengineering or 21 - Rejeuvanation for<BR>
the obscenely rich<BR>
Computers/Robotics:H or I (AI computers)<BR>
Communications: I (Pseudoreality commonplace)<BR>
Environment: G  (Global terraforming)<BR>
<BR>
(I know that these are rather high, but tehy make sense to me)<BR>
<BR>
I imagine that all other technologies are on par of lag the Imperium's due<BR>
to the destruction and carefull Imperial control during and subsequent to<BR>
the SR War.<BR>
I balance the SolState by making the Imperium much larger (using real<BR>
galactic charts), and giving it an edge in energetics and similar heavy<BR>
manufacturing technologies.  The 3I most closely mirrors our modern day<BR>
predispositions towards Mental (?) Sovereignty.<BR>
<BR>
> beliefs can introduce whatever repressive measures it likes under the<BR>
> guise of "temporary wartime security".<BR>
<BR>
Hmm, interesting.<BR>
<BR>
> Enemy, either as an actual traitor/wrecker or as a useful dupe.  Such<BR>
> treachery must be cut out of society before it infects others...<BR>
<BR>
Yes, but in an elightened tyranny, it has the use of reinforcing the status<BR>
of teh State as benevolent and interested in its citizens welfare.  It would<BR>
be an enormously useful propaganda tool.<BR>
><BR>
> (such as the CRI), or is a major public figure (and so "converting<BR>
> them to the Cause" will be a propaganda coup).<BR>
><BR>
> blood, a word in the ear of the SolSec regional commander could get<BR>
> her papers altered to show pure Solomani descent...<BR>
<BR>
This would certainly be the case, but with computer based "telempathy",<BR>
"telepathy', etc..., it would be incresingly difficult to pull off.<BR>
><BR>
> closed, hereditary elite.  (Of course, this assumes that all SolCon<BR>
> citizens already meet the racial qualifications).<BR>
<BR>
Concur - Thanks!  Look forward to hearing from you again.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:36:23 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
Terry Mixon writes:<BR>
> After a long time and several restarts the Spinward Marches <BR>
> trade map is complete. (Thank Ghu!).<BR>
> <BR>
> Please give it a look and tell me what you think.<BR>
<BR>
On initial inspection, there are several routes that are unnecessarily long; for example, Rhylanor-Efate is 19 pc; the shortest routes are all 16 pc (possibly less if you use some low-grade ports, I didn't check).  I also suspect that its missing some smaller routes, and I'm not sure about the sizes of some routes.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:39:50 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 reaction drives<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> > What about using a fusion reactor to *heat up* plain old hydrogen.<BR>
> > The hydrogen wouldn't run *through* the reactor, so the exhaust stream<BR>
> > wouldn't be radioactive.  Less thrust would be produced (since much of<BR>
> > the heat of the ongoing fusion reaction wouldn't be transferred<BR>
> > successfully), but you could use it in an atmosphere, and for landing<BR>
> > on relatively sturdy surfaces.  This sounds like a good Tech Level 9<BR>
> > "precursor to HEPlaR" to me...<BR>
> <BR>
> That's a "fusion heating" rocket (as opposed to a "fission heating" one<BR>
> like NERVA). And actually, running it through the reactor isn't likely<BR>
> to make it radioactive. It *is* likely to smother the fusion reaction. :-)<BR>
<BR>
But the hydrogen wouldn't being flowing directly *through* the ongoing<BR>
fusion reaction (no mixing would occur).  I'm not even close to being an<BR>
engineer, so my ability to picture these things accurately is severely<BR>
limited, but I'm thinking some mechanism that transfers just the *heat*<BR>
produced by the fusion reactor -- perhaps the hydrogen passes through a<BR>
network of ducts in the lining of the reactor vessel, or is routed through<BR>
the fusion reaction, but kept from *mixing* with it (and thus quenching<BR>
it) with some kind of esoteric and complicated magnetic containment<BR>
system, or *whatever*... The point is, cold hydrogen goes in one end, and<BR>
hot hydrogen comes out the other -- not (nearly) as good as genuine<BR>
HEPlaR, but (just barely) enough to get off the ground without<BR>
contra-gravity or a radioactive exhaust plume...<BR>
                                                          - J. Raynor<BR>
           <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:59:43 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin writes:<BR>
> I haven't been following the thread on radiators very carefully, but has<BR>
> anyone suggested the idea of heating some mass and then dumping it?  One<BR>
> might keep a large mass of [something that holds heat well] and pump heat<BR>
> into it, then just throw it out of the ship.  In a desperate situation,<BR>
> you might do this with your jump fuel, small craft and anything else<BR>
> non-vital, although it might be difficult to pump heat into some things...<BR>
<BR>
Well, this really isn't viable for long-term cooling, because once the coolant matter is used up, its gone.  However, for a warship, which may have massive heat spikes, some variant on this may be practical (largely dependent on how efficient we make radiators).  At the low end, water is a decent cheap expendable coolant material, and will carry away about 2.5 megajoules per kilogram.  Various plastics can probably do better; at an upper limit graphite is about 29.5 megajoules per kilogram, but requires heating the graphite up to 3800K, which means that water is actually more efficient for a low operating temperature.<BR>
<BR>
Another option which may be used for warships is rechargeable heat sinks; this would probably involve masses of some compound which undergoes a reversible change of state at some convenient temperature.  Water tanks would hold around 0.5 MJ/kg, assuming they start as ice; I'm sure better materials exist.  A disadvantage with such sinks is that they require eliminating the energy eventually, with some conversion loss.  An advantage is that internal heat sinks don't have _any_ IR output, and have minimal surface requirements.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:58:01 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Native Morans<BR>
<BR>
>Thought: If a native of Mora is a Moran, what is a native of Moran (Mora<BR>
>2924) called? :)<BR>
<BR>
Plural: Morani<BR>
Singular: Moranis<BR>
<BR>
[And there's a penchant for the first name of "Rick" for some reason]<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:06:59 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Conversely, space based applications are entirely radiative based.  Space is<BR>
> not cold, but instead a vacuum and this an excellent insulator.  A possible<BR>
> table for cooling efficiencies of various thermal radiator arrays (black<BR>
> body model, single sided) is:<BR>
><BR>
> TL     T(K)          Q (MW/m^2)<BR>
><BR>
> 7       866.3       .0009365<BR>
> 8      1299.45      .0047410<BR>
> 9      1732.6       .0149840<BR>
> 10     2165.75      .0365820<BR>
> 11     2598.9       .0758565<BR>
> 12     3032.05      .1405335<BR>
> 13     3465.2       .2397440<BR>
> 14     3898.35      .3840235<BR>
> 15     4331.5       .5853125<BR>
<BR>
Note that some proposed designs use liquid drops (molten metal!), and<BR>
these are buildable in the near term. That raises the available<BR>
operating temp considerably, and at lower TLs tha you use above.<BR>
<BR>
More advanced designs have proposes some sort of scheme involving high<BR>
"temperature" electrons in a cloud around the ship. I'm not entirely<BR>
sure how that'd work. But I suspect it wouldn't "baffle" worth a damn.<BR>
<BR>
> Note that for radiative heat tranfer, these temperatures have profound<BR>
> implications:<BR>
><BR>
> 1000K - Visible Light radiated<BR>
> 1800K - Yellow light radiated (steel furnace temperatures)<BR>
> 2800K - White light radiated (tungsten bulb filament temperatures)<BR>
> 3000K - Violet light radiated<BR>
> Higher temperatures take one into the UV and higher regimes<BR>
><BR>
> So TL15 ships utilizing radiators would be quite visible in the Violet-UV<BR>
> spectrum.<BR>
<BR>
They'll also be very visible *period*, even when the peak of the curve<BR>
moves above the visual range, there's *more* than enough energy being<BR>
radiated in the visible spectrum. Consider "blue-white" stars. They are<BR>
up *above* the ranges you give (the H-R diagram I'm looking at has the<BR>
high end of the stellar temp scale labelled as 40,000 K!!). <BR>
<BR>
> THERE MAY BE OTHER METHODS OF COOLING, HOWEVER.<BR>
><BR>
> Some possibilities might include<BR>
<BR>
> -Laser radiative cooling<BR>
<BR>
Thermodynamicly impossible. Waste heat is high entropy, laser beams are<BR>
near zero entropy.<BR>
<BR>
> -Quantum cooling - Transferring energy to the vacuum - my personal favorite<BR>
> (say TL13+) - This is like a magic heat sink and is related to thruster<BR>
> tech.<BR>
<BR>
> -Gaseous-Fluidic cooling - Rejecting the working fluid and associated waste<BR>
> heat into space -a good lower tech solution (say TL12-)<BR>
<BR>
Impractical. Work out just how *much* material has to be throw away to<BR>
cooling *ship*, not just the power plant.<BR>
<BR>
But using high temp low vapor pressure metal droplets in a spray that's<BR>
recovered after it's cooled *is* doable.<BR>
<BR>
> -Electromagnetic cooling - Using a strongly coupled plasma around the ship<BR>
> to increase the effective radiative area by orders of magnitude.  this might<BR>
> be a precursor to the FF&S version of the black globe as well, so it has<BR>
> some precedant.  It also is related to the sandcaster concept. I am not well<BR>
> versed in plasmas, but it seems to me that one should be able to transmit<BR>
> mechanical (thermal) vibrations to a plasma and heat it.  Perhaps this is<BR>
> another form of G-F cooling mentioned above.<BR>
<BR>
Much simpler, there are ways to convert heat directly into electron<BR>
emissions. They were originally developed for the cathodes of vacuum<BR>
tubes. <BR>
<BR>
> A PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPT FOR THRUSTERS<BR>
><BR>
> BTW, I disagree that thrusters violate Conservation of Energy and Momentum.<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, but *by definition* they do so.<BR>
<BR>
> One needs to consider that our cuurent concept of total energy is incomplete<BR>
> and that there is potential tremedous latent energy in the vacuum.<BR>
<BR>
Sure, but that's an energy source. Not a *momentum* source. <BR>
<BR>
Ships with thruster plates increase their momentum with no balancing<BR>
"loss" of momentum by anything else. Ditto for kinetic energy. Worse,<BR>
the *amount* of these gaind depends on the relative velocity of the<BR>
observer. <BR>
<BR>
Reaction drives don't have that problem because the exhaust has an<BR>
equal and opposite amount of kinetic energy and momentum, *regardless*<BR>
of your frame of reference.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, we tried playing around with *just* the energy aspect some years<BR>
back. And selecting only one frame, that of the planet the ship was<BR>
boosting away from. <BR>
<BR>
We came up with a self-consistent set of equations. Alas, they describe<BR>
something *far* different than thruster plates. You see, the energy of<BR>
the ship, relative to the planet increases as the *square* of the<BR>
velocity. Which means that it quickly reaches completely unreasonable<BR>
values. Even if you allow vacuum energy, you then have to explain how<BR>
come they can't use this huge energy source for anything else.<BR>
<BR>
> Extracting this energy is currently beyond our reach, just as the latent<BR>
> energy within the atomicnucleus was beyond the reach of researchers in the<BR>
> late 1900's, though they knew something was there.  IMTU, thrusters extract<BR>
> this energy, producing a particle stream on the discharge side of the<BR>
> thruster and imparting momentum to the generating ship. <BR>
<BR>
Fine. Then it's not a reactionless drive, which is where the violations<BR>
of conservation laws come in.<BR>
<BR>
> The mechanism<BR>
> involved is similar to pair production at the event horizon of a black hole<BR>
> involves a large "stack" of ultradense plates (which function as shielding<BR>
> and forward momentum sink) which accumulate a wavefront of increasing<BR>
> particle density.  The energy extraction from free vacuum creates an<BR>
> inflation state in the vacuum (energy deficit) and a corresponding potential<BR>
> gradient.  Potential gradients are forces, and it is this force that propels<BR>
> the ship.  Of course, thrusters are very visible. The created particle<BR>
> stream is short lived and is reabsorbed into the vacuum after travelling<BR>
> only a few hundred meters or so.<BR>
<BR>
The problem is that when the particles are re-absorbed, the energy that<BR>
went into the *other* half of the pair has to be "paid back". That's<BR>
why the pair creation at the black hole event horizon *reduces* the<BR>
mass of the black hole instead of increasing it.<BR>
<BR>
When the energy is paid back, so is the momentum. So you emit enough<BR>
particles to cause the reaction (and the impact of the associated<BR>
antiparticles) to give the ship a velocity of 1 m/s forward. Fine. Then<BR>
the particles disappear, taking the momentum with them. So the ship stops.<BR>
<BR>
And in actuality, there's *another* snag. The particles would be<BR>
created at rest WITH RESPECT TO THE GENERATOR. So the momentum cancels<BR>
anyway.<BR>
<BR>
Finally, you don't *want* conservation of energy and conservation of<BR>
momentum to be broken. You see, it turns out that those laws (like all<BR>
of the conservation laws) turn out to merely be a way of stating that<BR>
the universe has certain invariant properties.<BR>
<BR>
For conservation of energy, it's that the laws of physics are invariant<BR>
with respect to time. They are the same now as they were at the big<BR>
bang and will still be the same at the end of the universe.<BR>
<BR>
For conservation of momentum, it's that the laws of physics don't<BR>
change with your *position* in the universe. <BR>
<BR>
I don't think we want a universe where either of those is false. <BR>
<BR>
For the record, conservation of *charge* has to do with *direction*. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:38:51 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Greyscale(was Re:Alien vision)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> Not like the alien in the subdued mlap and gwarg outfit. Not his<BR>
>> fault that while his species sees mlap and gwarg as going together<BR>
>> the way green and blue do for us, *we* see them as scarlet and neon<BR>
>> green.  :-)<BR>
><BR>
> Yes, I've seen a few websites published with gwarg text on a mlap<BR>
> background. Point taken.<BR>
<BR>
Try bright red text on yellow...<BR>
<BR>
Some day, I hope to be able to get the time to retrieve files off some<BR>
old floppies. One is this *lovely* bit of "op art". A series of wavy<BR>
lines shading into each other. Bright red and bright green. It *hurts*<BR>
to look at. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:11:54 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Many thanks to Bruce Mac for the reposting.<BR>
<BR>
A small gripe :-<BR>
> Neural Activity Scanners detect and classify life forms based on brain<BR>
> activity. They are extremely short-ranged, expensive, and fragile.<BR>
<BR>
I know we're probably trying to detect and analyse microvolt potential<BR>
differences*, but :-<BR>
'Extremely short-ranged' is right! With an upper range limit of 400m,<BR>
it'd be easier in most cases to observe the suspect lifeforms with TTL 3<BR>
telescopes and an experienced eye.<BR>
<BR>
They're a little large as well ; I'm going to notice a 6000m^2 antenna<BR>
at 400m. If I can see in the infrared, the 60MW powerplant is going to<BR>
stick out like a sore thumb, if the heat haze around it doesn't give it<BR>
away.<BR>
<BR>
* - another alternative is to estimate brain metabolic rate as a<BR>
proportion of total metabolic rate and use this as an 'intelligence<BR>
index' in conjunction with the eye of experience (?pattern recognition<BR>
soft/hardware, as used in contemporary [TTL13+] robotics?). <BR>
Could high resolution near-infrared spectroscopy fit the bill?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:47:47 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> 3. Place receptors at different distances from the lens structure.  This<BR>
> is a little trickier but could be done.  As it is, the human retina is<BR>
> "inside out", with the receptors lying under a layer of<BR>
> impulse-transmitting cells (except at the fovea).  One might be able to<BR>
> have a second layer of receptors lying on top of this layer, bringing them<BR>
> slightly closer to the lens structure.  The most difficult part of this<BR>
> would be embryological: The human retina's structure is inverted that way<BR>
> due to the manner in which the retina develops from a cupping in<BR>
> developping CNS.  Also, the "high receptors" would be more vulnerable to<BR>
> wear from aging (this happens at the fovea and is called Macular<BR>
> Degeneration in humans, usually a disease of aging).<BR>
<BR>
Also, this setup in humans is why we have a "blind spot" That's where<BR>
all the nerves and stuff for the retins go thru it.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, squid have eyes essentially identical with ours<BR>
*expect* that the blood vessels and nerve connections are *under* the<BR>
retina instead of on top of it. (best argument that humans weren't<BR>
designed, or that if they were, they aren't as important as squids :-) <BR>
<BR>
So it's not at all impossible. <BR>
<BR>
> Note that there are some problems with IR in any case due to the fact that<BR>
> IR-detecting photo-chemicals are inherently unstable and can be set off by<BR>
> the heat of the system (ie. your body) so there's a lot more noise in such<BR>
> a system.<BR>
<BR>
I think IR is best left to something like a pit viper's "pits", basicly<BR>
a couple of concavities on the head lined with IR receptors. They don't<BR>
*image*, just report the strength of IR from the direction the snake is<BR>
looking. Which is more than good enough to spot warm blooded prey.<BR>
<BR>
> Ya, but What Would They _See_?<BR>
> This is to some degree an unanswerable question.  No one knows what anyone<BR>
> else sees internally (ie. science does not have access to qualia).<BR>
> Everything we know is based on performance measures and analysis of<BR>
> underlying physiological structures.  So it's impossible to say what<BR>
> "color" IR would look like internally.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, it's sort of pinkish. And no, I'm *not* kidding. I don't know<BR>
if everyone can do this, but I once spotted a soldering iron I'd left<BR>
plugged in the desk in my bedroom. I was in bed and saw this strange<BR>
blob of color. <BR>
<BR>
My eyes were fully dark adjusted (and I have excellent night vision).<BR>
It was the only "color" present. I got up and walked over to see what<BR>
it was, it was a dull red. So I unplugged it and watched the color<BR>
fade.<BR>
<BR>
I got curious, and after it was cool, plugged it back in and tried to<BR>
tell when I could first see it. As I said, it was a weird sort of color<BR>
I can only call "pinkish" when it first became visible. Very odd.<BR>
<BR>
If anybody has a temperature controlled soldering iron, you might want<BR>
to experiment in a dark room. <BR>
<BR>
> Cammo.<BR>
> Cammouflage would be very difficult in a universe with many different<BR>
> visual systems floating around.  Careful analysis of the full spectral<BR>
> reflectivity of materials (not just the human range) would be necessary,<BR>
> and this data would have to be convolved with the receptor sensitivity<BR>
> curves of the different races you want cammo against.  There's an<BR>
> interesting annecdote from one of the World Wars:  They would use<BR>
> color-blind people as scouts in planes to back-up the pilots and the rest<BR>
> of the crew.  Certain cammo which was invisible to trichromats would<BR>
> appear as bright patches to them.  Creatures with only gray-scale vision<BR>
> would be relatively easy to fool with cammo, however.<BR>
<BR>
They also used some folks with UV vision (due to having had cataract<BR>
surgery that used the old quartz(?) replacement lenses) to get messages<BR>
sent via UV filtered lights. They were used with the Resistance.<BR>
<BR>
Some day I need to look up the articles in Sky & Telescope that someone<BR>
who'd undergone that surgery wrote. "Naked Eye UV Astronomy" or some<BR>
such. Apparently a number of stars look a *lot* different if you can<BR>
see UV.<BR>
<BR>
And I've red that according to many "color blind" people (100% color<BR>
blind, as I recall), they say they *can* recognize colors, but while<BR>
it's a visible distiniction, it's not an "important" one. <BR>
<BR>
The way I understood the attempts to explain it, it's that to their<BR>
visual system, it's not a property that "matters". So they have to<BR>
*conciously* look for the difference, rather than having the various<BR>
processing layers in the system point it out. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:11:34 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
> However, as a purely personal thing I think that having one<BR>
> "totalitarian state where everybody is smiling and happy" - the<BR>
> Zhodani - is enough.  I'd prefer to see the SolCon as a very<BR>
> *efficient* dictatorship a' la "1984", as a contrast.<BR>
<BR>
I wouldn't necessarily call it happy, but the status quo has to be tolerable<BR>
to the general populas or the society will eventually collapse.  With an<BR>
organization like SolSec in operation, I'm sure that there is a general<BR>
undercurrant of fear, particularly among the 'marginal' types.  The 'shiny<BR>
happy' face might be an affectation.  "What's the matter, citizen?  Why<BR>
aren't you happy?" coming from a SolSec uniformed monitor might have a<BR>
particularly chilling effect.<BR>
<BR>
> >One of the things I always disliked about the Solomani was the mindset of<BR>
> >painting them as loudmouth racists.  Why not make them extremely<BR>
> >intimidating "sophisticated" racists instead.<BR>
><BR>
> Agreed, except that with several trillion people there's room for all<BR>
> sorts of different types of racist, from crude to the kind who would<BR>
> indignantly deny that they're racist at all.<BR>
<BR>
Aboslutely.  It might in fact work to SolSec advantage to have these load<BR>
radical groups.  They might be allowed (or even encouraged) to stage<BR>
incidents like attacking a group of aliens, etc.  The government could then<BR>
crack down on these 'extremists', explaining that the government doesn't<BR>
approve of this 'unenlightened' attitude.  They thus preserve their kindly<BR>
concerned image, reinforce the masses trust in their benign totalitarianism,<BR>
and eliminate troublesome radicals (both alien and loud mouths).<BR>
<BR>
Picture SolSec having agents infiltrated into every organization like this.<BR>
You'll end up with a 'dark totalitarian state' just with all the suspicion<BR>
this kind of informanty culture will generate<BR>
<BR>
> >On the Hi pop, Hi tech<BR>
> >worlds, all aspects of peopls's lives could be monitored.  This has the<BR>
> >effect of producing peace, since any individuals with anti-regime<BR>
policies<BR>
> >are quickly andidentified and quietly removed for re-education.<BR>
><BR>
> Would the Solomani want "peace"?  An alternative view is that they<BR>
> believe themselves to be permanently in a state of war;  they are the<BR>
> True Humans besieged by a vastly more numerous mongrel Imperium, that<BR>
> is only waiting for them to let their guard down before invading and<BR>
> crushing them.  A government that encourages its citizens in such<BR>
> beliefs can introduce whatever repressive measures it likes under the<BR>
> guise of "temporary wartime security".<BR>
<BR>
Exactly.  The society is at 'peace' but with a besieged mentality.  Every<BR>
SolCon citizen knows that the 3I is only waiting for the chance to pounce on<BR>
the confederation, and place it's safe and freedom loving citizens under the<BR>
boot heel of decadent Imperial nobles.  I'm certainh that SolSec<BR>
occasionally reveals 'secret 3I documents' that detail how after the next 3I<BR>
campaign of conquest, certain world will become the estates of particular<BR>
Imperial nobles (SolSec will doubtless find the most craven example of<BR>
Imperial nobility to use as potential new rulers).<BR>
<BR>
Think about this.  Secret documents uncovered by the ever vigilant Solomani<BR>
Security Directorate reveal the 3I's plans for [insert planet here].  After<BR>
a planned attack and brutal subjugation of peace-loving Solomani, [planet]<BR>
will be made part of the fief of [particularly loathsome 3I noble].<BR>
<BR>
> Re-educating your dissidents is expensive compared to just killing<BR>
> them, or using them as forced labour.  The Zhodani have an ideological<BR>
> reason to swallow the expense and do it anyway:  they claim to have a<BR>
> perfect society, so anybody who dissents must be ill.  In a more<BR>
> paranoid nation, dissent is a sign that you are in league with The<BR>
> Enemy, either as an actual traitor/wrecker or as a useful dupe.  Such<BR>
> treachery must be cut out of society before it infects others...<BR>
><BR>
> I've no doubt that SolSec *can* brainwash prisoners, but I would<BR>
> expect it to be rare:  only done if the prisoner has unique skills<BR>
> (such as the CRI), or is a major public figure (and so "converting<BR>
> them to the Cause" will be a propaganda coup).<BR>
<BR>
Why does it have to be costly, and why is this cost unacceptable.  Given<BR>
technological advances, such reprogramming could be quite simple. Imagine<BR>
high tech classical and operant conditioning.  IMTU, this kind of<BR>
conditioning is carried out in SolSec 'hospitals'--the same ones that treat<BR>
criminals (who are also just sick).  IMTU, the Solomani view execution as a<BR>
primitive and brutal act that only goes on in barbarous places like the 3I,<BR>
not highly evolved states like SolCon.<BR>
<BR>
'Treatment' can very as required.  Most problem types could be 'normalized'<BR>
with simple treatment like high tech behavior modification, limited scope<BR>
labotomies, drugs, etc.  On return to there neighborhoods, the local SolSec<BR>
monitors and neighbors could easily be enlisted to ensure the 'cure' holds.<BR>
<BR>
Naturally, SolSec does eliminate dangerous tyoes when required, but this is<BR>
a function of 'operation' and not official policy.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Also, while Zhodani are mostly incorruptible due to the use of<BR>
> psionics, there's no reason to expect SolSec to be similarly<BR>
> "clean"... you know what they say about the effects of absolute power.<BR>
> If the local Party leader's new girlfriend happens to have Vilani<BR>
> blood, a word in the ear of the SolSec regional commander could get<BR>
> her papers altered to show pure Solomani descent...<BR>
<BR>
Of course.  This happens all the time.  It is a given in traveller that the<BR>
more 'repressive' the regime, the more susceptable to corruption.  The<BR>
essential point is that all the popential trouble makers (those who might<BR>
upset the status quo) are either part of the status quo, or 'normalized'.<BR>
There is an implicit rule to not overtly violate the official policy.  Yes<BR>
you can have a Vilani girl friend, but don't falunt it.  Have her papers<BR>
changed and she's a proper Solomani girl friend (of course, now SolSec has a<BR>
big stick to hold over your head.  Plan on getting a call when the next<BR>
SolSec appropriations bill is up for approval.  "Comrade, I hope you'll be<BR>
supporting our bill.  By the way, how is that charming young lady friend of<BR>
yours?")<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Not necessarily a "meritocracy" - what you need to ensure is that your<BR>
> ambitious and capable people feel that they can do better working<BR>
> within the system that working outside it.  If the road to success<BR>
> means becoming a Party member, or joining SolSec or SolMil, or even<BR>
> just greasing the right palms, that's still enough to ensure a stable<BR>
> society.  What would be fatal would be if any of those bodies became a<BR>
> closed, hereditary elite.  (Of course, this assumes that all SolCon<BR>
> citizens already meet the racial qualifications).<BR>
<BR>
Absolutely.  IMTU, one of SolSec's tasks is to identify the ambitious and<BR>
capable as early as possible, and make sure they are utilized in a manner of<BR>
the most benifit to the state.  The vast majority of SolSec REALLY believe<BR>
in what they are doing. Dedicated true believers serving a 'repugnant cause'<BR>
are much more frightening than  sleazy opportunists.  As you say, think<BR>
'1984', but with a more human face.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2849<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg05.mx.aol.com (rly-yg05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.5]) by air-yg03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:14:15 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:13:31 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id NAA38027;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:13:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:11:32 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id NAA37970<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:11:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:11:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007311711.NAA37970@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2849<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2850</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 12:33:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2850<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: FFS3 radiator draft numbers<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Should I Get MT?<BR>
FFS3: sensor ranges<BR>
Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Starship insurance?<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Starship insurance?<BR>
Re: FFS3: sensor ranges<BR>
Re: Should I Get MT?<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:32:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
> > > However, as a purely personal thing I think that having one<BR>
> > "totalitarian state where everybody is smiling and happy" - the<BR>
> > Zhodani - is enough.  I'd prefer to see the SolCon as a very<BR>
> > *efficient* dictatorship a' la "1984", as a contrast.<BR>
> ><BR>
> That would work for me too.  I think Tod's view is somewhat more benign<BR>
than<BR>
> my own (perhaps he just means that the SolGov just wants it to seem that<BR>
> way).Perhaps there is variance among the worlds, but I think the concept<BR>
can<BR>
> be explored either way.  All that I want is sophistcated SF/Social Fiction<BR>
> that makes Solomani Society interesting to live in.<BR>
<BR>
Exactly.  My SolCon is a 'dark' place.  But the government wants to be seen<BR>
as kind and benevolent.  Most citizens know nothing else, so have no<BR>
framework for comparison. And they have been 'taight' to fear places like<BR>
the 3I with their wierd concepts and ideas. SolCon citizens are living in<BR>
the pinnacle of the human state, every one else is jealous, and seeks to<BR>
destroy or pervert what they have.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> IMTU, most core SolSphere worlds are TL F-G. And these subTL's can be<BR>
found:<BR>
><BR>
> Biomedical: J or L (19 - Advaced Bioengineering or 21 - Rejeuvanation for<BR>
> the obscenely rich<BR>
> Computers/Robotics:H or I (AI computers)<BR>
> Communications: I (Pseudoreality commonplace)<BR>
> Environment: G  (Global terraforming)<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I haven't focused on TL, but agree with you.  For example, biosculpting is<BR>
common in the RIM IMTU.  Naturally, this helps the travelling Solomani's<BR>
sense of superiority.  "My goodness, but these Imperials are all ugly".<BR>
<BR>
> > guise of "temporary wartime security".<BR>
><BR>
> Hmm, interesting.<BR>
<BR>
The 'fortress' mentality really helps oppressive regimes.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:34:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
<Leonard><BR>
Actually, it's sort of pinkish. And no, I'm *not* kidding. I don't know<BR>
if everyone can do this, but I once spotted a soldering iron I'd left<BR>
plugged in the desk in my bedroom. I was in bed and saw this strange<BR>
blob of color.<BR>
</Leonard><BR>
<BR>
This is very interesting.  Any odd dietary habits around that time?  I ask<BR>
because of a story I heard about the military trying to give sailors<BR>
infravision during one of the world wars.  Basically they kept them off<BR>
normal vitamin-A and gave them lots of a rare variant form.  This causes<BR>
their rod photopigments to be chemically different and IR sensitive.  ISTR<BR>
that they had some limited success before the project was terminated (end<BR>
of the war, I believe).<BR>
<BR>
<Leonard><BR>
And I've red that according to many "color blind" people (100% color<BR>
blind, as I recall), they say they *can* recognize colors, but while<BR>
it's a visible distiniction, it's not an "important" one.<BR>
</Leonard><BR>
<BR>
This is very odd.  It reminds me of the way people describe some pain-drug<BR>
effects: They still feel the pain, but it just isn't "compelling", they<BR>
feel no need to do anything about it, it's just another sensation.  <BR>
<BR>
It must be that way, because I can't believe they could have 'grayscale'<BR>
vision. They would have to have radically rewired visual systems for this<BR>
to occur.  There _are_ some individuals with low wavelenght cones only. <BR>
They have no color vision to speak of (some residual due to rod/cone<BR>
interactions) but they also had terrible acuity and many other problems. <BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:44:33 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 radiator draft numbers<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
> On 07/31/00 at 10:37 PM,  "Katharine Whitchurch"<BR>
> <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said: <BR>
> <BR>
> >OK, lets stay with that number. TL12 radiators deal with 1 MW/square<BR>
> >meter.<BR>
> <BR>
> For gaming purposes, I think we should be a tad more generous than<BR>
> that.<BR>
Hm..on locating the proper black-body formula (F = sT^4, where s is 5.67 x 10^-8 W m^-2 K^-4), 1 MW/M^2 = 2050K.<BR>
<BR>
In addition, for entropy reasons, the actual heat eliminated from the system should be multiplied by (operating temperature)/(radiator temperature); the rest of the heat is for the power requirement of the heat pump.  If we assume an operating temperature of 500K, and we still want to eliminate 1 MW/m^2, it works out that we need an operating temperature of 3300K (comparable to the temperature at which graphite vaporizes), and that our radiator has a power consumption of 5.6 MW.<BR>
<BR>
This means that 1 MW/m^2 is incredibly optimistic.  I'd go with:<BR>
TL 8 radiator: 0.01 MW/m^2.  Draws 0.004 MW/m^2, operating temperature 700K<BR>
TL 9 radiator: 0.03 MW/m^2.  Draws 0.03 MW/m^2, operating temperature 1000K<BR>
TL 10 radiator: 0.1 MW/m^2.  Draws 0.2 MW/m^2, operating temperature 1500K<BR>
TL 12 radiator: 0.3 MW/m^2.  Draws 1 MW/m^2, operating temperature 2200K<BR>
TL 14 radiator: 1.0 MW/m^2.  Draws 6 MW/m^2, operating temperature 3300K<BR>
<BR>
> >Also, we need to think about armoured radiators. How much of an<BR>
> >efficiency loss should you take from building radiators out of<BR>
> >laser-resistant materials like crystaliron ? Maybe a one TL penalty ?<BR>
<BR>
Take a look at those operating temperatures.  I assure you, anything capable of operating at 3300K is laser-resistant (in fact, TL 14 radiators are probably made of bonded SD or something similar).<BR>
<BR>
Note that if we want to make ships viable at all, we're going to need to massively correct power consumption figures in FFS3 (the basic effect is 'if it isn't a drive, an active sensor, or a weapon, its power consumption should be assumed to be zero).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:55:13 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Me, I'm a follower of the 'hyperspace hates neutrons' theory - you need to<BR>
> keep a buffer of LHyd between you and it, and thats why all that LHyd is<BR>
> used.<BR>
<BR>
Well, given that its fed in initially, its unclear how much of it is as 'buffer' and how much of it is just a requirement for initially inflating the J-space bubble.  I'm something of a fan of 'you need to feed 10% of your displacement into J-space to inflate the bubble.  However, to reach higher levels of J-space you need to create a temporary cavity in a lower level of J-space that you can pass through, also requiring 10% of displacement'.  This accounts for misjumps (you reach a higher level of J-space without passing through the lower ones, thus being able to go 36 parsecs on a J-1 drive) and drop tanks.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:10:17 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> From my POV, a great deal of the motivation for SF RPGs is to basically<BR>
> allow the players to experience the worlds which they read about in SF books<BR>
> or see in SF movies. Let's be honest, this is why many things in Traveller<BR>
> are (or are not) there. Can anyone really justify psionics? Jump drives? The<BR>
> ultimate reason that heat radiation is not really an issue in Traveller is<BR>
> that it's not an issue in most SF books or movies, since that's what we are<BR>
> recreating!<BR>
<BR>
The lack is merely because most authors aren't aware of the problem.<BR>
Once we actually get folks in space on a long term basis, that'll<BR>
change.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, as I understand it, the BattleTech stuff has heat buildup in mecha<BR>
as a major point...<BR>
<BR>
In any case, *some* of us are trying to create a universe that's as<BR>
much like a real one with things like jump & psi in it would be as we<BR>
can manage. <BR>
<BR>
> I don't worry about details like the physics of heat on ships, because it's<BR>
> the first step down a road where you don't really want to go down, since you<BR>
> will *always* arrive at inconsistencies (psionics, jump drives, etc), no<BR>
> matter how hard you try.<BR>
<BR>
The point is to avoid having inconsistencies that you didn't *choose*<BR>
to have. Jump drive and psionics were known to be "impossible" but<BR>
added because of story possibilities. <BR>
<BR>
Heat management problems are a case of some folks getting carried away<BR>
with power requirements for a lot of equipment, and not realizing that<BR>
heat was even an *issue* until it was pointed out.<BR>
<BR>
Another good reason for sticking with real science and engineering<BR>
except when you *deliberately* chose to go against them is that it<BR>
makes it easier to get help if something "technical" ever becomes<BR>
significant. It also makes things easier for GM *and* player if either<BR>
of them knows real science or engineering because they aren't<BR>
constantly being reminded that they have to use different rules for the<BR>
game than for the real world. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 01:37:47 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 19:45 -0400 30/7/00,  "Nick Bradbeer" <BR>
<nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
>I can't find the table of size limits in HG2 (I really ought to know my way<BR>
>around the book better - could somebody post a page number?) but surely the<BR>
>size limit for TL-12 still allows pretty big ships? At the moment fighters<BR>
>aren't a lot of good against anything past about a thousand tons.<BR>
<BR>
It's the computer table on p26. Max hull size is governed by computer <BR>
rating. Computer rating is governed by TL. Ergo hull size is governed <BR>
by TL.<BR>
<BR>
>Not that I'm saying this is Bad And Wrong; fighters may very well suck<BR>
>against capital ships. It's just that they're trumpeted as the best thing<BR>
>since contragravity, and they don't really seem to live up to that.<BR>
<BR>
They are excellent as pickets, targets covering capital ships and <BR>
killing escorts. They are also useful as missile defense, <BR>
particulerly if you use JTAS' expansions.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 01:41:47 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Should I Get MT?<BR>
<BR>
At 19:45 -0400 30/7/00, Arthur Boff <ajboff@yahoo.com> wrote:<BR>
>Serious point: I wonder if the CT Reprints will<BR>
>actually outsell any of the other incarnations of<BR>
>Traveller?<BR>
<BR>
I doubt it'll outsell itself; CT has around 250,000 copies in its <BR>
various incarnations. A good run for an RPG printing would be 10k <BR>
copies these days, as a guess...<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:38:26 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: FFS3: sensor ranges<BR>
<BR>
Current FFS sensors assume that the cost and volume of the sensor are linear in area, presumably as some sort of phased array.  However, while this formula is true for the actual sensors in a phased array, I am reasonably certain that the processing required to treat all the smaller sensors as a single larger sensor is non-linear in size (it's at least n log n in the number of sensors, but I suspect integrating signals is harder if the sensors are further apart).<BR>
<BR>
Given this, it's probably reasonable to boost sensor mass and cost somewhat; we can certainly handwave upping the mass and cost to 3rd order in diameter, rather than 2nd order.  Given the current rules, I would probably multiply cost and weight by 1/5 the diameter (this should significantly cut down on the huge system-defense sensors).<BR>
<BR>
On a separate point, there is a significant difference between modern telescopes and the PEMS on a starship -- a telescope has a very narrow field of view, while starship sensors necessarily have extremely broad fields of view (to reliably pick up on transient phenomena, they actually need to cover the full sky).  It's probably reasonable to adjust sensitivity by about 0.5 between science sensors and sensors that can cover the whole sky in a turn, and another 0.5 or even 1 for sensors that can cover the whole sky continually.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:55:08<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
<BR>
At 09:55 AM 7/31/2000 -0400, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>This seems to jibe with what I've heard on this group about the<BR>
>effects of unprotected exposure to vacuum, and makes me like Farscape <BR>
>even more - I think the last time I remember anyone surviving <BR>
>explosive decompression without being wrecked was in _2001: A Space <BR>
>Odyssey_.<BR>
<BR>
John-boy was exposed for about 45 seconds.  From what I could see, they got<BR>
the physilogical effects of short-term exposure perfectly.<BR>
<BR>
My favorite bit was that he clearly exhaled before opening the airlock.<BR>
Going into the Big Empty with full lungs is *bad*<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:57:13<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
<BR>
At 10:32 AM 7/31/2000 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Not only that, but he seemed to be under the control of that voice in his<BR>
>head.  This is actually the first episode I'd ever seen, so maybe someone<BR>
>could explain that to me.<BR>
<BR>
Yikes! Starting with _Look At The Princess, Pt. 2_ is not a good way to get<BR>
into the Farscape universe...<BR>
<BR>
The identity of that voice is the subject of some debate.  Many think it's<BR>
Scorpious, who has, in the past, had the oppotunity to play with John's<BR>
mind.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:05:01<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
At 02:32 PM 7/31/2000 GMT, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Are Solomani allowed to be left handed, or is that another sign of<BR>
>genetic contamination?<BR>
<BR>
since about 10% of all us current Solomani are in our right minds, I don't<BR>
see why it would matter in the future.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
"Some days, you just can't get rid  of a bomb!"<BR>
                    -Adam West, as Batman <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:43:05 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 01:37 AM,  SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>At 19:45 -0400 30/7/00,  "Nick Bradbeer" <BR>
><nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
>>I can't find the table of size limits in HG2 (I really ought to know my way<BR>
>>around the book better - could somebody post a page number?) but surely the<BR>
>>size limit for TL-12 still allows pretty big ships? At the moment fighters<BR>
>>aren't a lot of good against anything past about a thousand tons.<BR>
<BR>
>It's the computer table on p26. Max hull size is governed by computer <BR>
>rating. Computer rating is governed by TL. Ergo hull size is governed  by<BR>
>TL.<BR>
<BR>
If that wasn't so well hidden, I'd have noticed it *long* ago.  <g><BR>
<BR>
At TL12, the limit for computers is 6, the largest ship a 6 can<BR>
operate is an R, and an R is 100,000 dtons, therefore the largest<BR>
ship you can build at TL12 is 100,000 dtons.  And yeah, IMO, that's<BR>
a pretty big ship.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:21:22 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
> Don't radiators mostly work by conduction and convection within an<BR>
> atmosphere? Sure, I guess there would be plenty of radiation from a big<BR>
> enough array, but wouldn't the efficiency of a radiator be severly<BR>
limited<BR>
> in a vaccuum, with only an average 4 Hydrogen atoms per square meter?<BR>
> Physicists, please comment.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, radiators radiate a surprising amount of their output. (Although<BR>
yes, they do conduct a lot of it to the surrounding air, which convects<BR>
away). As the pressure of the air decreases, so does the fraction of heat<BR>
which is lost through conduction and convection, until a state of pure<BR>
radiation is reached in vacuum.<BR>
<BR>
So we're looking at a pure radiation issue here - the limit to the rate of<BR>
heat loss is the temperature of the radiator surface.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
(Not a physicist, but wishes he was.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:51:11 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Victor Abraham Delnore <vad9m@unix.mail.virginia.edu><BR>
Subject: Starship insurance?<BR>
<BR>
I'm pretty sure nobody on this list has ever owned a starship in real<BR>
life, but many of us have experience with ownership of low-tech analogues<BR>
such as boats, aircraft, and cars.  One of the main expenses we experience<BR>
is insurance.  Insurance not only adds cost to ownership and operation,<BR>
but also influences the types and methods of operation undertaken.  And<BR>
insurance isn't always optional:  besides being a good idea, certain types<BR>
of insurance are obligatory.<BR>
<BR>
What about insurance in a Traveller setting, particularly as applied to<BR>
the types of starships PCs are likely to own and the types of things they <BR>
are likely to do with them?  Has anthing ever been published on this<BR>
topic?  My knowledge of the canon and other materials is far from<BR>
complete.  I've got a few ideas of my own but want to see if anything on<BR>
this topic is out there already.<BR>
<BR>
- --Abe Delnore, under-25 driver<BR>
<BR>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------- <BR>
| V. A. Delnore          	      vad9m@virginia.edu            |<BR>
| Graduate Student       	      (804) 971-8806                |<BR>
| Corcoran Department of History      1821 Jefferson Park Ave #4    |<BR>
| University of Virginia              Charlottesville VA 22903      |<BR>
| Mica mica parva stella miror quaenam sis tam bella  (Anon. lyric) |<BR>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:57:44 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
> It's the computer table on p26. Max hull size is governed by computer<BR>
> rating. Computer rating is governed by TL. Ergo hull size is governed<BR>
> by TL.<BR>
<BR>
Cheers - got it.<BR>
<BR>
But my point still holds - a TL-12 ship with a model 6 or 6fib computer can<BR>
be size code R - 100,000 tons. And you can build up to 50,000 at TL-11.<BR>
Fighters still aren't a lot of good against these ships.<BR>
<BR>
I take your point below about fighters having roles other than the ship<BR>
killer. That's probably the important one.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 11:54:39 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: "Neal C. Oldham" <nco@its.caltech.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Starship insurance?<BR>
<BR>
> What about insurance in a Traveller setting, particularly as applied<BR>
> to the types of starships PCs are likely to own and the types of<BR>
> things they are likely to do with them?  Has anthing ever been<BR>
> published on this topic?  My knowledge of the canon and other<BR>
> materials is far from complete.  I've got a few ideas of my own but<BR>
> want to see if anything on this topic is out there already.<BR>
<BR>
There is definitely some mention of it in canon; in Survival Margin,<BR>
several dispatches mention Zirunkariish (sp?) and Hortalez et Cie as major<BR>
starship insurers (similar to Lloyd's of London, I would assume) and<BR>
summarize their annual reports on Rebellion-related claims.  However, I<BR>
did get the impression that they primarily insure the ships of shipping<BR>
lines and megacorporations, not free traders.  The original starship<BR>
economics rules don't really discuss insurance.  You might want to try<BR>
GT: Far Trader, which might have something (I'm still reading the main GT<BR>
book).  :)<BR>
<BR>
- ---<BR>
Neal C. Oldham<BR>
nco@caltech.edu<BR>
<BR>
ad astra!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:00:58 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: sensor ranges<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson writes:<BR>
> <BR>
> Given this, it's probably reasonable to boost sensor mass and cost<BR>
> somewhat; we can certainly handwave upping the mass and cost to 3rd order <BR>
> in diameter, rather than 2nd order.  Given the current rules, I would<BR>
> probably multiply cost and weight by 1/5 the diameter (this should<BR>
> significantly cut down on the huge system-defense sensors). <BR>
<BR>
Having found the PEMS formula in one of Bruce Macintosh's posts, I can make this more concrete (stats are for TL 12 sensors):<BR>
Area = Base * 10^(rating*2-26); base varies by TL.<BR>
Volume = Base * 10^(rating*3-39); base is as above.<BR>
Price is per m^3, rather than per m^2.  Weight is 1 ton/m^3.<BR>
Modifiers: a continuous 360 coverage sensor (rather than a sensor which gradually scans the sky over a turn) is treated as a standard sensor with a sensitivity 0.5 higher.  A standard sensor is assumed to include a scanning sensor which has a sensitivity 1.0 lower; you should use this second sensitivity to detect any events which last less than a turn.<BR>
<BR>
This means that a PEMS-15 at TL 15 changes from 5,000 tons to 500,000 tons,<BR>
and is a hundred times more expensive.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:00:48 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Arthur Boff <ajboff@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Should I Get MT?<BR>
<BR>
VonRammen said:<BR>
<BR>
<<Okay, my fundamental position is this (and please<BR>
read my further <BR>
comments<BR>
in light of this): MT is my favorite version of<BR>
Traveller. You should<BR>
definitely aquire it, and use it to run your games<BR>
:)>><BR>
<BR>
That's two ticks under the "buy" column...<BR>
<BR>
<<MT collects much of the *background* info of CT into<BR>
several books. >><BR>
<BR>
Hmmm. The Supplements Reprint contains both Library<BR>
Data volumes and GT contains much of the same Library<BR>
Data too. I assume, therefore, that MT contains this.<BR>
What else does it include? Info on aliens? (I'd love<BR>
to have all the procedures for making humans, aliens,<BR>
and animals in one lovely tome...)<BR>
<BR>
<<However, the rules are in many cases substantially<BR>
revised. Sometimes this is just to conform to the task<BR>
system, sometimes this changes rules in important <BR>
ways from CT.>><BR>
<BR>
Such is the way of new editions. What you say below of<BR>
the MT changes seems to indicate that MT smooths out<BR>
the rough edges I've noticed in CT.<BR>
<BR>
<<The Task System. PLST has already praised this, so I<BR>
just want to point out some things that make it better<BR>
than almost any other task system I know of. First, it<BR>
is simple, with an elegant system to handle mishaps.<BR>
Secondly, the +/- 8 cap to die modifiers means that<BR>
moving the difficulty level can radically effect your<BR>
chances of success, i.e. even some one who can only<BR>
fumble a Difficult task still only succeeds at a<BR>
Formidible task on 7+.>><BR>
<BR>
Looking up the BITS task system, would I be right in<BR>
thinking that the task system allows one to decide<BR>
what roll the players have to make in any situation?<BR>
If so, then that's excellent, because that's what in<BR>
my opinion CT sorely needed.<BR>
<BR>
<<Character Generation: Under the two CT systems, you<BR>
often had the problem of using the basic system, and<BR>
getting characters with a very few skills, or using<BR>
Merc, High Guard etc. and generating walking<BR>
encyclopedias who had too many skills. The basic MT<BR>
system gives more skills, and uses more cascades to<BR>
give (IMHO) characters that balance these two<BR>
extremes.>><BR>
<BR>
What did annoy me about Merc/High<BR>
Guard/Scouts/Merchant Prince was that the CharGen<BR>
system presented was blatantly unfair. You couldn't<BR>
realisticly integrate Mercenary etc CharGen into a<BR>
campaign that had started off using the basic CharGen.<BR>
I can't think why they didn't make the new CharGen<BR>
system 100% compatible with the old one (that includes<BR>
making PCs of similar ability) since CharGen is such a<BR>
fundamental part of every RPG.<BR>
<BR>
<<The Ship and Vehicle generation system isn't too<BR>
hard to work with, and does indeed work from groundcar<BR>
to 1,000,000 dton battlewagon. Unfortunately, the<BR>
results are not at all compatible with many of the<BR>
assumptions of either version of FFS.>><BR>
<BR>
No problem, I've never had the slightest inclination<BR>
to even touch either version. The first edition,<BR>
because it was designed for TNE and I'd have an awful<BR>
headache trying to convert it to the CT-MT hybrid my<BR>
campaign may well become. The second edition, because<BR>
it's an IG product and I am wary of buying such<BR>
things. One flip through First Survey scared the hell<BR>
out of me...<BR>
<BR>
<<Downsides: I don't like the combat system as<BR>
written. Interrupts are arcane, I don't like not<BR>
rolling for damage right away, I don't like "half <BR>
damage" penetration results. I DO like the idea of<BR>
splitting penetration and damage, which avoids a lot<BR>
of the artificiality of the T4 blowthrough rule. I <BR>
have my own "thought-experiment" rules for fixing MT<BR>
damage that I can explain if you're interested.>><BR>
<BR>
If and when I get the game I'll take a look at the<BR>
combat rules and may get back to you, but at the<BR>
moment I'm happy with CT combat for the simple reason<BR>
that it lets me run quick, simple combats which aren't<BR>
too slowed down by rules.<BR>
<BR>
<<Space Combat is completely FUBAR. Ships can circle<BR>
in one hex no matter what their speed is (which would<BR>
surprise Sir Isaac Newton, among others); and why go<BR>
through all the trouble of calculating the hit point<BR>
values of each system when the damage results call for<BR>
percentage reductions? I won't comment on the sensor<BR>
rules except to say they're pretty messed up to, I<BR>
suspect.>><BR>
<BR>
I'm probably going to be making a homebrewed space<BR>
combat system anyhow.<BR>
<BR>
<<The Background. The Rebellion looks promising in the<BR>
main text, but by the time of the Rebellion<BR>
Sourcebook, it was clear to me that it had been rigged<BR>
so that no faction could possibly win. In addition,<BR>
there seemed an effort to mess with the "rules" of<BR>
certain Traveller traditions (Oekhsos comes to<BR>
mind.) Happily, you can play in the GT timeline with<BR>
the MT rules--I would :)>><BR>
<BR>
Hey, that's what I planned to do (unless I come up<BR>
with a really, really good Rebellion plotline). But<BR>
then, since my players' characters are just starting<BR>
out in 1105 at the moment I've got plenty of time to<BR>
decide, and in fact don't need to decide at all until<BR>
1116...<BR>
<BR>
Personally, it rubs me up the wrong way when game<BR>
companies go and change some of the fundamental<BR>
premises of a campaign setting, and as far as I'm<BR>
concerned the friction between the Third Imperium and<BR>
its Zhodani neighbours is a fundamental part of the<BR>
Spinward Marches setting. If the Imperium breaks up<BR>
then the Zhodani will no longer be concerned about its<BR>
expansionist policies (since there's no policies<BR>
_left_) and that little ever-present powder keg will<BR>
be defused.<BR>
<BR>
<<Overall: get MT. Play it as written (except for the<BR>
space combat!) if you like, or create your own<BR>
homebrew rules. But the task system, chargen, and<BR>
compilation of CT rules (not to mention the Imperial<BR>
Encyclopedia's massive collection of gear!) make it a<BR>
worthwhile acquisition.>><BR>
<BR>
Plus it'll give me a nice box to keep a collection of<BR>
BITS supplements in if I don't like it. ;-)<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:24:34 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
- --- Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Terry Mixon writes:<BR>
> > After a long time and several restarts the Spinward Marches <BR>
> > trade map is complete. (Thank Ghu!).<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Please give it a look and tell me what you think.<BR>
> <BR>
> On initial inspection, there are several routes that are<BR>
> unnecessarily long; for example, Rhylanor-Efate is 19 pc; the<BR>
> shortest routes are all 16 pc (possibly less if you use some<BR>
> low-grade ports, I didn't check).  I also suspect that its missing<BR>
> some smaller routes, and I'm not sure about the sizes of some routes.<BR>
<BR>
I can't see how, without going through a starport of less than class <BR>
3, or an Amber or Red zone. The GT trade rules say to avoid low <BR>
class ports and since a port class of three seems to be the minimum <BR>
for sustaining the large throughput in ships, that is the level <BR>
marker I used. I have trade going to but not through Amber or Red <BR>
zones. I figure if there is trade from that world someone will <BR>
have specially trained crews to go there and back. I came up with <BR>
these limits after a lot of email back and forth with Jim MacLean, <BR>
the man that came up with the rules in the first place. Do you agree <BR>
with my interpritation? If not, what do you think is more reasonable?<BR>
I will send you a gif with the port info on the small map of that <BR>
area and tell me the exact path you think it should take instead.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks!<BR>
<BR>
Terry  <BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:27:16 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
- --- Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
> Terry Mixon writes:<BR>
> > After a long time and several restarts the Spinward Marches <BR>
> > trade map is complete. (Thank Ghu!).<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Please give it a look and tell me what you think.<BR>
> <BR>
> On initial inspection, there are several routes that are<BR>
> unnecessarily long; for example, Rhylanor-Efate is 19 pc; the<BR>
> shortest routes are all 16 pc (possibly less if you use some<BR>
> low-grade ports, I didn't check).  I also suspect that its missing<BR>
> some smaller routes, and I'm not sure about the sizes of some routes.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:31:26 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
- --- Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
Sorry about the double send. I forgot to answer part of this.<BR>
<BR>
> > After a long time and several restarts the Spinward Marches <BR>
> > trade map is complete. (Thank Ghu!).<BR>
> > <BR>
> > Please give it a look and tell me what you think.<BR>
> <BR>
> On initial inspection, there are several routes that are<BR>
> unnecessarily long; for example, Rhylanor-Efate is 19 pc; the<BR>
> shortest routes are all 16 pc (possibly less if you use some<BR>
> low-grade ports, I didn't check).  I also suspect that its missing<BR>
> some smaller routes, and I'm not sure about the sizes of some routes.<BR>
<BR>
I feel pretty sure I got all the smaller routes that exist. If you <BR>
have any specifics, I will be happy to look at them. As for the sizes, <BR>
I used a spreadsheet to tell me which ones were even possible and <BR>
then looked at them on a one to one basis, counting them out. When<BR>
three of a particular size when through, I upgraded them to the <BR>
next size. I certainly could have made some errors but I need to know <BR>
specifics to look at. Any concerns you raise, I will be happy to <BR>
examine.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for the input.<BR>
<BR>
Terry <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2850<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg05.mx.aol.com (rly-yg05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.5]) by air-yg02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:33:53 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:33:19 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id PAA43744;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:33:03 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:31:29 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id PAA43657<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:31:29 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:31:29 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007311931.PAA43657@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2850<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2851</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 1:55:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2851<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: funky radiator ideas (was re:Ship Size Limits)<BR>
Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
RE: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re:Sensors<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Ship Insurance<BR>
Re : Fusion Power and Nuclear Dampers (was : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:34:05 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: funky radiator ideas (was re:Ship Size Limits)<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
> A possibly less challenging variant of this would be a 'radiator tail'.<BR>
> <BR>
> We have an armoured ball, that contains the important stuff. We have a<BR>
> looong radiating tail off the back, or a series of heat-conducting<BR>
> filaments, or something.<BR>
> <BR>
> The idea is to provide more surface area that doesnt need to be armoured.<BR>
<BR>
Use thin 'wings' spread between much heavier spines.  Result will be similar to age of sail ships -- you can shoot the sails, but not much happens unless you actually hit the rigging.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:44:53 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> BTW, as I understand it, the BattleTech stuff has heat buildup in mecha<BR>
> as a major point...<BR>
<BR>
And more relevant to the starship designer, BattleSpace inherits those<BR>
rules.  WarShips designed with BattleSpace have hundreds or thousands of<BR>
tons of "heat sinks," the exact design of which has never been explained<BR>
to my knowledge.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 12:55:34 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
<BR>
> I'd like some more work on area requirements for thruster plates. At the<BR>
> moment, they need 0.1 m2 area per meganewton. Increasing this (thruster<BR>
> *plates*) will make ships run out of surface area faster, and result in<BR>
> more maneuver hits in combat.<BR>
<BR>
Just decide on a reasonable number.  Or simply limit T-plate area to 20% of total hull area (actually, this is a good general limit for _any_ component).<BR>
At 0.1 per meganewton, with the 20% limit noted above, a 100,000 ton spherical hull (area 60,000) would be limited to 1,200,000 tons of thrust, which is <BR>
unlikely to exceed 2 Gs, and will be 1.2 Gs with the standard '10 tons per dT'<BR>
rule.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:44:38 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
<BR>
At 8:07 -0400 31/7/00, Matt Bond <MBOND@karpad.demon.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
>If you want 5FW flashbacks for a native Moran, then I suppose your<BR>
>former SDB commander may have been called up to replace losses elsewhere<BR>
>than Mora, or volunteered for active duty in the War Zone, before being<BR>
>traumatised.<BR>
<BR>
If Mora used standard TL15 battleriders as heavy SDBs then it is <BR>
entirely possible that they could have been called up as replacements <BR>
for Imperial losses as BattleTender's withdrew at the start of the <BR>
5FW.<BR>
<BR>
So Moran ships/SDBs could have seen front line action at Rhylanor <BR>
etc, especially if Mora was the focus of resupply routes coming from <BR>
Corridor/Deneb etc.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:35:15 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 23:01 -0400 30/7/00,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote:<BR>
> > I'd argue for small ships like missile boats and Weber's LACs rather<BR>
> > than light fighters for normal operations, as the modern day naval<BR>
> > surface combatant analogy isn't good for Traveller starships.<BR>
<BR>
>True, but there *are* roles for them.<BR>
<BR>
I'm not arguing about the validity of fighters like the Rampart <BR>
against appropriate targets (merchants, pirates, light escorts, <BR>
missile fire) - rather that their role is not appropriate for ship <BR>
killers like current strike aircraft.<BR>
<BR>
Looking at missile boats and the LACs; we tried the missile boat <BR>
option on CT-Starships and the devastating (and canon) effect of them <BR>
was best modeled by allowing a single limited bay in a sub-1000dT <BR>
ship. Unfortunately, this undermines canon designs, so we ended up <BR>
rejecting it as an option.<BR>
<BR>
Weber's LACs pack the punch by using grazers - dreadnought class <BR>
weapons - agile eggshells with hammers effectively.<BR>
<BR>
Under HG2, a 3 beam laser (USP4) equipped fighter at TL13+ will <BR>
critical automatically against any sub 400dt (USP3) ship which really <BR>
demonstrates their effectiveness. Firing against a 200dT Beowulf it's <BR>
lights out time! And this also explains why the small fusion plant <BR>
technology for M0 made fighters so deadly against the pirate issues.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:04:04 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
Terry Mixon writes:<BR>
<BR>
> I can't see how, without going through a starport of less than class <BR>
> 3, or an Amber or Red zone.<BR>
It's legit to route through amber zones.  Route is:<BR>
Porozlo (1)<BR>
Fulacin (2)<BR>
Kinorb (2)<BR>
Keanou (1) (or, go directly from Fulacin, at J3)<BR>
Yori (3)<BR>
Roup (3) (amber zone, but given its on Xboat routes, it's a trade route anyway)<BR>
Alell (3)<BR>
Efate (1)<BR>
<BR>
> marker I used. I have trade going to but not through Amber or Red <BR>
> zones. I figure if there is trade from that world someone will <BR>
> have specially trained crews to go there and back. I came up with <BR>
> these limits after a lot of email back and forth with Jim MacLean, <BR>
> the man that came up with the rules in the first place. Do you agree <BR>
> with my interpritation?<BR>
<BR>
I asked him his opinion on amber zones, he basically said 'call them a tiebreaker' -- i.e. if there's an equal path, don't route through it, but otherwise ignore amber zones.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:13:24 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
<BR>
Okay, now for something different...a GURPS gearhead question. <g><BR>
<BR>
1. What is the volume of a GURPS laser?<BR>
<BR>
In mamy cases, I notice, volume is calculated as Weight / 50.  Is<BR>
this correct in this case?<BR>
<BR>
2.  With ROF's lower than 1/2 does the modifier stay at 0.666, and<BR>
if not how is it figured?<BR>
<BR>
Taking a 90 Mj output for an extreme range, non-compact, X-ray laser<BR>
(which I figure is what we'd use in Traveller) we get the Empty<BR>
weight (Ewt.) with the formula...<BR>
   <BR>
   Ewt = (90000/72) * 1 * 1 * 0.666 * 4 = 3330 lb<BR>
   <BR>
   Volume = 3330/50 = 66.6 = 67 cf<BR>
   <BR>
So, if that's correct the 90 Mj X-Ray laser masses 1.5 tonnes and<BR>
occupies 1.88 cubic meters, and making it compact would cut the<BR>
mass and volume in half.<BR>
<BR>
Does that look correct?<BR>
<BR>
I'm assuming the ship provides power and the laser will fire once<BR>
per minute (ROF 1/60).  So, I have to provide an energy bank to hold<BR>
one shot...or ~240 Mw in this case.<BR>
<BR>
    Power Required = 90000 * 2.666 * 1/60 = 3999 kw.<BR>
    <BR>
    Input Energy = 3,999 / (1/60) =  239,940 kw (we'll say 240 Mw)<BR>
    <BR>
    Weight of Energy Bank = 240,000 * 0.000056 = 13.44 lb<BR>
    <BR>
    Volume of Energy Bank = 13.44 / 100 = 0.134 cf = 0.004 m^3<BR>
    <BR>
So, combining the laser and it's energy bank we get<BR>
<BR>
  Volume = 1.88 + 0.004 = 1.884 m^3<BR>
  <BR>
3.  What else is required for a laser you'd install in a turret?<BR>
<BR>
You wouldn't need a gunnery station, beam pointer, or fire control<BR>
for each laser, just for the entire turret, and all of that can<BR>
easily a half space (half dton).<BR>
  <BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:23:56 -0500<BR>
From: "R. Michael Stephens" <Robert.M.Stephens@vanderbilt.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
> And I've red that according to many "color blind" people (100% color<BR>
> blind, as I recall), they say they *can* recognize colors, but while<BR>
> it's a visible distiniction, it's not an "important" one. <BR>
> <BR>
> The way I understood the attempts to explain it, it's that to their<BR>
> visual system, it's not a property that "matters". So they have to<BR>
> *conciously* look for the difference, rather than having the various<BR>
> processing layers in the system point it out. <BR>
> <BR>
> - -- <BR>
> Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
>  shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
> leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
> <BR>
> ------------------------------<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
My son (17) is a living example of this.  We found out that he is<BR>
totally Red-Green color blind<BR>
(at least as far as the tests are concered) when he went for his<BR>
learners permit.  Yet hr can distinguish AND categorize subtle shading<BR>
differences in reds and greens, even when mixed -- if they aren't mixed<BR>
like the color blindness tests.  With extreme effort he can make out the<BR>
distictions when the are mixed -- but it's more a learned thing.  The<BR>
lower the light level the more easily<BR>
he is conufsed, as might be expected.  It's really odd.  And of course<BR>
theres no real way to discuss what he sees because green is green to<BR>
him!  It's what he has learned.<BR>
<BR>
Mike<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
R. Michael Stephens            Systems Software Specialist   <BR>
VUspace Project              Technical Infrastructure Team<BR>
Academic Computing & Info. Systems,  Vanderbilt University<BR>
Nashville TN. USA R.M.Stephens@Vanderbilt.Edu 615.343.8780<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 21:22:30 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 15:31 -0400 31/7/00, "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
>But my point still holds - a TL-12 ship with a model 6 or 6fib computer can<BR>
>be size code R - 100,000 tons. And you can build up to 50,000 at TL-11.<BR>
>Fighters still aren't a lot of good against these ships.<BR>
<BR>
But look at it the other way - a milspec rating 6 computer (ie a <BR>
fibre optic one) is 83MCr, 14dT and needs 5 EP (1250Mw) - so I'd <BR>
expect a ship with it to trash a Rampart...<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:29:58 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 10:11:34 -0700<BR>
>From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
> IMTU, the Solomani view execution as a<BR>
>primitive and brutal act that only goes on in barbarous places like the 3I,<BR>
>not highly evolved states like SolCon.<BR>
><BR>
Fair enough, and it does fit with the general Solomani ethos you've<BR>
developed.  My view of the SolCon would have more of a bias towards<BR>
execution than reprogramming, however, for several reasons.<BR>
<BR>
Firstly, Solomani are racists.  Their fundamental belief structure<BR>
says that certain people are better than others, at the genetic level,<BR>
and no amount of (re-)education can change that.  If SolSec was to<BR>
claim it can turn recidivists and dissidents into productive citizens,<BR>
people might start to question why they can't turn *Vilani* into<BR>
productive citizens...<BR>
<BR>
Secondly, Solomani see themselves as a decisive, warlike race.<BR>
Warriors don't re-educate their foes - they kill them.  The Terran<BR>
Confederation didn't sit down and talk to the Ziru Sirka - it crushed<BR>
it in war.  Nowadays, the SolCon is effectively in a permanent state<BR>
of war with the Imperium - and under military law there can only be<BR>
one penalty for treachery in the face of the enemy.  (There is<BR>
precedent for the deliberate attempt to apply military values to<BR>
civilian social interaction - the Nazis' _Fuehrerprinzip_, for<BR>
example.)<BR>
<BR>
Thirdly, if SolCon propaganda emphasises the "we are surrounded by<BR>
hordes of enemies" line, then they'll want to encourage paranoia and<BR>
hatred of the outsider in their citizens.   Rather than "curing"<BR>
dissidents, I'd think the preferred approach would be more on the<BR>
lines of Stalinist show trials.  Put the dissidents on the holo, where<BR>
they can tearfully confess to undermining the morale of their fellow<BR>
workers on No 3 Fusion Plant, before subjecting them to a brutal - and<BR>
televised - execution.  The viewers get a warm glow that their<BR>
government is protecting them from such dangerous saboteurs and agents<BR>
of the Imperium.  Official policy is that these public executions act<BR>
as a deterrent;  their more subtle effect is to make the general<BR>
public complicit in the regime's cruelty.  Of course, anyone who knew<BR>
the (ex-) dissident would also be pulled in for interrogation.  *This*<BR>
is where I see scope for the "we just want to cure you" approach;  not<BR>
the actual opponents of the regime, but their "innocent" "victims".<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:35:30 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
<BR>
At 8:32 AM -0800 7/31/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
[Regarding storing heat and then dumping it, it is also an<BR>
approach that I haven't gotten into....]<BR>
<BR>
>Basicly, it's *totally* impractical. You can only dump s much heat into<BR>
>the mass, and once you've done that and dumped it, it's gone.<BR>
><BR>
>At the power levels required for most ships, you'd be lucky to carry a<BR>
>few turns worth of that sort of coolant.<BR>
<BR>
[snip]<BR>
<BR>
>As I recall, it takes one kilogram calorie to raise the temp of a kilo<BR>
>of (liquid) water by one K. It takes hundreds to convert a kilo of ice<BR>
>to a kilo of water (both at 0 C). It takes hundreds more to convert a<BR>
>kilo of water to a kilo of steam. So to go from 0 K to 273 K (0 C)<BR>
>takes some number of kcal. Say it takes 300. Say it takes another 300<BR>
>to melt the ice. Then 100 to get from 273 K to 373 K (100 C). Say it<BR>
>takes another 300 to turn the water to steam. So we are now at 373 K,<BR>
>and have used up 1100 kcal. Lets say it takes another 900 to raise the<BR>
>steam to 1000 K. That's 2000 kcal total. Or 8400 Joules.<BR>
><BR>
>Water has darn near the highest heat capacity known, if not the<BR>
>highest. And using the (overly optimistic) figures figures above, we<BR>
>can get rid of 8.4 kJ per kilo of water (assuming we start with it at<BR>
>absolute zero).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Why do yo have to stop there?  Why can't you use gravitic<BR>
technology to create superheated plasmas?  Heck, you might<BR>
be able to get all the way up just short of neuclear fusion.<BR>
(In fact, if you choose Fe, it won't fuse and you can start<BR>
storing energy in neuclear dissociations).<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:38:27 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin writes:<BR>
>A few disorganized thoughts/responses regarding alien vision:<BR>
>IR or UV vision:<BR>
>Leonard noted the problem with wide-ranging spectral sensitivity.<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>There are a couple of ways around this, though:<BR>
>1. Accept lower acuity for a given range.<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>2. Accept lower acuity for one range at a time.<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>3. Place receptors at different distances from the lens structure.<BR>
<snipped><BR>
<BR>
	Another possibility is having separate sensors for each band.<BR>
	The brain would then put it all together into one rich image.<BR>
<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>Creatures with only gray-scale vision<BR>
>would be relatively easy to fool with cammo, however.<BR>
<BR>
	On the other hand, they may be much more sensitive to subtle<BR>
	differences in shading.  They probably have better night vision<BR>
	as well.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:41:58 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re:Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Not quite as strong as that. AEMS may still well be good for<BR>
> *detecting* targets out to some plausible range. What was less<BR>
> clear was whether they could *localize* targets well enough to<BR>
> allow laser fire; and also what that plausible range is.<BR>
<BR>
Well, radar isn't going to be terribly accurate (it's got a long wavelength and has the same resolution limits as anything else) but it should be able to give you range within a couple of meters and relative velocity forward and backwards, which in combination with a passive sensor allows targeting.<BR>
<BR>
For wide areas, a radar will have dramatically lower power consumption than a lidar of comparable range; however, it can't be focused nearly as narrowly.<BR>
<BR>
The big advantage of radar over lidar is that <BR>
 Since I<BR>
> know a lot less about radar (and what I do know has to do with<BR>
> detecting asteroids and suchlike) than about IR, I couldn't answer<BR>
> what the plausible range was; and I don't know how tricks with<BR>
> moving the sensor to make a synthetic aperture can improve<BR>
> resolution<BR>
<BR>
It can't unless you already know the velocity of what you're taking pictures of, which probably doesn't apply in space combat.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:39:36 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
At 8:44 PM +1000 7/31/00, Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
>  > From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
>  > Subject: RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > My handwave for ignoring any possible heat issues.<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > We know that jump drives consume massive quantities of liquid hydrogen to<BR>
>  > perform jumps. Tons and tons of the stuff. I am, of course, assuming that<BR>
>  > you are burning the stuff in your fusion power plant, or its equivanent in<BR>
>  > your jump drive.<BR>
><BR>
>Nope. Too much energy. If we can do that with a jump drive, then why cant we<BR>
>pour that energy into a spinal mount ?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Just a point, you don't really have to worry about waste heat<BR>
from a beam weapon.  The big beam of energy being sent out is<BR>
going to be enough of a giveaway that it really doesn't matter<BR>
of you dump a bunch of heat just after....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:42:47 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Insurance<BR>
<BR>
This comes up from time to time.  <g> Here are 3 reposts concerning<BR>
Starship insurance from 99, 98 and 97.<BR>
<BR>
On 11/25/99 at 01:41 PM,  "Eris Reddoch" <eris@pcola.gulf.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>ObTrav, and ship insurance.  What you pay is going to depend on<BR>
>several factors, the value of the ship (or ship systems) insured,<BR>
>how and where the ship is used, the deductible and/or co-payments<BR>
>required, and the frequency of payment.<BR>
<BR>
>This is going to be coming up in my game RSN, and here's my<BR>
>thinking on it.  I'd appreciate comments.<BR>
<BR>
>To insure a ship against loss or damage up to 90% of apprised value.<BR>
>    3% of apprised value per year, payable in advance<BR>
>   +1% to cover the remaining 10%<BR>
>   -1% if the ship stays on especially safe routes<BR>
>   +2% if the ship works outside "safe zones"<BR>
>   -1% if the ship receives regular and necessary maintenance, as<BR>
>       defined by the insurer, and proof of same is submitted to the<BR>
>       insurer<BR>
<BR>
>   Insurance does not cover maintenance, upgrades, or repairs<BR>
>   required from normal use.<BR>
<BR>
>   Insurance covers only damage incurred from causes listed in the<BR>
>   contract at time of issuance.<BR>
<BR>
>   And, of course, the GM may modify payments, terms and conditions<BR>
>   as needed based on the requirements of the campaign.<BR>
   <BR>
>So, to cover the exploratory trader /Mae Lee/, valued at 10.8<BR>
>million cr, to 100%, given that she receives regular maintenance,<BR>
>will cost you 540,000 cr each year.  If you drop the coverage to<BR>
>90% and fly only the insurer's designated "safe routes", the fee<BR>
>drops to 108,000 cr.<BR>
<BR>
 -------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
And here are two posts from  Peter H. Brenton  : pbrenton@mit.edu...<BR>
<BR>
>Repair in the event of a Collision ($500 deductable)<BR>
>Liability for Damage to others (up to $50k I think)<BR>
>Liability for Health Expenses for others or passengers (up to $300k<BR>
>I think) Replacement in the event of Fire/Theft (According to book<BR>
>value) My own Health expenses in the case of a collision with an<BR>
>uninsured auto.<BR>
<BR>
>There is more than that, but that's a fair basis, Now lets<BR>
>translate;<BR>
<BR>
>For 4.5Mcr/ Year (375,000Cr/Month);<BR>
>-Repair in the event of docking collision, landing accident or<BR>
>   mid-space collision, or act of vandalism, with 2 Mcr Deductable.<BR>
<BR>
>-Depreciated Value (total Value less 1/40th per year of age of<BR>
>   total value) reimbursed in the event of damage equal to that<BR>
>   value or theft.<BR>
<BR>
>-Liability for damage to facilities, other ships, etc in the case<BR>
>   of damage up to a predetermined total (300 Mcr?) and health<BR>
>   expenses. and, of course, free windshield replacement.<BR>
<BR>
>Insurance (using the same model) will *not* cover;<BR>
>"Acts of Nature" such as asteroid collisions<BR>
>Deliberate damage by the owner<BR>
>Damage due to regular wear and tear or negligence<BR>
>Damage from acts of War<BR>
>Damage from incorrectly installed parts, defective parts, etc.<BR>
<BR>
>There may be a better prototype; Ship (wet) insurance such as that<BR>
>provided by Lloyds, but that insurance (as I understand it) was<BR>
>bought by the owners who stayed behind, not by owners aboard since,<BR>
>in the event the insurance was collected, those aboard were<BR>
>probably dead.<BR>
<BR>
>Always remember that Insurance companies make a profit by betting<BR>
>that you will not need the insurance to pay for repairs.  If a<BR>
>captain has a bad record the premiums will go up.  If the area of<BR>
>operation (required information...outside which the policy will be<BR>
>void) is particularly dangerous, the premiums go up.  Anything<BR>
>which can be legitimately known and which increases risk will cause<BR>
>premiums to increase.<BR>
<BR>
>Insurance is really just a tool for regulating expenses.  In the<BR>
>end you will have paid more over time than the likely benefit<BR>
>received, its just that you will have spread those expenses over a<BR>
>lot of time instead of getting it in one lump.<BR>
<BR>
>Barratry<BR>
<BR>
>Barratry is the practice of a ship's master doing intentional harm<BR>
>to their own ship or cargo.  Rest assured that any attempt to make<BR>
>a claim of theft or damage will be investigated thoroughly, at<BR>
>least until you pay off the inspector.<BR>
<BR>
>Seriously though, there would be a "cooling off" period and a<BR>
>serious investigation conducted before any payoff resulted.  I<BR>
>would expect there to be a standard 'waiting period' for any ship<BR>
>supposedly lost in jumpspace and a hearty reward (1/5th the<BR>
>payoff?) for information leading to proving fraudulent insurance<BR>
>claims.<BR>
<BR>
>I think you can find a few adventure hooks buried in the above.<BR>
>PCs in general might find insurance a bit of a burden for little<BR>
>repayment (until they get in a collision, or have their ship<BR>
>stolen).  On the other hand I would bet that most merchants do have<BR>
>insurance, and it may even be mandatory before landing at some<BR>
>starports, perhaps those outside the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
>Pete<BR>
<BR>
 -------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
And yet another post from Pete...<BR>
>So here's my take on Starship Insurance;<BR>
<BR>
>-------Begin Insurance Clause-------<BR>
>Starburst Mutual Insurance Co. A Division of Ling Standard Product<BR>
>LIC.  <BR>
<BR>
>Coverage:  This policy will reimburse the policy holder for<BR>
>up to the replacement value of the vessel (depreciation at 1% per<BR>
>year, assuming regular maintanence) for damage or loss as a result<BR>
>of collision, acts of piracy, failure of properly maintained<BR>
>equipment, vandalism, acting to aid another craft in danger, theft,<BR>
>accidents where neglect has not been proven, and such other events<BR>
>not specifically excluded below that are not a result of willful<BR>
>negligence on the part of the policy holder.<BR>
<BR>
>Exclusions:  This policy shall not reimburse the policy holder for<BR>
>damage resulting from acts of war, acts of nature, damage resulting<BR>
>from actions which willfully and intentionally put the insured<BR>
>property in danger (except where acting to preserve life or<BR>
>property of higher value or need, in an emergency situation), or<BR>
>damage resulting from neglect of proper safety or maintanence<BR>
>procedures.<BR>
<BR>
>Deductable:  The Policy Holder shall be responsible for the first<BR>
>Cr 5,000 worth of damage resulting from a claim.  This is a per<BR>
>incident deductable.<BR>
<BR>
>Payment:  This policy costs $.0001 per month of the insured value<BR>
>of the property.  Payable at any LSP Payment Center available at<BR>
>most Imperial A and B Class Starports.<BR>
<BR>
>-------End Insurance Clause-------<BR>
<BR>
>Comments?<BR>
<BR>
>Pete<BR>
<BR>
My comment was that was those rates were a bargin (IMTU anyway). <g><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Hope these reposts help.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:08:18 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Fusion Power and Nuclear Dampers (was : Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> I wonder if electrostatic confinement rather than magnetic confinement<BR>
> would work better for these? <BR>
<BR>
The design in the article is fairly 'tight', as the proposed<BR>
efficiencies for the colliding beam reactor as described in the article<BR>
were high :-<BR>
<BR>
> The design of a 100-MW (electric) reactor [13] has been considered on the basis of Q = 4.3 by assuming a<BR>
> converter efficiency of 0.9 for alpha particles, 0.4 for radiation, and 0.7 for accelerators.<BR>
<BR>
The Q value was for p-11B fusion.<BR>
<BR>
This assumes spin polarisation of the fuel and superconducting magnets.<BR>
The rebuttal (reference posted earlier) presumes that the radiative loss<BR>
figure is... overly optimistic.<BR>
<BR>
John Snead wrote :-<BR>
> However, if we don't want folks using <BR>
> NDs to shut down another ship's power plant we have an easy <BR>
> handwave.  At TL 12 and above the increase in fusion pp efficiency <BR>
> seems almost certain to be due to small scale nuclear dampers <BR>
> being used to moderate and control the fusion.<BR>
Absolutely. p-p/CNO cycle fusion needs special conditions to happen in<BR>
anything smaller than a star and generate useful power at the same time.<BR>
<BR>
Dampers are the key. ISTR that a change in the value of the strong force<BR>
by less than 1% accelerates the rate of fusion reactions by millions, if<BR>
not billions of times.<BR>
<BR>
> Also, do we have any reason to believe that NDs work at a range <BR>
> greater than a few kilometers? <BR>
Difficult. You may need to damp things at longer ranges.<BR>
<BR>
I wonder if high-altitude detonations of nukes to scramble the<BR>
ionosphere is a useful planetary invasion tactic at TTLs where dampers<BR>
will be available ; in very nasty conflicts, salting the stratosphere<BR>
with cobalt/strontium/caesium etc. isotopes might be another (bomb<BR>
optional with the latter).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:53:09 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
> At 8:32 AM -0800 7/31/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >As I recall, it takes one kilogram calorie to raise the temp of a kilo<BR>
80 cal/gram, or 80 kcal/kilogram, or 335 kJ/kg<BR>
> >of (liquid) water by one K. It takes hundreds to convert a kilo of ice<BR>
> >to a kilo of water (both at 0 C). It takes hundreds more to convert a<BR>
100 cal/gram for temperature shift, 540 cal/gram to convert to steam, total 2.68 MJ/kg.<BR>
> >kilo of water to a kilo of steam. So to go from 0 K to 273 K (0 C)<BR>
> >takes some number of kcal. Say it takes 300. Say it takes another 300<BR>
> >to melt the ice. Then 100 to get from 273 K to 373 K (100 C). Say it<BR>
> >takes another 300 to turn the water to steam. So we are now at 373 K,<BR>
> >and have used up 1100 kcal. Lets say it takes another 900 to raise the<BR>
> >steam to 1000 K. That's 2000 kcal total. Or 8400 Joules.<BR>
1 kcal = 4184 joules.  You're off by 3 orders of magnitude.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Water has darn near the highest heat capacity known, if not the<BR>
> >highest. And using the (overly optimistic) figures figures above, we<BR>
> >can get rid of 8.4 kJ per kilo of water (assuming we start with it at<BR>
> >absolute zero).<BR>
Simply starting from water ice, we can get 3 MJ/kilogram.<BR>
> <BR>
> Why do yo have to stop there?  Why can't you use gravitic<BR>
> technology to create superheated plasmas?  Heck, you might<BR>
> be able to get all the way up just short of neuclear fusion.<BR>
> (In fact, if you choose Fe, it won't fuse and you can start<BR>
> storing energy in neuclear dissociations).<BR>
<BR>
Heh.  Interesting idea, there's conservation of energy problems with nuclear dampers as it is.  In any case, heat sinks get less and less efficient the hotter they have to run.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:51:27 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
>  > From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
>  > Subject: RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > My handwave for ignoring any possible heat issues.<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > We know that jump drives consume massive quantities of liquid hydrogen to<BR>
>  > perform jumps. Tons and tons of the stuff. I am, of course, assuming that<BR>
>  > you are burning the stuff in your fusion power plant, or its equivanent in<BR>
>  > your jump drive.<BR>
><BR>
>Nope. Too much energy. If we can do that with a jump drive, then why cant we<BR>
>pour that energy into a spinal mount ?<BR>
><BR>
>Me, I'm a follower of the 'hyperspace hates neutrons' theory - you need to<BR>
>keep a buffer of LHyd between you and it, and thats why all that LHyd is<BR>
>used.<BR>
><BR>
>It's not really jump fuel, but I'm sure we can all think of other examples<BR>
>of loose use of language :)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
OOPs, I replied to this after misreading and thinking it was about<BR>
radiating energy.<BR>
<BR>
For jump fuel, you do sort of need to make a modification to way<BR>
it just isn't a really great powerplant.  In<BR>
my mind, the way that solves the problem in the simplest, and most<BR>
consistent, way is to simply link the burning of all the fuel to<BR>
the process of jumping (you decide that the act of jumping grounds<BR>
one side of a Lanthanum grid in absolute zero our opens a singularity<BR>
that you pour energy into, or something else that lets you fuse a<BR>
lot more hydrogen than you could possibly hope to handle without<BR>
jumping).  The reason you can't use it in a weapon is that you<BR>
can't fire weapons while jumping....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2851<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (rly-yb03.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.3]) by air-yb04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:55:06 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:54:11 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA47042;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:53:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:51:51 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA46950<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:51:51 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:51:51 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007312051.QAA46950@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2851<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2852</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 3:30:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2852<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
Re:Sensors<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: Fusion & Nuclear Dampers<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re:Sensors<BR>
Re: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
Re: Thrusters (was Re: Radiators in space)<BR>
Re: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Should I get MT?<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 13:54:12 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
 <BR>
> Just a point, you don't really have to worry about waste heat<BR>
> from a beam weapon.  The big beam of energy being sent out is<BR>
> going to be enough of a giveaway that it really doesn't matter<BR>
> of you dump a bunch of heat just after....<BR>
<BR>
We aren't necessarily concerned with being stealthy...we might just be concerned with frying the crew.  <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:02:12 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
<BR>
> For jump fuel, you do sort of need to make a modification to way<BR>
> it just isn't a really great powerplant.  In<BR>
> my mind, the way that solves the problem in the simplest, and most<BR>
> consistent, way is to simply link the burning of all the fuel to<BR>
> the process of jumping (you decide that the act of jumping grounds<BR>
> one side of a Lanthanum grid in absolute zero our opens a singularity<BR>
> that you pour energy into, or something else that lets you fuse a<BR>
> lot more hydrogen than you could possibly hope to handle without<BR>
> jumping).<BR>
<BR>
The simplest method is to say 'you feed X tons of hydrogen into the drive to jump' and ignore the idea that its fused at all.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:05:17 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
> Okay, now for something different...a GURPS gearhead question. <g><BR>
> <BR>
> 1. What is the volume of a GURPS laser?<BR>
> <BR>
> In mamy cases, I notice, volume is calculated as Weight / 50.  Is<BR>
> this correct in this case?<BR>
1/50 for unconcealed, 1/20 for concealed.<BR>
> <BR>
> 2.  With ROF's lower than 1/2 does the modifier stay at 0.666, and<BR>
> if not how is it figured?<BR>
<BR>
Stays at 0.666<BR>
> <BR>
> Taking a 90 Mj output for an extreme range, non-compact, X-ray laser<BR>
> (which I figure is what we'd use in Traveller) we get the Empty<BR>
> weight (Ewt.) with the formula...<BR>
>    <BR>
>    Ewt = (90000/72) * 1 * 1 * 0.666 * 4 = 3330 lb<BR>
Yep.<BR>
>    <BR>
>    Volume = 3330/50 = 66.6 = 67 cf<BR>
>    <BR>
> So, if that's correct the 90 Mj X-Ray laser masses 1.5 tonnes and<BR>
> occupies 1.88 cubic meters, and making it compact would cut the<BR>
> mass and volume in half.<BR>
<BR>
Yep.<BR>
> <BR>
> Does that look correct?<BR>
> <BR>
> I'm assuming the ship provides power and the laser will fire once<BR>
> per minute (ROF 1/60).  So, I have to provide an energy bank to hold<BR>
> one shot...or ~240 Mw in this case.<BR>
> <BR>
>     Power Required = 90000 * 2.666 * 1/60 = 3999 kw.<BR>
I think the 90 MJ has RoF 1/15.<BR>
>     <BR>
>     Input Energy = 3,999 / (1/60) =  239,940 kw (we'll say 240 Mw)<BR>
More or less the intent, yes.<BR>
>     <BR>
>     Weight of Energy Bank = 240,000 * 0.000056 = 13.44 lb<BR>
Yep.  GURPS energy banks are insane, though eliminating them makes FGMPs impossible.<BR>
>     <BR>
>     Volume of Energy Bank = 13.44 / 100 = 0.134 cf = 0.004 m^3<BR>
>     <BR>
> So, combining the laser and it's energy bank we get<BR>
> <BR>
>   Volume = 1.88 + 0.004 = 1.884 m^3<BR>
>   <BR>
> 3.  What else is required for a laser you'd install in a turret?<BR>
Usually, full stabilization and a universal mount.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:01:20 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re:Sensors<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 01:41 PM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Bruce Macintosh writes:<BR>
<BR>
>> Not quite as strong as that. AEMS may still well be good for<BR>
>> *detecting* targets out to some plausible range. What was less<BR>
>> clear was whether they could *localize* targets well enough to<BR>
>> allow laser fire; and also what that plausible range is.<BR>
<BR>
>Well, radar isn't going to be terribly accurate (it's got a long<BR>
>wavelength and has the same resolution limits as anything else) but it<BR>
>should be able to give you range within a couple of meters and relative<BR>
>velocity forward and backwards, which in combination with a passive<BR>
>sensor allows targeting.<BR>
<BR>
>For wide areas, a radar will have dramatically lower power consumption<BR>
>than a lidar of comparable range; however, it can't be focused nearly as<BR>
>narrowly.<BR>
<BR>
>The big advantage of radar over lidar is that <BR>
<BR>
Anthony, your post got cut off here. The big advantage of radar over lidar is?  Lower power consumption?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 17:05:36 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>And I've red that according to many "color blind" people (100% color<BR>
>blind, as I recall), they say they *can* recognize colors, but while<BR>
>it's a visible distiniction, it's not an "important" one. <BR>
>The way I understood the attempts to explain it, it's that to their<BR>
>visual system, it's not a property that "matters". So they have to<BR>
>*conciously* look for the difference, rather than having the various<BR>
>processing layers in the system point it out. <BR>
<BR>
	There are different kinds of "colour-blindness," but typical<BR>
	red-green colour deficiency involves having the pigment in<BR>
	certain cones (the colour-sensitive cells in the eye) respond<BR>
	to the wrong wavelength of light.  For example, humans usually<BR>
	have three kinds of cones, sensitive to red, green, and blue<BR>
	light respectively.  If the pigment in the red-sensitive cones<BR>
	is sensitive to green light instead, then the 'red cones' may<BR>
	respond exactly the same as the 'green cones.'  If this is the<BR>
	case, there is no way for the individual to distinguish between<BR>
	red and green (though in most cases red and green objects will<BR>
	look slightly different due to subtle differences in brightness,<BR>
	texture, blue light, etc.).  It is also possible for the 'red<BR>
	cones' to have a pigment that responds to some other band of<BR>
	light, in which case that other band may be perceived as red.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:10:11 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Fusion & Nuclear Dampers<BR>
<BR>
sneadj@mindspring.com writes:<BR>
> The established tech for nuclear dampers can definitely affect both <BR>
> fission & fusion power plants.  However, if we don't want folks using <BR>
> NDs to shut down another ship's power plant we have an easy <BR>
> handwave.  At TL 12 and above the increase in fusion pp efficiency <BR>
> seems almost certain to be due to small scale nuclear dampers <BR>
> being used to moderate and control the fusion.  That being the <BR>
> case, perhaps TL 12 and above fusion plants cannot be easily <BR>
> affected by external nuclear dampers.  In that case, fission plants <BR>
> and TL 11 and lower fusion plants are all susceptible to NDs, and <BR>
> higher TL ships are not.<BR>
<BR>
That being the case, why don't TL 12+ nuclear weapons come with their own damper fields to prevent people from shutting them off?<BR>
<BR>
It's very hard to come up with a handwave which allows NDs to affect nuclear weapons without them also affecting power plants.  The easiest fix is to ignore the issue of NDs vs det-lasers and give dampers extremely limited range.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 17:13:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> The simplest method is to say 'you feed X tons of hydrogen into<BR>
> the drive to jump' and ignore the idea that its fused at all.<BR>
<BR>
I agree.<BR>
As far as I'm concerned, jump drives do something profoundly<BR>
*mysterious* with hydrogen.  In my "Traveller" universe, the<BR>
hydrogen gets ionized by the ship's power plant, and the <BR>
resulting plasma gets fed into the innards of the jump drive,<BR>
where it *vanishes* without a trace (presumably into hyperspace).<BR>
<BR>
                                                    - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 17:18:27 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin writes:<BR>
<snipped><BR>
><Leonard><BR>
>And I've red that according to many "color blind" people (100% color<BR>
>blind, as I recall), they say they *can* recognize colors, but while<BR>
>it's a visible distiniction, it's not an "important" one.<BR>
></Leonard><BR>
>This is very odd.  It reminds me of the way people describe some pain-drug<BR>
>effects: They still feel the pain, but it just isn't "compelling", they<BR>
>feel no need to do anything about it, it's just another sensation.  <BR>
>It must be that way, because I can't believe they could have 'grayscale'<BR>
>vision. They would have to have radically rewired visual systems for this<BR>
>to occur.  There _are_ some individuals with low wavelenght cones only. <BR>
>They have no color vision to speak of (some residual due to rod/cone<BR>
>interactions) but they also had terrible acuity and many other problems. <BR>
<BR>
	Most of us do have 'grayscale' vision, in as far as we have the<BR>
	machinery to perceive images entirely in black and white and<BR>
	shades of gray.  Under well-lit conditions, our cones (colour-<BR>
	sensitive but requiring relatively good light) tend to dominate<BR>
	our perception of our surroundings, but the black-and-white rods<BR>
	in our eyes continue to play an important roll.  In dim light,<BR>
	the cones are much less effective and we rely almost entirely on<BR>
	the rods for grayscale images.  Truelt colour blind people, who<BR>
	can only see in black and white, are extremely rare.  I imagine<BR>
	that they could still often distinguish different coloured objects<BR>
	without actually seeing the colours.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:21:25 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re:Sensors<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
> On 07/31/00 at 01:41 PM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
> <BR>
> >Bruce Macintosh writes:<BR>
> <BR>
> >> Not quite as strong as that. AEMS may still well be good for<BR>
> >> *detecting* targets out to some plausible range. What was less<BR>
> >> clear was whether they could *localize* targets well enough to<BR>
> >> allow laser fire; and also what that plausible range is.<BR>
> <BR>
> >Well, radar isn't going to be terribly accurate (it's got a long<BR>
> >wavelength and has the same resolution limits as anything else) but it<BR>
> >should be able to give you range within a couple of meters and relative<BR>
> >velocity forward and backwards, which in combination with a passive<BR>
> >sensor allows targeting.<BR>
> <BR>
> >For wide areas, a radar will have dramatically lower power consumption<BR>
> >than a lidar of comparable range; however, it can't be focused nearly as<BR>
> >narrowly.<BR>
> <BR>
> >The big advantage of radar over lidar is that <BR>
> <BR>
> Anthony, your post got cut off here. The big advantage of radar over lidar<BR>
> is?  Lower power consumption? <BR>
<BR>
And the fact that at lower tech levels, you can generate a radio pulse with a far higher efficiency than a laser pulse.  I think I sort of cut off in my thinkin there, however.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:21:04 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 02:05 PM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
>> Okay, now for something different...a GURPS gearhead question. <g><BR>
>> <BR>
>> 1. What is the volume of a GURPS laser?<BR>
>> <BR>
>> In mamy cases, I notice, volume is calculated as Weight / 50.  Is<BR>
>> this correct in this case?<BR>
>1/50 for unconcealed, 1/20 for concealed.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks. Is that in the book or is it errata? <BR>
 <BR>
>> 2.  With ROF's lower than 1/2 does the modifier stay at 0.666, and<BR>
>> if not how is it figured?<BR>
<BR>
>Stays at 0.666<BR>
<BR>
Good, don't have to change the spreadsheet. <g><BR>
 <BR>
>> Taking a 90 Mj output for an extreme range, non-compact, X-ray laser<BR>
>> (which I figure is what we'd use in Traveller) we get the Empty<BR>
>> weight (Ewt.) with the formula...<BR>
>>    <BR>
>>    Ewt = (90000/72) * 1 * 1 * 0.666 * 4 = 3330 lb<BR>
>Yep.<BR>
>>    <BR>
>>    Volume = 3330/50 = 66.6 = 67 cf<BR>
>>    <BR>
>> So, if that's correct the 90 Mj X-Ray laser masses 1.5 tonnes and<BR>
>> occupies 1.88 cubic meters, and making it compact would cut the<BR>
>> mass and volume in half.<BR>
<BR>
>Yep.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Does that look correct?<BR>
>> <BR>
>> I'm assuming the ship provides power and the laser will fire once<BR>
>> per minute (ROF 1/60).  So, I have to provide an energy bank to hold<BR>
>> one shot...or ~240 Mw in this case.<BR>
>> <BR>
>>     Power Required = 90000 * 2.666 * 1/60 = 3999 kw.<BR>
<BR>
>I think the 90 MJ has RoF 1/15.<BR>
<BR>
You can't pick a different rate?<BR>
<BR>
>>     Input Energy = 3,999 / (1/60) =  239,940 kw (we'll say 240 Mw)<BR>
<BR>
>More or less the intent, yes.<BR>
<BR>
     <BR>
>>     Weight of Energy Bank = 240,000 * 0.000056 = 13.44 lb<BR>
<BR>
>Yep.  GURPS energy banks are insane, though eliminating them makes FGMPs<BR>
>impossible. >     <BR>
<BR>
Yes, they are.   Talk about a magic ***sink! <g>  Traveller has magic radiators and GURPS has magic batteries. <g><BR>
<BR>
>>     Volume of Energy Bank = 13.44 / 100 = 0.134 cf = 0.004 m^3<BR>
>>     <BR>
>> So, combining the laser and it's energy bank we get<BR>
>> <BR>
>>   Volume = 1.88 + 0.004 = 1.884 m^3<BR>
>>   <BR>
>> 3.  What else is required for a laser you'd install in a turret?<BR>
<BR>
>Usually, full stabilization and a universal mount.<BR>
<BR>
Ah!  Right, yes, I'll add that.<BR>
<BR>
Designing lasers in Ve 2 is *so* much easier than in either FFS. Probably not as realistic, but so what. They need a modification for gravitic focusing so I can get the ranges most of the Traveller systems favor, but that shouldn't be hard to include. <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:29:01 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 12:55 PM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
<BR>
>> I'd like some more work on area requirements for thruster plates.<BR>
>> At the moment, they need 0.1 m2 area per meganewton.  Increasing<BR>
>> this (thruster *plates*) will make ships run out of surface area<BR>
>> faster, and result in more maneuver hits in combat.<BR>
<BR>
>Just decide on a reasonable number.  Or simply limit T-plate area<BR>
>to 20% of total hull area (actually, this is a good general limit<BR>
>for _any_ component).  At 0.1 per meganewton, with the 20% limit<BR>
>noted above, a 100,000 ton spherical hull (area 60,000) would be<BR>
>limited to 1,200,000 tons of thrust, which is unlikely to exceed 2<BR>
>Gs, and will be 1.2 Gs with the standard '10 tons per dT' rule.<BR>
<BR>
Tplates have to be limited in where you can place them based on<BR>
their function.  The Tplates may be reactionless, but they *are*<BR>
thrusters and need to be placed along the axis, or spine, of the<BR>
ship.  I'd say 20% of the hull is being *very* generous.  What about<BR>
no more than 15%?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:34:47 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
> >1/50 for unconcealed, 1/20 for concealed.<BR>
> <BR>
> Thanks. Is that in the book or is it errata? <BR>
<BR>
In the book but hidden in chapter 2, rather than in the design sequence.<BR>
<BR>
> You can't pick a different rate?<BR>
<BR>
Sure, but I think the published weapon was 1/15.<BR>
<BR>
> Yes, they are.   Talk about a magic ***sink! <g>  Traveller has magic<BR>
> radiators and GURPS has magic batteries. <g> <BR>
Of course, just try to make an FGMP with any noticeable number of shots without magic energy banks.  Use advanced batteries (1/10 the energy density) if you want to be more reasonable.<BR>
<BR>
> Designing lasers in Ve 2 is *so* much easier than in either FFS. Probably<BR>
> not as realistic, but so what. They need a modification for gravitic focusing so I can get the ranges most of the Traveller systems favor, but that shouldn't be hard to include.  <BR>
<BR>
I'd go with 'grav focus (TL 10+): x2 weight; multiplies range by 2 * (TL-9)'.<BR>
Standard designs could then be changed to be 'very long range grav focus' for ranges of 4/11 at TL 10, 10/30 at TL 12.  Still only 1.6 light-seconds total, but closer.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:33:45 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 09:22 PM,  SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>At 15:31 -0400 31/7/00, "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
>wrote: >But my point still holds - a TL-12 ship with a model 6 or 6fib<BR>
>computer can >be size code R - 100,000 tons. And you can build up to<BR>
>50,000 at TL-11. >Fighters still aren't a lot of good against these<BR>
>ships.<BR>
<BR>
>But look at it the other way - a milspec rating 6 computer (ie a  fibre<BR>
>optic one) is 83MCr, 14dT and needs 5 EP (1250Mw) - so I'd  expect a ship<BR>
>with it to trash a Rampart...<BR>
<BR>
Hey, now that Ian has ruled that "everything uses 1/5 it's former<BR>
power" and we're "rationalizing" power requirements, can we cut an<BR>
EP down to something more reasonable? <BR>
<BR>
Hum, even at 1/5, that's 250 Mw for the computer.  Still a little<BR>
much, don't you think? <g><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 14:41:23 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Tplates have to be limited in where you can place them based on<BR>
> their function.  The Tplates may be reactionless, but they *are*<BR>
> thrusters and need to be placed along the axis, or spine, of the<BR>
> ship.  I'd say 20% of the hull is being *very* generous.  What about<BR>
> no more than 15%?<BR>
<BR>
Shrug.  It really depends on how you shape your vehicle, and where you put the thrusters.  A standard 2x3x5 brick has an area of 6 per end, 10 per side, 15 for top/bottom, total 62, so you're limited to 10% if you have your thrusters on the end, 15% if you have it on the side, 25% if you have them on top/bottom.<BR>
<BR>
That was my logic for limiting area, however.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:39:50 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
Hi folks,<BR>
<BR>
Has anyone described what a fire would be like in Zero G?  I'm in the <BR>
finishing touches of a scenario for BITS that needs a description and <BR>
I've got about a day to complete it (one of our authors had to drop <BR>
doing a book for unforseen personal circumstances so I'm having to <BR>
bring something up the queue a lot faster than planned).<BR>
<BR>
In addition, I remember someone posted a medical description of <BR>
decompression damage etc a while ago (Robert?), and could do with a <BR>
copy to check the details.<BR>
<BR>
If you respond to this please can you copy it to my home address ( <BR>
dom@cybergoths.u-net.com ) too so I can get to it faster?<BR>
<BR>
Cheers, and thanks.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 17:53:26 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Thrusters (was Re: Radiators in space)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 09:06:59 PST<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
><BR>
>Ships with thruster plates increase their momentum with no balancing<BR>
>"loss" of momentum by anything else. Ditto for kinetic energy. Worse,<BR>
>the *amount* of these gaind depends on the relative velocity of the<BR>
>observer. <BR>
<BR>
Mach's Principle?<BR>
<BR>
http://www.npl.washington.edu/AV/altvw83.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:58:53 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Ve2 to GT Laser questions<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 02:34 PM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
>> >1/50 for unconcealed, 1/20 for concealed.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Thanks. Is that in the book or is it errata? <BR>
<BR>
>In the book but hidden in chapter 2, rather than in the design<BR>
>sequence.<BR>
<BR>
What a strange place to put it!<BR>
<BR>
>> You can't pick a different rate?<BR>
<BR>
>Sure, but I think the published weapon was 1/15.<BR>
<BR>
Ah!  Well, I wasn't trying to match the published weapon.  I'm<BR>
writing a spreadsheet to create lasers using the Ve2 today instead<BR>
of writing game posts like I should be doing.  <g> Well, it's<BR>
*mostly* Ve2, I'm using Traveller TL's not GTL's, so I'm having to<BR>
adjust a little..but not much.<BR>
<BR>
>> Yes, they are.  Talk about a magic ***sink!  <g> Traveller has<BR>
>> magic radiators and GURPS has magic batteries.  <g><BR>
<BR>
>Of course, just try to make an FGMP with any noticeable number of<BR>
>shots without magic energy banks.  Use advanced batteries (1/10 the<BR>
>energy density) if you want to be more reasonable.<BR>
<BR>
I'll stick with power cells, but raise the price...probably.<BR>
<BR>
>> Designing lasers in Ve 2 is *so* much easier than in either FFS.<BR>
>> Probably not as realistic, but so what.  They need a modification<BR>
>> for gravitic focusing so I can get the ranges most of the<BR>
>> Traveller systems favor, but that shouldn't be hard to include.<BR>
<BR>
>I'd go with 'grav focus (TL 10+):  x2 weight; multiplies range by 2<BR>
>* (TL-9)'.  Standard designs could then be changed to be 'very long<BR>
>range grav focus' for ranges of 4/11 at TL 10, 10/30 at TL 12.<BR>
>Still only 1.6 light-seconds total, but closer.<BR>
<BR>
Hum, I like it.  I'll have to adjust to Traveller's slightly higher<BR>
TL's, but I do like ranges increasing by TL.  This will depend on<BR>
what I do about ranges too.  I lean toward the 30,000 km range<BR>
bands/hexes of BL rather than 10,000 mile ones of GT, but I might<BR>
lean back. <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:05:26 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
At 2:05 PM -0700 7/30/00, Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
>[Discussing radiating in limited directions and/or somehow<BR>
>mimicking the background radiation]<BR>
>  >Yes, it won't work in all cases, but it will work in many cases<BR>
>  >of interest.  Combined with directional<BR>
>  >emmission and other tricks, it shows that detection is _not_<BR>
>  >automatic.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>It only "shows" this if you actually do some math to back up<BR>
>your claims.<BR>
><BR>
>(1) How narrow an angle is your radiator radiating in? What<BR>
>hardware defines the angle? What<BR>
>fraction of the power comes out outside that angle?<BR>
>Since you've reduced how much power can get out per<BR>
>square meter of radiators, how much bigger/hotter do the<BR>
>radiators get?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
That the question isn't it?  You have been assuming technology<BR>
pretty much on par with what we have now.  If you look at the<BR>
amount of space that you need to cover at any reasonable distance<BR>
from ship (a light second or more) your angle doesn't have to<BR>
be that small to make detection quite iffy.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>(2) What exactly do you mean by "emitting at the same<BR>
>wavelengths as the background?" It can be shown (entropy/<BR>
>thermodynamics) that you can't get rid of more waste heat per<BR>
>square meter at the<BR>
>effective temperature of your radiators than a blackbody at<BR>
>those temperatures.<BR>
<BR>
I don't see how.  If you radiate a large amount of low energy<BR>
radiation with a blackbody radiator with a large surface area,<BR>
or you emit the same radiation by  another process, it really<BR>
doesn't matter.  The end state for both processes are the<BR>
same.<BR>
<BR>
>That being said, runninng your radiators cool<BR>
>so more heat comes out in the mid-IR, where it's harder to see,<BR>
>does help. However, it requires much bigger radiators. This is<BR>
>allowed in the FFS2 rules - that's what IR masking buys you.<BR>
>It's a hard game to play. In particular, it is a tradeoff against the<BR>
>narrow-angle beaming you want to do above...<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:15:01 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
<BR>
> That the question isn't it?  You have been assuming technology<BR>
> pretty much on par with what we have now.  If you look at the<BR>
> amount of space that you need to cover at any reasonable distance<BR>
> from ship (a light second or more) your angle doesn't have to<BR>
> be that small to make detection quite iffy.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, he's been assuming that certain of the laws of physics remain constant.  Without changing the laws of thermodynamics, there are specific limits to what can be done.<BR>
<BR>
> I don't see how.  If you radiate a large amount of low energy<BR>
> radiation with a blackbody radiator with a large surface area,<BR>
> or you emit the same radiation by  another process, it really<BR>
> doesn't matter.  The end state for both processes are the<BR>
> same.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, not necessarily.  Non-blackbody energy generally has a lower entropy than blackbody energy, and is therefore less useful for cooling.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:13:05 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Should I get MT?<BR>
<BR>
At 11:34 AM -0700 7/30/00, Arthur Boff wrote:<BR>
>Hello,<BR>
><BR>
>I may be in a position to get a copy of MegaTraveller.<BR>
><BR>
>The question I want to ask is: Is it worth it?<BR>
><BR>
>I have the currently available CT reprints and some<BR>
>BITS and GT supplements. Would MT add a lot to my<BR>
>game?<BR>
><BR>
>I've heard that MT was merely all the CT rules brought<BR>
>together. So is the reprint of the CT Books<BR>
effectively The Game MT Was Meant To Be?<BR>
<BR>
What do you want from it?<BR>
<BR>
GT has probably, at this point, a better coverage of rules<BR>
on things from making ship to designing words to conduction<BR>
trade, etc.  It also covers the basic background as well.<BR>
The main reasons you might get it are, a) if you are looking<BR>
for a different set of rules (I'm sure the people who<BR>
don't like GURPS will pipe up :-), b) you want to learn<BR>
more about the rebellion background that is only in MT.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:28:42 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
At 2:02 PM -0700 7/31/00, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
>David P. Summers writes:<BR>
><BR>
>  > For jump fuel, you do sort of need to make a modification to way<BR>
>  > it just isn't a really great powerplant.  In<BR>
>  > my mind, the way that solves the problem in the simplest, and most<BR>
>  > consistent, way is to simply link the burning of all the fuel to<BR>
>  > the process of jumping (you decide that the act of jumping grounds<BR>
>  > one side of a Lanthanum grid in absolute zero our opens a singularity<BR>
>  > that you pour energy into, or something else that lets you fuse a<BR>
>  > lot more hydrogen than you could possibly hope to handle without<BR>
>  > jumping).<BR>
><BR>
>The simplest method is to say 'you feed X tons of hydrogen into the <BR>
>drive to jump' and ignore the idea that its fused at all.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'm not sure if you mean, it is simplest to not worry about it<BR>
("you need X tons of hydrogen and that's that...) or if you<BR>
are saying some sort of jump bubble idea is simpler.<BR>
<BR>
The idea that you create a jump bubble has a few problems.<BR>
One is that if the bubble is large, then the volume of the ship<BR>
shouldn't matter a lot and if the bubble is small, then the<BR>
requirement should be based on surface area not volume.  It<BR>
also doesn't explain why you can use jump projectors at higher TLs,<BR>
doesn't tie directly into the need for lanthanum.  An energy<BR>
use also doesn't require addition explanation about why you<BR>
get an energy signature, and not a mass signature, when you<BR>
enter and leave jump space, why you need purified hydrogen, why<BR>
it is call "fuel", and how alternate sources like  black globes,<BR>
solar energy, drop tanks, etc. work.<BR>
<BR>
Now I'm not saying you can't handwave these.  But with an<BR>
energy use you don't have to.  The original concept was clearly<BR>
that it was used for energy and any explanation that stays<BR>
closer to that is going to be simpler and run into few<BR>
problems.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2852<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (rly-yh03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.35]) by air-yh05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:30:58 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:30:40 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA52950;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:30:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:28:56 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA52639<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:28:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:28:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200007312228.SAA52639@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2852<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2853</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	7/31/00 5:31:11 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, July 31 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2853<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re : Alien Vision<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done <BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Multiple posts<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Solomani Conditioned Reflex Infantry and Solomani Society (LONG)<BR>
Notes on FFS3 Power Plants, etc. (longish)<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 15:31:56 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
At 3:15 PM -0700 7/31/00, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
>David P. Summers writes:<BR>
><BR>
>  > That the question isn't it?  You have been assuming technology<BR>
>  > pretty much on par with what we have now.  If you look at the<BR>
>  > amount of space that you need to cover at any reasonable distance<BR>
>  > from ship (a light second or more) your angle doesn't have to<BR>
>  > be that small to make detection quite iffy.<BR>
><BR>
>Actually, he's been assuming that certain of the laws of physics <BR>
>remain constant.  Without changing the laws of thermodynamics, there <BR>
>are specific limits to what can be done.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe he is, but that isn't clear to me....<BR>
<BR>
>  > I don't see how.  If you radiate a large amount of low energy<BR>
>  > radiation with a blackbody radiator with a large surface area,<BR>
>  > or you emit the same radiation by  another process, it really<BR>
>  > doesn't matter.  The end state for both processes are the<BR>
>  > same.<BR>
><BR>
>Actually, not necessarily.  Non-blackbody energy generally has a <BR>
>lower entropy than blackbody energy, and is therefore less useful <BR>
>for cooling.<BR>
<BR>
The energy of a state doesn't depend on the path you take to<BR>
get to that state.  If you emit x photons of a certain energy,<BR>
the result is the same regardless of how you emit them....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:51:59 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
> Note that some proposed designs use liquid drops (molten metal!), and<BR>
> these are buildable in the near term. That raises the available<BR>
> operating temp considerably, and at lower TLs tha you use above.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
The problem with this as a general solution is that you cant really dodge<BR>
while using it, which precludes it's use in combat.<BR>
<BR>
It could work as a civilian technology, though.<BR>
<BR>
The reason I put the droplets in a tail is to allow you to dodge in combat.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:58:48 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
Looking at things, we have a couple of problems.<BR>
<BR>
The first one is that, whilst power plant == radiator output looks like it<BR>
works for small ships, it breaks down for large ships. And I think we all<BR>
want something the size of the AHL.<BR>
<BR>
Lets assume that Thrusters do in fact violate the law of conservation of<BR>
momentum.<BR>
<BR>
While we are violating the laws of the universe, why cant we make them<BR>
violate some other laws as well ?<BR>
<BR>
Specifically, if you are using t-plates, radiator output == (power plant<BR>
output - maneuver drive energy). This means that we have a very 'hard<BR>
science' area below TL11 ("Traveller 2300" ... now there's a phrase *grin*),<BR>
but at TL11 and up, we have enough of a 'radiator problem' to impose some<BR>
discipline on starship architects, but without making big ships absolutely<BR>
impractical.<BR>
<BR>
Now, jump drives could get the same rule, which kinda makes sense, since<BR>
jump drives are fundamentally magic as well (the heat energy goes into<BR>
changing the phase-space of the lanthanum in the grid, which then changes<BR>
back in jump space).<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:54:55 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
Charles Collin wrote :-<BR>
> <Professional Pride> Ya, but the psychophysicists pointed the way! </PP><BR>
> *Ahem*<BR>
Oops. Shouldn't have forgotten the sensory physiology/psychology stuff.<BR>
<BR>
> In actual fact, there are many species of fish and birds with more than 3<BR>
> pigment types.<BR>
I didn't realise this. My comparative physiology reading has been<BR>
centred around the cardiovascular, respiratory and renal systems.<BR>
Mea culpa.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:04:59 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done <BR>
<BR>
> From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
><BR>
> Terry Mixon writes:<BR>
><BR>
> > I can't see how, without going through a starport of less than class<BR>
> > 3, or an Amber or Red zone.<BR>
> It's legit to route through amber zones.  Route is:<BR>
<BR>
Thats easy to solve. Imagine a flunky at a starport, somewhere in the<BR>
Marches ...<BR>
<BR>
"See, in the Third Imperium, insurers wont cover freight going through Amber<BR>
zones.<BR>
<BR>
You might argue it's a stupid policy. But it's in the Hortalez et Cie Blue<BR>
Book (starport flunky points to Blue Book). They might do things differently<BR>
where y'all are from, but here in the Three-Eye, thats just how it works."<BR>
<BR>
Terry, you did a bloody magnificent job. And if any sharp-eyed player spots<BR>
a more efficient route, well, let them bid for freight on it, and see if<BR>
they can make money on a non-standard 'Held Covered' route.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:08:59 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch writes:<BR>
> Looking at things, we have a couple of problems.<BR>
> <BR>
> The first one is that, whilst power plant == radiator output looks like it<BR>
> works for small ships, it breaks down for large ships. And I think we all<BR>
> want something the size of the AHL.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe.  Simply reducing the area which is available to T-plates will cut an AHL down to around 1 G anyway.  In any case, I think I agree that power plant = radiator output is wrong, because most components either (a) use too much energy, or (b) are going to be eliminating some energy in non-thermal ways.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 09:04:37 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Multiple posts<BR>
<BR>
Sorry about posting multiple copies of several messages yesterday.<BR>
My mail server is on the blink...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 16:11:58 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
> > IMTU, the Solomani view execution as a<BR>
> >primitive and brutal act that only goes on in barbarous places like the<BR>
3I,<BR>
> >not highly evolved states like SolCon.<BR>
> ><BR>
> Fair enough, and it does fit with the general Solomani ethos you've<BR>
> developed.  My view of the SolCon would have more of a bias towards<BR>
> execution than reprogramming, however, for several reasons.<BR>
><BR>
> Firstly, Solomani are racists.  Their fundamental belief structure<BR>
> says that certain people are better than others, at the genetic level,<BR>
> and no amount of (re-)education can change that.  If SolSec was to<BR>
> claim it can turn recidivists and dissidents into productive citizens,<BR>
> people might start to question why they can't turn *Vilani* into<BR>
> productive citizens...<BR>
<BR>
Obviously Solomani and Vilani are different.  Any Solomani subvert is<BR>
ultimately the victim of outside elements. It's us versus them.  Vilani<BR>
should be crushed, but wayward Solomani? Compassionate to our own, as it<BR>
were.<BR>
<BR>
An if you read our game notes some day, you'll see that SolSec's Section 9<BR>
(the section that doesn't exist) actually started a plan to make Citizens of<BR>
the 3I 'happy, shiny citizens'.  Of course, there are different factions<BR>
within solSec.  Perhaps executions would be carried out with the deepest<BR>
regret, but then there are always some beyond the reach of even the most<BR>
advanced "medical care".  Sometimes you just have to sgoot the rabid dog,<BR>
although I still like the idea of former revolutionaries, now cured, being<BR>
returned to their old areas.  Rather than becoming martyrs, they are daily<BR>
reminders to everone else of what happens to those who work against the<BR>
state.  Rather chilling, i always thought.<BR>
<BR>
Take a current example:  Imagine the effect if a gang member was caught by<BR>
the police, convicted, then taken to a "special hospital"..  Some time later<BR>
he returns to the "hood".  But now he is "all better".  His former buddies<BR>
are constantly reminded of what happens to those who cross the state. Just<BR>
lock the same person in jail, or even execute him, and he is soon forgotten.<BR>
Not only that, but he is now a pillar of the community, willing to report<BR>
his erstwhile companions, who are still "sick".  Not because he is a<BR>
government "stoolie" but because he really wants to help them "get better",<BR>
just like him. Does this sound like the soft treatment?<BR>
<BR>
> Thirdly, if SolCon propaganda emphasises the "we are surrounded by<BR>
> hordes of enemies" line, then they'll want to encourage paranoia and<BR>
> hatred of the outsider in their citizens.   Rather than "curing"<BR>
> dissidents, I'd think the preferred approach would be more on the<BR>
> lines of Stalinist show trials.  Put the dissidents on the holo, where<BR>
> they can tearfully confess to undermining the morale of their fellow<BR>
> workers on No 3 Fusion Plant, before subjecting them to a brutal - and<BR>
> televised - execution.  The viewers get a warm glow that their<BR>
> government is protecting them from such dangerous saboteurs and agents<BR>
> of the Imperium.  Official policy is that these public executions act<BR>
> as a deterrent;  their more subtle effect is to make the general<BR>
> public complicit in the regime's cruelty.  Of course, anyone who knew<BR>
> the (ex-) dissident would also be pulled in for interrogation.  *This*<BR>
> is where I see scope for the "we just want to cure you" approach;  not<BR>
> the actual opponents of the regime, but their "innocent" "victims".<BR>
<BR>
Excellent point, though while I'd opt for 'show trails', I like the idea of<BR>
reformation for _Solomani_.  Now as for those who are not TrueMen... I'll<BR>
have to think about this, as you ideas have some real merit, IMHO.  Nothing<BR>
like a good show trial.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 00:46:31 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
> Hum, even at 1/5, that's 250 Mw for the computer.  Still a little<BR>
> much, don't you think? <g><BR>
<BR>
No, that energy's not going into the computer itself, it's going into the<BR>
ENORMOUS cooling system that CPU needs....<BR>
<BR>
Let me get this straight, Jason. You tried to overclock that model 2bis to<BR>
17.2 terrahertz, and in doing so accidentally opened up a rift to<BR>
Grandfather's pocket universe? 'Kayyy...you've been at the Scout Brew,<BR>
haven't ya?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 00:48:25 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Bunch of tech stuff for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
> Tplates have to be limited in where you can place them based on<BR>
> their function.  The Tplates may be reactionless, but they *are*<BR>
> thrusters and need to be placed along the axis, or spine, of the<BR>
> ship.  I'd say 20% of the hull is being *very* generous.  What about<BR>
> no more than 15%?<BR>
<BR>
They don't necesarily have to be placed on the spine, they just need to be<BR>
pointing the right way and be symmetrical. Think of an airliner - the<BR>
engines are way off the centreline.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:48:30 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Looking at things, we have a couple of problems.<BR>
> <BR>
> The first one is that, whilst power plant == radiator output looks like it<BR>
> works for small ships, it breaks down for large ships. And I think we all<BR>
> want something the size of the AHL.<BR>
<BR>
Of course, _I_ want ships the size of _Montana_.... ;-)<BR>
> <BR>
> Lets assume that Thrusters do in fact violate the law of conservation of<BR>
> momentum.<BR>
> <BR>
> While we are violating the laws of the universe, why cant we make them<BR>
> violate some other laws as well ?<BR>
> <BR>
> Specifically, if you are using t-plates, radiator output == (power plant<BR>
> output - maneuver drive energy). This means that we have a very 'hard<BR>
> science' area below TL11 ("Traveller 2300" ... now there's a phrase *grin*),<BR>
> but at TL11 and up, we have enough of a 'radiator problem' to impose some<BR>
> discipline on starship architects, but without making big ships absolutely<BR>
> impractical.<BR>
<BR>
That sounds like a winner, Ian!<BR>
<BR>
A couple of additional points:<BR>
<BR>
1.  I would raise the radiator requirements somewhat.  As a<BR>
"quick-and-dirty" solution, all ships intended for combat would need to<BR>
have what in FF&S2 is Basic thermal masking (double the radiator area),<BR>
with no reduction in signature.  Advanced and Extreme thermal masking<BR>
would have the current costs and requirements, and would reduce the<BR>
thermal signature by 0.5 and 1.0 respectively.  These radiator<BR>
requirements would be based (at TL11+) on Ian's formula above.  We could<BR>
change the labels to "Combat," "Basic," and "Advanced" thermal masking,<BR>
respectively.<BR>
<BR>
2.  Ships without at least Combat [Basic] thermal masking are<BR>
automatically disabled after the first combat turn in which they are hit<BR>
by effective (i.e., not blocked by sandcasters) laser or PAW fire, due<BR>
to heat buildup.  Penetration is not required to disable such a ship.<BR>
<BR>
3.  I would go ahead and keep the power requirements for facilities such<BR>
as accomodations, sickbays, etc.  These power requirements (and their<BR>
resulting radiator requirements) would account for both the "hotel load"<BR>
of the ship and the waste metabolic heat produced by crew and<BR>
passengers.  However, I would modify the total "hotel load" requirement<BR>
with a TL-based multiplier, to account for increased efficiency in power<BR>
consumption (the higher-tech equivalents of switching from incandescent<BR>
to fluorescent lighting).<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 01:00:22 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
>John Groth wrote:<BR>
> Of course, _I_ want ships the size of _Montana_.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Nick turns to the camera, raises an eyebrow, and does The Point. The stereo<BR>
switches on, and the Brothers Gibb begin to belt out. Nick smiles, and<BR>
begins to beat the unfortunate ubergearhead to the floor, in time to the<BR>
music.<BR>
<BR>
WHAM, WHAM, WHAM, WHAM, stayin' alive, stayin' alive, WHAM WHAM WHAM...<BR>
<BR>
I thank you.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:18:01 -0400<BR>
From: peersce@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: Solomani Conditioned Reflex Infantry and Solomani Society (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_005D_01BFFB2C.6CBCAB60<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
THE POINT:  Canon has given the Solomani a bad rap (Solomani & Aslan in =<BR>
particular, with its New Van Dootchen Estates and other examples).  My =<BR>
opinion is that they aren't fall fascist, racist thugs.  Doubtless most =<BR>
of them suffer from a severe case of ethnocentrism.  Their government is =<BR>
more Soviet than Hitlerian.  They hate the humans and everbody else that =<BR>
screwed them out of power and then crushed them in an unjust war, and =<BR>
they've gone militaristic because they always were, and totalitarian =<BR>
because its a good way to survive in an ethnic conflict lasting =<BR>
centuries against a larger, more powerful adversary.<BR>
<BR>
   =20<BR>
<BR>
    AM6 Solomani says that before Zhakirov married Antiama Shiishuginsa, =<BR>
all of the 3I's emperors had been Solomani, and that the Solomani =<BR>
dominated the Imperial court and the upper ranks of the Imperial Navy.  =<BR>
The Solomani element was alienated by this marriage and threat to their =<BR>
power base.  DGP Solomani & Aslan goes even further and says that =<BR>
Arbellatra secretly arranged for Vilani interests to gain political and =<BR>
military power at the expense of the Solomani, even going so far as to =<BR>
arrange the marriage between Zhakirov and Antiama.=20<BR>
<BR>
    Consider the Solomani viewpoint:  For centuries the Solomani had =<BR>
been of the blood of the emperor, and controlled the Imperial Navy, the =<BR>
most powerful military force in known space, and had great influence at =<BR>
court. Though greatly outnumbered by the Vilani in the Imperium, they =<BR>
still had great power and a stake in the Imperium.  Then one day =<BR>
Zhakirov marries Antiama, Vilani interests command greater political =<BR>
power, and the Solomani are disenfranchised, disempowered in a few short =<BR>
years.  All of a sudden they're powerless nobodies in their own empire.  =<BR>
A proud, militaristic people aren't going to stand for that, so they try =<BR>
to break off from the Imperium, in response to the disempowerment.  In =<BR>
the words of Cartman,"Screw you guys, I'm goin' home."   Then the =<BR>
Imperium blasts them into submission and occupies Terra itself.  No =<BR>
wonder they hate the Vilani and their non-human allies.  It was the =<BR>
Vilani that screwed them out of their political power in the first =<BR>
place!  It was the Vilani that gave the the Solomani Autonomous Region =<BR>
to shut them up!  Then when the Solomani just want to become an =<BR>
independent polity again, the Vilani attacked!  Why shouldn't they hate =<BR>
the Vilani?  Since they can't take it out on the Vilani, having just =<BR>
lost the Rim War, they beat down the non-Solomani in the Confederation.<BR>
<BR>
This next part is a discussion about the possible use of bioweapons by =<BR>
the Solomani, which is also relevant to the current discussion about why =<BR>
they have such an intolerant, ethnocentric society.<BR>
=20<BR>
I think that a hurting, wounded, bitter<BR>
loser in the "Police Action of Reintegration" (as the Imperial histories<BR>
call it) would create such a weapon.  Churning hatred, bitter pride, and =<BR>
an<BR>
ever-ravenous lust for revenge would affect the decision makers' =<BR>
judgement<BR>
so that they would consider any weapon, the more hurt it would put on =<BR>
the<BR>
Imperials the better, so they would "suffer as we have suffered!"  This =<BR>
kind<BR>
of psycho-social dynamic could go a long way to explain the intolerance<BR>
depicted in the supplement Solomani and Aslan. When everyone has lost<BR>
someone, when everything families have worked for goes up in a fusion<BR>
fireball, when pleasant lives turn into the wretched existences of =<BR>
refugees,<BR>
and when Imperial ground forces desecrate Terra itself BECAUSE<BR>
YOU LOST! YOU FAILED! YOU DIDN'T TRY HARD ENOUGH!  YOU DIDN'T SACRIFICE<BR>
ENOUGH!....this hate of the enemy and self hate born from failure could =<BR>
create a stamp of intolerance, hate, and militarism<BR>
(hate directed outwards, toward anyone Not Us) that could last for<BR>
generations in the Solomani people.  This could go a very long way =<BR>
towards explaining their totalitarian practices. =20<BR>
<BR>
    The Solomani ethnic conciousness, which had been building since the =<BR>
600's, combined with the near destruction of the Solomani in the Rim =<BR>
War, could have very well created a strongly entrenched =<BR>
"we-Solomani-have-got-to-stick-together" national conciousness.  Given =<BR>
that this situation has been going on for centuries, generations of =<BR>
Solomani have lived their entire lives without knowing anything else.  =<BR>
Consider their viewpoint:  It is their unity and support of the Solomani =<BR>
state which gives them the strength to survive in the shadow of a =<BR>
hostile Vilani-controlled Imperium.  SolSec guards the state which =<BR>
guards the people, keeping traitors and dupes from wounding the state =<BR>
from within, and is seen by the Solomani as just and heroic because of =<BR>
this. The Solomani military are those men and women who put their lives =<BR>
on the line against external threats and internal disorder.  The Party =<BR>
is the expression of Solomani unity. In the eyes of the Solomani, =<BR>
totalitarian service to their government is normal, natural, and right, =<BR>
bizarre as it is to our viewpoint of democracy and individual freedom.  =<BR>
They probably don't even know what real freedom is.<BR>
<BR>
A heck of a lot more than .02Cr<BR>
<BR>
P<BR>
   =20<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_005D_01BFFB2C.6CBCAB60<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><HEAD><BR>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =<BR>
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><BR>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR><BR>
<STYLE></STYLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>THE POINT:&nbsp; Canon has given the Solomani a bad rap (Solomani =<BR>
&amp;=20<BR>
Aslan in particular, with its New Van Dootchen Estates and other=20<BR>
examples).&nbsp; My opinion is that they aren't fall fascist, racist=20<BR>
thugs.&nbsp; Doubtless most of them suffer from a severe case of=20<BR>
ethnocentrism.&nbsp; Their government is more Soviet than =<BR>
Hitlerian.&nbsp; They=20<BR>
hate the humans and everbody else that screwed them out of power and =<BR>
then=20<BR>
crushed them in an unjust war, and they've gone militaristic because =<BR>
they always=20<BR>
were, and totalitarian because its a good way to survive in an ethnic =<BR>
conflict=20<BR>
lasting centuries against a larger, more powerful adversary.</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV></DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; AM6 Solomani says =<BR>
that before=20<BR>
Zhakirov married Antiama Shiishuginsa, all of the 3I's emperors had been =<BR>
<BR>
Solomani, and that the Solomani dominated the Imperial court and the =<BR>
upper ranks=20<BR>
of the Imperial Navy.&nbsp; The Solomani element was alienated by this =<BR>
marriage=20<BR>
and threat to their power base.&nbsp; DGP Solomani &amp; Aslan goes even =<BR>
further=20<BR>
and says that Arbellatra secretly arranged for Vilani interests to gain=20<BR>
political and military power at the expense of the Solomani, even going =<BR>
so far=20<BR>
as to arrange the marriage between Zhakirov and =<BR>
Antiama.&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Consider the =<BR>
Solomani=20<BR>
viewpoint:&nbsp; For centuries the Solomani had been of the blood of the =<BR>
<BR>
emperor, and controlled the Imperial Navy, the most powerful military =<BR>
force in=20<BR>
known space, and had great influence at court. Though greatly =<BR>
outnumbered by the=20<BR>
Vilani in the Imperium, they still had great power and a stake in the=20<BR>
Imperium.&nbsp; Then one day Zhakirov marries Antiama, Vilani interests =<BR>
command=20<BR>
greater political power, and the Solomani are disenfranchised, =<BR>
disempowered in a=20<BR>
few short years.&nbsp; All of a sudden they're powerless nobodies in =<BR>
their own=20<BR>
empire.&nbsp; A proud, militaristic people aren't going to stand for =<BR>
that, so=20<BR>
they try to break off from the Imperium, in response to the=20<BR>
disempowerment.&nbsp; In the words of Cartman,"Screw you guys, =<BR>
I<FONT=20<BR>
face=3DArial size=3D2>'m goin' home."&nbsp;&nbsp; Then the Imperium =<BR>
blasts them into=20<BR>
submission and occupies Terra itself.&nbsp; No wonder they hate the =<BR>
Vilani and=20<BR>
their non-human allies.&nbsp; It was the Vilani that screwed them out of =<BR>
their=20<BR>
political power in the first place!&nbsp; It was the Vilani that gave =<BR>
the the=20<BR>
Solomani Autonomous Region to shut them up!&nbsp; Then when the Solomani =<BR>
just=20<BR>
want to become an independent polity again, the Vilani attacked!&nbsp; =<BR>
Why=20<BR>
shouldn't they hate the Vilani?&nbsp; Since they can't take it out on =<BR>
the=20<BR>
Vilani, having just lost the Rim War, they beat down the non-Solomani in =<BR>
the=20<BR>
Confederation.</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV><BR>
<DIV>This&nbsp;next part&nbsp;is a =<BR>
discussion about the=20<BR>
possible use of bioweapons by the Solomani, which is also relevant to =<BR>
the=20<BR>
current discussion about why they have such an intolerant, ethnocentric=20<BR>
society.</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>I think that a hurting, wounded, =<BR>
bitter<BR>
loser in=20the "Police Action of Reintegration" (as the Imperial histories<BR>
call =it)=20would create such a weapon.&nbsp; Churning hatred, bitter pride, and=20an<BR>
ever-ravenous lust for revenge would affect the decision makers'=20judgement<BR>
so that they would consider any weapon, the more hurt it =would put=20on the<BR>
Imperials the better, so they would "suffer as we have=20suffered!"&nbsp; This kind<BR>
of psycho-social dynamic could go a long =way to=20explain the intolerance<BR>
depicted in the supplement Solomani and =Aslan. When=20everyone has lost<BR>
someone, when everything families have worked for =goes up=20in a fusion<BR>
fireball, when pleasant lives turn into the wretched =existences=20of refugees,<BR>
and when Imperial ground forces desecrate Terra itself=20BECAUSE<BR>
YOU LOST! YOU FAILED! YOU DIDN'T TRY HARD ENOUGH!&nbsp; YOU =DIDN'T=20SACRIFICE<BR>
ENOUGH!....this hate of the enemy and self hate born from =failure=20could create a stamp of intolerance, hate, and militarism<BR>
(hate =directed=20outwards, toward anyone Not Us) that could last for<BR>
generations in =the=20Solomani people.&nbsp; This could go =a very long=20way towards explaining their totalitarian =practices.&nbsp;&nbsp;</DIV><DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The&nbsp;Solomani =ethnic=20conciousness, which had been building&nbsp;since the 600's, combined = with the=20 near&nbsp;destruction of the&nbsp;Solomani in the Rim War,&nbsp;could = have very=20 well created a strongly entrenched = "we-Solomani-have-got-to-stick-together"=20 national conciousness.&nbsp; Given that this&nbsp;situation has been=20 going&nbsp;on for centuries,&nbsp;generations of Solomani&nbsp;have = lived their=20 entire lives without knowing anything else.&nbsp; Consider their=20 viewpoint:&nbsp; It is their unity and support of&nbsp;the Solomani = state which=20 gives them the strength to survive in the&nbsp;shadow of a hostile=20 Vilani-controlled Imperium.&nbsp; SolSec guards the state which guards = the=20 people, keeping traitors&nbsp;and dupes from wounding the state from = within, and=20 is seen by the Solomani as&nbsp;just and heroic because of = this.&nbsp;The=20 Solomani military are those&nbsp;men and women who put their lives on = the line=20 against external threats and internal disorder.&nbsp; The Party is the=20 expression of Solomani&nbsp;unity. In the eyes of the Solomani, = totalitarian=20 service to their government is normal, natural, and right, bizarre as it = is to=20 our viewpoint&nbsp;of democracy and individual freedom.&nbsp; They =probably=20don't even know what&nbsp;real freedom is.</DIV><DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><DIV>A heck of a lot more =than&nbsp;.02Cr</DIV><DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><DIV>P<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;=20</DIV></DIV><BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_005D_01BFFB2C.6CBCAB60--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 10:19:27 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Notes on FFS3 Power Plants, etc. (longish)<BR>
<BR>
** Fuels<BR>
Type         MJ/kg  MJ/L   density   Fuel Rate (L/MW-h, 100% eff)<BR>
Diesel        40     36     0.9       1000<BR>
EtOH          27     21.3   0.8       1690<BR>
MeOH          19.7   15.6   0.8       2308<BR>
CH4           24.2   10.6   0.436     3380<BR>
Hydrogen*     1.6    0.14   0.0875    257143<BR>
LH2           12     0.84   0.07      42857<BR>
H(1)          218    15.26  0.07      2381<BR>
Fission(2)    2.6e6  2.6e7  10        1.4e(-4)<BR>
Fusion (3) :-<BR>
D-T           3.4e8  1.05e8 0.31      3.4e(-5)<BR>
cat-DD        3.4e8  4.76e8 0.14      7.6e(-6)    <BR>
D-3He         3.5e8  4.3e8  0.12      8.3e(-6)        <BR>
p-11B         7.3e7  1.5e8  2.1       2.4e(-5)<BR>
p-p           5.5e8  3.8e7  0.07      9.5e(-5)<BR>
Antimatter(4) 9e10   6.3e9  0.07      5.7e(-7)    <BR>
<BR>
Densities are in g/cc<BR>
* gas at zero C and 1 atm pressure<BR>
(1) atomic hydrogen (predicted), 100% w/w<BR>
(2) standard uranium reactor fuel, 3% w/w U235 <BR>
(3) D-T 40/60 mix deuterium/tritium ; cat-DD spin catalysed deuterium<BR>
fusion (theoretically aneutronic) ; D-3He 40/60 mix D/He3 ; p-11B 10/90<BR>
mix H/B.<BR>
(4) proton-antiproton annihilation<BR>
<BR>
** Reducing power consumption<BR>
i. Reducing stateroom power :- rationale<BR>
Roughly 10-20kWh per person each day at TL 8. (36 to 72 MJ/day, or<BR>
416 to 832 W continuous load). This is for all activities.<BR>
Stateroom power is used for lighting, entertainment, and some minor<BR>
temperature control e.g. airconditioning - but life support systems<BR>
cover most of that burden. There are separate food preparation and<BR>
storage power requirements ; so there is scope for further reducing<BR>
stateroom power.<BR>
<BR>
Power requirements for food storage in FFS2 are reasonable (comparable<BR>
with contemporary refrigeration tech).<BR>
<BR>
ii. Life support :-<BR>
Life support from moon rover article* : 2 kW for 4 people + 5kW thermal<BR>
management (much of load from power systems) - figure 1.75 kW/person.<BR>
This is for a water recycle (not solids) system i.e. FFS2 level III.<BR>
Basic life support power requirements could be halved.<BR>
<BR>
* NASA TM 4496, 'Power Transmission by Laser Beam From Lunar-Synchronous<BR>
Satellite' <BR>
<BR>
iii. Other facilities :-<BR>
Power demands far too large (800-1000 X large stateroom, which is<BR>
already equivalent to average TL 8 householder's power consumption).<BR>
These could drop by a factor of ~100.<BR>
<BR>
** Radiators<BR>
Anthony's numbers seem to be reasonable. There may be some room for<BR>
improving heat pump performance at higher TTLs (assuming a base temp of<BR>
500K, the TTL 8 radiator has a coefficient of performance of about<BR>
0.52).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:25:10 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 08:58 AM,  "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Looking at things, we have a couple of problems.<BR>
<BR>
>The first one is that, whilst power plant == radiator output looks like<BR>
>it works for small ships, it breaks down for large ships. And I think we<BR>
>all want something the size of the AHL.<BR>
<BR>
By TL14 or 15, I suppose so.<BR>
<BR>
>Lets assume that Thrusters do in fact violate the law of conservation of<BR>
>momentum.<BR>
<BR>
>While we are violating the laws of the universe, why cant we make them<BR>
>violate some other laws as well ?<BR>
<BR>
Ian, I think we might be approaching this backwards.  We have *some*<BR>
idea of what reasonable radiator values should be, and those values<BR>
kill really big ships.  If we make magic radiators it bothers us.<BR>
OTOH, and as you've mentioned several times recently, we have no<BR>
idea how Tplates work...or how much power they require.<BR>
<BR>
What we should be doing is decrease the amount of power the TPlates<BR>
need as the TL's go up, and keep radiators at fixed, reasonable,<BR>
value.  At first, only very small ships can mount them and they are<BR>
too expensive.  As time passes larger and larger ships can mount<BR>
them as their power requirements drop and they become less<BR>
expensive.  While all this is going on radiator technology could<BR>
become mature and remain a constant (or close to it) at some easy to<BR>
use number like 0.5 Mw/m^2.<BR>
<BR>
The basic scenario would be something like the following.  Introduce<BR>
them at TL9 as very expensive and requiring huge amounts of power,<BR>
perhaps they are inferior to reaction drives for almost everything.<BR>
At TL10 they are less expensive and require a little less power, now<BR>
they are competitive with reaction drives, perhaps even advantageous<BR>
for certain classes of vehicle.  At TL11 they are still expensive<BR>
and require lots of power, but are clearly the drive of choice for,<BR>
at least, small ships.  At TL12 through TL15 the price and energy<BR>
requirements continue to drop making it possible, and cost<BR>
effective, for larger and larger ships to mount them.  At TL15-16<BR>
they become a mature technology and drops in power required and cost<BR>
stop.<BR>
<BR>
What do you think of that?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2853<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc02.mx.aol.com (rly-yc02.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.34]) by air-yc05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:31:11 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:30:32 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id UAA57407;<BR>
	Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:30:21 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:27:27 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id UAA57308<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:27:26 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:27:26 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008010027.UAA57308@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2853<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2854
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com
Errors-To: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com
Precedence: bulk


Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2854



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

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Radiators in space
Re: Ship Size limits
Re: Ship Size limits
FFS3 draft heat rules
Re: FFS3 computers
RE: The Jesse's Art Book
Game report: Striker
Re: Ship size limits
Re: Did Farscape get it right?
Re: Ship size limits
Potential Gamers
Re: Ship size limits
Re: Potential Gamers
Re : Radiators
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates
Re: Ship size limits
Re: Potential Gamers
Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:37:15 -0400
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space

> Note that some proposed designs use liquid drops (molten metal!), and
> these are buildable in the near term. That raises the available
> operating temp considerably, and at lower TLs tha you use above.

What sort on endurance are we looking at here.  How much mass expended per
unit time per unit energy?
>
> More advanced designs have proposes some sort of scheme involving high
> "temperature" electrons in a cloud around the ship. I'm not entirely
> sure how that'd work. But I suspect it wouldn't "baffle" worth a damn.
>
> radiated in the visible spectrum. Consider "blue-white" stars. They are
> up *above* the ranges you give (the H-R diagram I'm looking at has the
> high end of the stellar temp scale labelled as 40,000 K!!).

Yes.
>
> > -Laser radiative cooling
>
> Thermodynamicly impossible. Waste heat is high entropy, laser beams are
> near zero entropy.

Its being done today. (on a small scale, undoubtedly where the tagret
material is enclosed in an environment and the external environment entropy
increases as a result.
>
>
> > -Gaseous-Fluidic cooling - Rejecting the working fluid and associated
waste
> > heat into space -a good lower tech solution (say TL12-)
>
> Impractical. Work out just how *much* material has to be throw away to
> cooling *ship*, not just the power plant.

I think you already addressed this.  I was merely proposing it as a possible
alternative.  Based on your numbers, it does appear to be practically
ineffective.
>
> Much simpler, there are ways to convert heat directly into electron
> emissions. They were originally developed for the cathodes of vacuum
> tubes.

Cool, and an excellent example of a real application.  Perhaps we have a
winner.
>
> > A PHILOSOPHICAL CONCEPT FOR THRUSTERS
> >
> > BTW, I disagree that thrusters violate Conservation of Energy and
Momentum.
>
> Sorry, but *by definition* they do so.
>
You assume that we "know" the full definition as it is known in 1100
Imperial.  I do not make this assumption.  On the other hand, I believe that
our understanding of physics and its laws will seem as incomplete to the
physicists of the 3I as that of the ancient Chinese seem to us.  It appears
to me that thrusters may be possible based on the effects that I have
described.  The mass depletion source is furnished by the large "stack" of
plates - a quantum pile.  The ultimate propulsive effect may be related to
pair production and merely extracts particles from the Zero vac.  But I do
see some Conservation of memoentum problems here.  Ultimately, the stream
would exit both end of the stack  That won't work for propulsiona nd would
fry the leading hull.  I need to rethink this.

When I initally devloped the concept, I imagined that the stack functioned
as a potential gradient generator, depleting the energy density between the
plates and propagating  the effect as a wave down its length to aft.  I
don't remember if the PP idea ever was reconciled with this.  In any case,
the effect is to couple the vacuum with the ship's drive, allowing the ship
to impart momentum to the vacuum (virtual particle field) and receive
momentum for that field.  In essence, this is extracting zero point energy
from the vacuum creating a negative energy state (deficit) ahead of the
ship.  This creates a gradient.  Wherever there is a potential gradient, a
force exists. Momentum is conserved and so is energy, but in order to
accomplish this, the vacuum ZPE must be included in the equation.  Our
current physics isn't enough.

And at this point, further debate becomes as useless as the Sumerians
hypothesizing why the sun lights the day.  Their science wasn't up to the
tasks, and their closest guesses might have been that the sun is a divine
fire in the sky which orbits the earth.

> > One needs to consider that our cuurent concept of total energy is
incomplete
> > and that there is potential tremedous latent energy in the vacuum.
>
> Sure, but that's an energy source. Not a *momentum* source.
>
Sorry, I disagree.  When you can extract energy, you can extract momentum,
just as long as it is conserved.  I don't believe in "reactionless" drives.
The thruster is nothing more than a sophisticated sort of virtual particle
jet rocket which derives its propulsion force by reducing a massive series
superdense plate at a subatomic or quantum level.  It apppears reactionless
becasue under the guise of Newtonian mechanics, the vacuum energy field and
even the latent energy of the atomic nucleus is not recognized.  Only when
using relativistic Mass-energy assumptions does it become clear that the
source of the ship's kinetic energy and momentum is the mass depletion of
the thruster plates.  The mechanism for this can only be truthfully
understood using physics that have yet to be developed and perhaps never
will be.  These same sciences provide the foundation for devices such as
nculear dampers and advanced (TL13+) meson devices.  I rather feel that
thrusters should be TL13 technolgy, becasue the TL13 revolution is where so
many similar advances happen.

> Ships with thruster plates increase their momentum with no balancing
> "loss" of momentum by anything else. Ditto for kinetic energy. Worse,
> the *amount* of these gaind depends on the relative velocity of the
> observer.

Again, I have always believed that the ecoil momentum is imparted to some
aspect of the quantum vacuum.  Thus thrusters are actually a reaction drive
using a virtual particle operating medium/fluid.
>
> Reaction drives don't have that problem because the exhaust has an
> equal and opposite amount of kinetic energy and momentum, *regardless*
> of your frame of reference.
>
> BTW, we tried playing around with *just* the energy aspect some years
> back. And selecting only one frame, that of the planet the ship was
> boosting away from.
>
> We came up with a self-consistent set of equations. Alas, they describe
> something *far* different than thruster plates. You see, the energy of
> the ship, relative to the planet increases as the *square* of the
> velocity. Which means that it quickly reaches completely unreasonable
> values. Even if you allow vacuum energy, you then have to explain how
> come they can't use this huge energy source for anything else.

Do you mean KE = (1/2)*M*V^2?  If not, I'm afraid I'm not following what you
are getting at Leonard.  Can you elaborate?
>
>
> Fine. Then it's not a reactionless drive, which is where the violations
> of conservation laws come in.

OK, then we agree on that.  This is essentially why I said they didn't
violate the sacred conservation laws.  Now if they violated the 2nd law of
thermo, then I would be worried.  Somehow, I bet that they do violate it
too.  Just a hunch.

> The problem is that when the particles are re-absorbed, the energy that
> went into the *other* half of the pair has to be "paid back". That's
> why the pair creation at the black hole event horizon *reduces* the
> mass of the black hole instead of increasing it.
>
> When the energy is paid back, so is the momentum. So you emit enough
> particles to cause the reaction (and the impact of the associated
> antiparticles) to give the ship a velocity of 1 m/s forward. Fine. Then
> the particles disappear, taking the momentum with them. So the ship stops.

>
> And in actuality, there's *another* snag. The particles would be
> created at rest WITH RESPECT TO THE GENERATOR. So the momentum cancels
> anyway.

Not if the field effect that creates them is not at rest WRT the source
mass.  Then they would be created with the specific momentum of the field
quanta.
I imagine this as like a near-c photon travelling near a masssive object
(atomic nucleus, black hole, massive object in a Meissner like nuclear force
exclusion
field).  The photon is destroyed and creates a particle/antiparticle pair.
The antiparticle is absorbed into the mass, annihilates and imparts its
momentum to the mass.  The particle is ejected astern, forming part of a
particle jet.  It is short lived and is reabsorbed by the vacuum at some
point, although I see no reason why this should be necessary.

(I can see some holes in this idea, and prefer the variation in which the
field effect generates a virtual particle gradient in the ZPF, creating a
force on the ship and i8mparting momentum to it and the ZPF.)

Just treat this as food for thought.  I'm open to suggestions and criticisms
and would especially like to quantify this for use.  The only thing that I
categorically reject is the idea that something like thruster plates is
impossible.  I think that our physics just isn't up to the tas because we
don't know where the energy is hidden.

- -Dan Lane.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:42:07 -0500
From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@hex.net>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits

At 01:43 PM 07/31/2000, you wrote:
>On 07/31/00 at 01:37 AM,  SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> said:
>
> >At 19:45 -0400 30/7/00,  "Nick Bradbeer"
> ><nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> >>I can't find the table of size limits in HG2 (I really ought to know my way
> >>around the book better - could somebody post a page number?) but surely the
> >>size limit for TL-12 still allows pretty big ships? At the moment fighters
> >>aren't a lot of good against anything past about a thousand tons.
>
> >It's the computer table on p26. Max hull size is governed by computer
> >rating. Computer rating is governed by TL. Ergo hull size is governed  by
> >TL.
>
>If that wasn't so well hidden, I'd have noticed it *long* ago.  <g>
>
>At TL12, the limit for computers is 6, the largest ship a 6 can
>operate is an R, and an R is 100,000 dtons, therefore the largest
>ship you can build at TL12 is 100,000 dtons.  And yeah, IMO, that's
>a pretty big ship.
>
>Eris

Eris,

It also was carried over into MT, I tried to design a STL ship for crossing 
space, with mostly cold births. It could not be done at the TL's at which 
traveller said it was, most of the ships were under 100,000 dt. I have not 
given a thought to the hand wave that would have let it happen.

Sinbad Sam

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:43:28 -0400
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits

I want to have ships the size of Montana too.  In fact, I used historical
ship building sizes graphed over time to develop a feasibility curve for
ship sizes. The limiting factor is apparently (nearly as I can see from teh
curve) material strengths.  The slope increased dramatically with the
subsequent introductions of iron and steel construction techniques.
the slop jumps in the following years:

1845 iron construction gains dominance
1907 steam turbines, all iron construction?
1932 it has a slight downturn (great depression?)
1938 WWII, all steel construction?

I'll make this available to those interested.

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 17:56:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com>
Subject: FFS3 draft heat rules

Heat Rules -- Draft

Summary: having heat from the power plant, and then more heat from
the systems being powered, is somewhat annoying doubling.  Therefore,
the rule of thumb will be that heat production is (40-TL*2)% of the
total energy consumption of the ship (it will be higher for very low
tech ships).  You must then get heat control to deal with that heat.
Heat control consists of radiators, rechargeable heat sinks, and
non-rechargeable heat sinks.

Radiators simply eliminate heat.  The listed stats are per megawatt
of heat eliminated.  Note that radiators really do draw power, though
no additional heat is charged for this.  It is possible to create
folding radiators; choose a multiple from 2 to 5.  Multiply radiator
volume by this amount; divide folded area by the same.  A folded
radiator is reduced effect (divide as above).  Folding radiators are
not normally armored, but can be armored without substantially affecting
their performance (they will take longer to cool).
TL      8       9       10      12      14
Area    100     30      10      3       1
Volume  10      3       1       .3      .1
Weight  20      10      5       2       1
Power   .4      1       2       3       5

Rechargeable Heat Sinks absorb heat for a while; the heat eventually
has to be gotten rid of in another way.  They consist of specialized
materials which undergo a reversible change of state when heated. 
The primary advantage is that they do not consume surface area.  
Per ton, rechargeable heat sinks hold 0.05 * TL megawatt-hours, fill
1 M^3, and cost Cr 10,000.

Non-rechargeable heat sinks absorb heat by vaporizing some material.
Simple water tanks can eliminate 1 megawatt-hour per ton and are
essentially free; other materials will discharge 0.2 * TL megawatt-hours
and run Cr 2,000 per ton.  Either is 1 ton/m^3.  They require 0.1
M^2/megawatt for venting mechanisms.

Any undischarged heat will heat up the hull, at a rate of 1 degree *
(unresolved power) / (vehicle weight in tons).

This means that an AHL-sized ship, displacing 60,000 tons and weighing
600,000 tons, with 1,200,000 tons of T-plates (covering 6,000 M^2),
drawing 30,000 MW, has a heat output of 3600 MW from the drives.  That
requires 3600 M^2 (TL 14) and an extra 18,000 MW of power.  If for
some reason the radiators shut off, it will overheat at 3600/600000 or
0.006 degrees/second (11 degrees per space combat turn).

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 19:57:19 -0500
From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@hex.net>
Subject: Re: FFS3 computers

At 04:45 AM 07/31/2000, you wrote:
><snip>
>Fine. You are in as Head of IT.

Damn it! pooched again!<G>

>I kinda assume that part of those insanely expensive sensor arrays are
>dedicated sensor data processing computers.

I also agree but to some extent sensors could always use some additional 
signal processing power. That is one thing that needs to worked out. How 
much processing power does a specific sensor have to start with. What 
effect does additional processing power have?

>BTW I actually dont mind the 'traditional' sizes of Trav computers. If you
>do want them small, can you also include 'optional' extras like climate
>control, redundant power and space to allow someone to crawl in and replace
>bits (preferably in combat. Even better, while it's in use in combat ...).

I prefer the computers presented in T4, it more closely resembles the 
computer growth explosion of the our planet. The ones in CT did not give 
any benefit of higher TL on price, mass, volume etc. It assumed that at TL 
15 you would want the TL 15 current model. It reminds me of the IBM 
computer "priesthood" of the early sixties and seventies.


>A Book 2 software system will at least be looked at wistfully :)

Software can easily be added to the system.

Sinbad Sam

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:04:24 -0700
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net>
Subject: RE: The Jesse's Art Book

That's similar to what I was thinking.  If the picture ratio isn't the same
as the page ratio, then there could be a sidebar with text bits describing
the shot, location, plot elements, or whatever.

Best,
Jesse




> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Benyamene'
> ZeAbe' Akella
> Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2000 6:34 PM
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
> Subject: Re: The Jesse's Art Book
>
>
> Via electronic medium on 7/29/00 12:49 PM, Travelleri@home.com
> issued forth:
>
> > Size of page is up in the air, 8.5"x11" vs. 8.5"x14", the ratio
> seems to be
> > off for most of the art I've seen on Jesse's page. Now
> 11"x17"... ah, you'd
> > probably lose sales at that size. I'd say go with the size that
> best fits
> > the size ratio of the art. I'd rather see a smaller page than
> one with a lot
> > of open area around the picture. I sure don't want to see them
> stretched and
> > distorted to fit a page size ratio that they weren't designed for.
>
> No, streching is bad. But what about some info about the picture
> in whatever
> margin there is, or some color text like the Beowulf mayday?
>

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:29:04 -0700
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net>
Subject: Game report: Striker

On July 29th, the San Jose Traveller group played Striker. The opposing
forces were a ragged assortment (TL 7 to 10) of forces on the planet Mongo,
representing both the forces loyal to the government as well as rebels
trying to take advantage of the political upheaval after the Fifth Frontier
War.

The loyalist forces, a company of mechanized infantry, advanced in their
APCs to occupy the ruins of the Mongo downport commerce park. The quickly
met elements of the rebel force in ACVs, which were moving at relatively
high speeds (these guys cover the entire table in one turn). The ACV troops
quickly occupied the few intact downport facilities, remaining exposed to
the loyalists fire for too short a time to allow the loyalists to
effectively engage them.

Soon, additional rebel elements were sighted on the North ridge,
approximately 800 meters from the loyalists position. These rebel troops
were in armored recon vehicles whose light armor proved no match for the RAM
grenades carried by the loyalist infantry, and soon the recon element was
neutralized. Apparently the intelligence of the rebels was faulty,
indicating that no serious anti-armor threat would be expected.

In the firefight developing between the troops in the commerce park and the
downport, the loyalist troops launched massive waves of RAM grenades at the
armored ACVs of the rebels, scoring a few lucky hits, rendering two-thirds
of the ACVs immobile.  After this, an obvious stalemate developed, with
neither side able to gain a tactical advantage over the other due to the
lack of any artillery support.

The game ended at this point, with the loyalist troops occupying the
commerce park with the rebels occupying the downport facilities
approximately 600 meters away.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 21:57:55 -0400
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits

>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:58:48 +1000
>From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au>
>Subject: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates
>
>The first one is that, whilst power plant == radiator output looks like it
>works for small ships, it breaks down for large ships. And I think we all
>want something the size of the AHL.

Speak for yourself, mate. A 5,000-dton ship is more than 70,000 tons
displacement or 25,000 grt -- and it flies. That's plenty big enough for me.

For comparison, an /Ohio/-class ballistic missile submarine is 1,300 dtons
- -- roughly the size of /Kinunir/. The average merchant cargo vessel is
3,400 dtons; excluding tankers, the average is only 2,700 dtons. A 200-dton
free trader is the size and cargo capacity of a C-5 /Galaxy/.

While you're about fixing things, Ian, don't forget to adjust hull and/or
frame material for the g-rating of the drives. (And no, I am not
volunteering, merely kibbitzing).

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

Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 00:25:42 -0700
From: "Delos" <delos@superior.net>
Subject: Re: Did Farscape get it right?

SPOILER












- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com>
> The identity of that voice is the subject of some debate.  Many think it's
> Scorpious, who has, in the past, had the oppotunity to play with John's
> mind.

I figure Scorpius latched on to some father-son event and pirated his Dad's
voice.

=) But that's just one of a thousand theories, eh?

What had been done with living-ships in the Traveler Universe?
(According to canon., I mean.)

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:30:14 -0400
From: "Samuel D. Weiss" <samwise1@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits

Been busy again but I wanted to chime in with this.
While all this talk of radiators and surface area and such is nice, some of
us (me?) were impressed with HG, daunted by Striker and fainted at MT. The
on time I glanced at FFS I had to fight from fleeing in outright fear.
For us non-engineering inclined types, the use of computer size to limit
ship size does more than enough to give it that neat sci-fi techie feel
without making us whimper in fear every time we have to look at a vehicle
stat form not to mentiong think about trying to design one.
Yakking about Pop limits and just how fascist or communist the SolCon is one
thing.  Techie stuff is another.
I now return you to your regularly scheduled radiator ranting.
:)

Sam
Soft sciences rule, hard sciences drool.

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

Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 12:56:30 +1000
From: William & Melissa Kendell <billk@planet.net.au>
Subject: Potential Gamers

We have recently (last Friday night) had two new potential game players
arrive at our local hospital.

Thanks to my wonderful wife, they are William Ryan Kendell, born at 9.39pm
Fri 28/7/00; and Ilona Jade Kendell, born at 9.48pm Fri 28/7/00.

Keep the flame.

Bill Kendell
Programming since 1974. Gaming since 1980. Husband/Stepfater since 1999.
Father of twins August 2000.

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:20:40 -0500
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net
Subject: Re: Ship size limits

On 07/31/00 at 09:57 PM,  Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com> said:

>>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:58:48 +1000
>>From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au>
>>Subject: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates
>>
>>The first one is that, whilst power plant == radiator output looks like it
>>works for small ships, it breaks down for large ships. And I think we all
>>want something the size of the AHL.

>Speak for yourself, mate. A 5,000-dton ship is more than 70,000 tons
>displacement or 25,000 grt -- and it flies. That's plenty big enough for
>me.

LOL!  Me too, unfortunately we seem to be a minority.  I'm willing
to let them have their monster ships, but want to push them back a
few TL's and cut them down a trifle.  Why can't 60,000 dton ships
become 15,000, 100,000 dton ships become 25,000 and 300,000 dtons
ships become 75,000?  Dang it those are HUGE ships!  Part of the
problem, I think, is that these monster maniacs don't realize just
how bloody big even a 5,000 dton ship really is...think 100 meters
long by 20 meters wide by 35 meters high.  That's an 8 story
apartment block...and it flies!!!

>For comparison, an /Ohio/-class ballistic missile submarine is 1,300
>dtons -- roughly the size of /Kinunir/. The average merchant cargo vessel
>is 3,400 dtons; excluding tankers, the average is only 2,700 dtons. A
>200-dton free trader is the size and cargo capacity of a C-5 /Galaxy/.

That's right.  I work in a building that is about the same volume as
a 400 dton ship.  Yes, I actually walk around saying, "Yep, that's a
100 S-100, and over there is a 400 dton Subbie."...saying to myself,
that is. <g>

>While you're about fixing things, Ian, don't forget to adjust hull and/or
>frame material for the g-rating of the drives. (And no, I am not
>volunteering, merely kibbitzing).

That's in FFS already, so it should continue to be.

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:22:48 -0500
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net
Subject: Re: Potential Gamers

On 08/01/00 at 12:56 PM,  William & Melissa Kendell <billk@planet.net.au> said:

>We have recently (last Friday night) had two new potential game players
>arrive at our local hospital.

>Thanks to my wonderful wife, they are William Ryan Kendell, born at
>9.39pm Fri 28/7/00; and Ilona Jade Kendell, born at 9.48pm Fri 28/7/00.

>Keep the flame.

>Bill Kendell
>Programming since 1974. Gaming since 1980. Husband/Stepfater since 1999.
>Father of twins August 2000.

Congratulations!  And I wish you luck. <g>

Eris
- -- 
- -----------------------------------------------------------
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr
- -----------------------------------------------------------

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

Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 13:21:31 +1000
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au>
Subject: Re : Radiators

Doh!
I wrote :-
> There may be some room for
> improving heat pump performance at higher TTLs (assuming a base temp of
> 500K, the TTL 8 radiator has a coefficient of performance of about
> 0.52).

The only way of doing this is to reduce the temperature/heat gradient
between the reservoirs.

c = Q1/W = Q1/(Q2-Q1) = T1/(T2-T1)

where the low temp reservoir is #1, the high temp one #2 and W the work
done by the heat pump.


Robert O'Connor
Medico, Gamer

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:43:54 -0700
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates

- -----Original Message-----
From: Nick Bradbeer <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Date: Monday, July 31, 2000 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates


>>John Groth wrote:
>> Of course, _I_ want ships the size of _Montana_.... ;-)
>
>Nick turns to the camera, raises an eyebrow, and does The Point. The stereo
>switches on, and the Brothers Gibb begin to belt out. Nick smiles, and
>begins to beat the unfortunate ubergearhead to the floor, in time to the
>music.
>
>WHAM, WHAM, WHAM, WHAM, stayin' alive, stayin' alive, WHAM WHAM WHAM...


    Legate Legion walks in wielding the latest weapon from FS & looks at
Nick & says with a slight smile. "Get off of him your big bully.  If you
want to play Battletech with their heat problems, do so, just do not make me
worry about heat in Traveller."  Look, if you want to mess around with
radiators, do so, if you don't, don't.  There is no need to get violent,
like Nick always does, when someone does not agree with him.
    Nick, you might want to see to a career as a Skinhea...er....member of
SolSec, as you have so much anger, hatred, & violence inside of you.

    I bid you peace.

Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.
ICQ # 8973001
legate@futureone.com

"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:45:56 -0400
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits

I think that anything less thena a Nimitz class carrier is puny.  Yes CG's
and BB's are big, but my brother defined ship sizes based on his perspective
from the B-1.  He noted that anything less than a runway length seems puny.
If you've ever been at pierside beside a 100,000 ton carrier, you might note
that they look smaller than they do from afar.  But from the inside, they
are awfully huge.  So are 36,000 - 40,000 ton amphibs.

Here are some approximate Imperial ship sizes for comparison/reference:

BI-15     680m length, 290m beam, 34m height
CJ-15    500m length, 80m height, 200m beam            (RIFT CRUISER)
BB-13    267m length, 158m height, 267m diameter    (VOROSHILEF)
CA-15   450m to 500m length (can't find my calculations)

The largest canonical MT Fighting Ship is the 700,000 dt BI-15.  There may
also be a Battle Tender which is 1,000,000.  Don't remember where I might
have seen this.

- -Dan Lane

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:53:56 -0400
From: "Mike Demetro" <punkabilly@sprint.ca>
Subject: Re: Potential Gamers

> Thanks to my wonderful wife, they are William Ryan Kendell, born at 9.39pm
> Fri 28/7/00; and Ilona Jade Kendell, born at 9.48pm Fri 28/7/00.
> 
Awesome! Congratulations to you and your lovely wife.

Mike Demetro, President, The Guildhall Press, Canada
www.guildhallpress.com president@guildhallpress.com 

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

Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:43:01 -0400
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com>
Subject: Re: [BITS] GT Bestiary released for MacOS

>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 05:36:30 PST
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
>
>In mail you write:
>

<snip>

>Are you part of the "Portland branch" of the TML? If so, I can
>recommend a couple of folks who could likely set you up.


Actually no. Ypsilanti, MI. Thanks for the thought though.

Dave Shayne

"She came from Planet Claire
 I knew she came from there
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite
 Faster than the speed of light"
  - B-52's

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

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2854
***********************************

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

<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2855</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 3:12:01 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2855<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Solamani Confederation<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
RE: Alien Vision<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
RE: Murchison's Eye (Was: Balkanized systems)<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
Re: Potential Gamers<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
RE: Moving a rock...<BR>
Modern Mercury...<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done <BR>
Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:41:18 -0500<BR>
From: tim@premier.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Hi all<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> >Speak for yourself, mate. A 5,000-dton ship is more than 70,000 tons<BR>
> >displacement or 25,000 grt -- and it flies. That's plenty big enough for<BR>
> >me.<BR>
> <BR>
> LOL!  Me too, unfortunately we seem to be a minority.  I'm willing<BR>
> to let them have their monster ships, but want to push them back a<BR>
> few TL's and cut them down a trifle.  Why can't 60,000 dton ships<BR>
> become 15,000, 100,000 dton ships become 25,000 and 300,000 dtons<BR>
> ships become 75,000?  Dang it those are HUGE ships!  Part of the<BR>
> problem, I think, is that these monster maniacs don't realize just<BR>
> how bloody big even a 5,000 dton ship really is...think 100 meters<BR>
> long by 20 meters wide by 35 meters high.  That's an 8 story<BR>
> apartment block...and it flies!!!<BR>
<BR>
You are not alone Eris, i have been reading the thread and have <BR>
saved alot of cool ideas.  I too see 100,000 ton ships as to big.<BR>
I have a soluation to the problem.  Have all these people in favor of <BR>
10,000 tons or better draw up deck plans.  That will break them.<BR>
<BR>
I tried doing deckplans for an 18,000 ton liner for an adventure idea. <BR>
 It would be 21 two foot by 1 1/2 foot pieces of graph paper.  I <BR>
stoped that adventure right away.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tim Reynolds<BR>
tim@premier.net <BR>
225-334-5063<BR>
www.premier.net/~tim<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Knowledge, information, power, words...Flying through<BR>
the air, invisible<BR>
And suddenly the world was tap dancing on quicksand.<BR>
In that case, the prize went to the best dancer<BR>
Terry Pratchett: The Fifth Elephant <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:19:11 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
>To arrive at the quoted figures, I used the TL7 baseline (which was<BR>
>developed from realworld space radiator values).<BR>
Without going into it in detail, this might be the issue. At TL7 radiator<BR>
temperatures (eg 400 K), the temperature of the object you're radiating into<BR>
shows up in the equations; for most space applications, that's<BR>
the Earth, over at least 2pi of the steradians, at 300K.<BR>
<BR>
Once your radiators are at 2000 K, and if as an added bonus you're in<BR>
deep space, the temperature you're radiating into is almost irrelevant.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:24:20 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Solamani Confederation<BR>
<BR>
    I have been thinking about the Solamani Confederation in my games, &<BR>
while I do have access to the CT Alien Module for them, I never really used<BR>
any of the ideas in it.<BR>
    I have always seen the 3I as 19th Century Brits in Space.  OK, so you<BR>
may think it is Yanks in Space, but look at the facts.  3I, Nobles; USA, NO<BR>
Nobles.  19th Century Britan, Nobles; 3I, Nobles.  'Nuff said.<BR>
    As for the Solamni Confederation, I see them as Yanks in space, & I use<BR>
the CT book as a propaganda tool used by the 3I to prove to its people that<BR>
the SC needs to be part of the 3I.  But, in my game the SC is really about<BR>
TL16/17 & looking rimward for expansion, though it is also getting ready to<BR>
retake Terra.<BR>
    In TNE, I have used the SC as a basis for a couple of games, based upon<BR>
the above model.  As SC tech is about TL 16/17 they were not as hard hit by<BR>
Virus as most, in fact their TL16+ worlds were not hit at all & they were<BR>
able to pull out of the problems very quickly & are not TL 20.  They have<BR>
reclaimed their lost worlds & have bootstraped as many of them as they could<BR>
to at least TL 16.<BR>
    Now, the downside.  Yes, they are racists, but in a differant format to<BR>
what most people say they are.  They only like races born of Terra, so any<BR>
races of Humaniti are cool with them, but if you have even a single drop of<BR>
Solomani Blood, you are able to become a citizen.  As for the other Major<BR>
Races, well the only ones they can stand are the Vargr.  Vargr are treated<BR>
like Solomani Citizens, due to their origin.  And, many of the elite units<BR>
in the SCMil have quite a few Vargr in them.<BR>
    Anyway, my 0.02 Cr on the matter.  I like the SC & do not like them to<BR>
be a evil state.<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:37:07 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
Nick Bradbeer wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >John Groth wrote:<BR>
> > Of course, _I_ want ships the size of _Montana_.... ;-)<BR>
> <BR>
> Nick turns to the camera, raises an eyebrow, and does The Point. The stereo<BR>
> switches on, and the Brothers Gibb begin to belt out. Nick smiles, and<BR>
> begins to beat the unfortunate ubergearhead to the floor, in time to the<BR>
> music.<BR>
> <BR>
> WHAM, WHAM, WHAM, WHAM, stayin' alive, stayin' alive, WHAM WHAM WHAM...<BR>
<BR>
I admire your optimism, sir, but I suspect that your reach might exceed<BR>
your grasp in this case.  ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Besides, advocating violence against me, even in such obvious<BR>
tongue-in-cheek terms, does little to advance any argument that large<BR>
ships should not exist.<BR>
<BR>
Seriously, why do you object to the existence of ships the size of<BR>
_Montana_ (500,000 dtons), bearing in mind that _Montana_ is the same<BR>
size as the canonical _Tigress_-class?  IMHO, the existence of large<BR>
vessels in the Traveller universe is a _good_ thing for roleplaying, for<BR>
several reasons:<BR>
<BR>
1.  Player characters flying small merchant vessels should not _expect_<BR>
to fight major naval units with any hope of winning.  OTOH, they should<BR>
also not expect to _encounter_ such vessels as opponents, unless they<BR>
have behaved in such a manner as to deserve the undivided attention of<BR>
the nearest fleet that owns such vessels.  Avoiding such undivided<BR>
attention is part of the roleplaying experience.<BR>
<BR>
2.  Limiting the size of starships to LBB2 (5000 dton) size would<BR>
detract from the roleplaying experience, for two reasons.  First, for<BR>
the price of one _Brooklyn_-class light cruiser (TL-13, 60,000 dtons,<BR>
MCr 89,296.745), one can purchase 379 800-dton mercenary cruisers, with<BR>
change left over.  In an average PC-sized ship, which would _you_ rather<BR>
face: one _Brooklyn_, that can kill your ship in an instant, _if_ it<BR>
finds you; or three hundred Type-M mercenary cruisers, that _will_ find<BR>
you, pile on, and kill you deader than Elvis?  Second, for those<BR>
campaigns in which the PCs are high-ranking military officers, limiting<BR>
ships to LBB2 size means that a fleet action will involve hundreds, or<BR>
even thousands, of "capital" ships on each side.  A 5FW cruiser squadron<BR>
would consist of 1500 or so Type-M cruisers, rather than four<BR>
_Brooklyn_-class ships.  How much roleplaying can one experience with<BR>
such massive numbers of ships on each side?<BR>
<BR>
3.  The premise that an interstellar culture that is over 1100 years old<BR>
would be unable to build starships larger than late 20th century<BR>
warships is, IMHO, ludicrous.  Consider that a _Nimitz_ class CVN<BR>
displaces about 100,000 tons at full load.  This equates to over 7000<BR>
dtons - and does not account for the fact that _most_ of the ship's<BR>
volume is above the waterline.  Limiting the ships of the 3I to such<BR>
puny dimensions "snaps my disbelief suspenders."<BR>
<BR>
4.  While I have been composing this e-mail, one TMLer suggested that<BR>
the advocates of larger vessels should be required to draw deck plans of<BR>
such ships, implying that an inability on the part of large-ship<BR>
advocates to draw such plans somehow invalidates the idea that large<BR>
ships can exist in the 3I.  I would ask those who hold this view to<BR>
answer two questions:  First, does a lack of artistic ability on the<BR>
part of a ship designer (I would be hard-pressed to draw reasonable deck<BR>
plans for a Type-S scout/courier from scratch) invalidate a design<BR>
concept?  Second, did Admirals Nagumo, Ozawa, Spruance, or Halsey<BR>
require knowledge of their ships' deck plans to fight the battles of<BR>
Midway and Leyte Gulf?<BR>
<BR>
> I thank you.<BR>
<BR>
Did you expect applause for claiming to pound me against the floor?  If<BR>
so, that was rather "nyekulturniy" of you.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 07:50:56 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
<SNIP><BR>
<BR>
>My son (17) is a living example of this.  We found out that he is<BR>
>totally Red-Green color blind<BR>
>(at least as far as the tests are concered) when he went for his<BR>
>learners permit.  Yet hr can distinguish AND categorize subtle shading<BR>
>differences in reds and greens, even when mixed -- if they aren't mixed<BR>
>like the color blindness tests.  With extreme effort he can make out the<BR>
>distictions when the are mixed -- but it's more a learned thing.  The<BR>
>lower the light level the more easily<BR>
>he is conufsed, as might be expected.  It's really odd.  And of course<BR>
>theres no real way to discuss what he sees because green is green to<BR>
>him!  It's what he has learned.<BR>
<BR>
>Mike<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I myself am red/green colour blind, Mike. It is kinda hard to describe...red<BR>
and green are very differant colours to me, and I can certainly understand<BR>
writers when they talk about 'angry reds' or 'lush greens' (mind you, it is<BR>
emotive language and the concepts are entirly subjective). I have no<BR>
difficulty telling red from green...but do confuse some of the darker greens<BR>
and browns...and oddly my girlfriend told me the other day that something I<BR>
always thought was a mid-range, silvery grey was actually light blue. Hardly<BR>
a great disadvantage, but it does mean I can't become an airline pilot (I<BR>
case I can't tell the differance between a green 'everything's OK' LED and a<BR>
red 'panic' one :) )<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:48:04 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
Trevor, Peter wrote :<BR>
> Eris wrote:<BR>
> > I'm focused on roleplaying, not wargaming.  Character skills<BR>
> > *have* to matter in operations, and I want a PC to have to<BR>
> > worry about juggling software into and out of the computer<BR>
> > system.<BR>
<BR>
Didn't see the original, but while I agree with Eris' aim of having PC's<BR>
make decisions, juggling software does not make sense in anything but a<BR>
jury-rigged ship, I have to agree<BR>
with Peter on the swapping of software.<BR>
<BR>
No modern aircraft changes software in flight, that only happens at<BR>
overhauls.<BR>
<BR>
I very much doubt that this will get _worse_ in the future, in other words,<BR>
not only do I suspect software will not be juggled in flight, but it will be<BR>
installed when the ship is built and will not change unless there is a major<BR>
change to the ship's configuration, such as the addition of turrets where<BR>
there weren't any.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
Vist Munden's Bar at http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/~frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:06:51 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Murchison's Eye (Was: Balkanized systems)<BR>
<BR>
>As I recall, the UK title for 'The Gripping Hand' was 'The Moat around<BR>
>Murchison's Eye'<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Makes sense, I'm in the UK. Darn it! I thought that meant there was a thrid<BR>
book out there somewhere! :)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 03:18:37 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
Going by memory. Larry Niven covered this in "Integral Tree." The gist is<BR>
that<BR>
a fire in zero-g will have a tendency to smother itself. Without gravity to<BR>
provide an up the smoke just stays around the flame and eventually the<BR>
oxygen runs out.<BR>
<BR>
A good breeze, say from somebody fanning the flames or a leak in a preasure<BR>
hose will push aside the smoke, is required for the fire to be sustainable.<BR>
<BR>
The flame itself will tend toward a spherical shape unless elongated in the<BR>
direction of a breeze. The flame will have a hot (white or blue) center<BR>
surrounded by cooler (yellow, orange, and finally perhaps red) layers.<BR>
<BR>
Hope this helps<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 03:32:02 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Potential Gamers<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 12:56:30 +1000<BR>
>From: William & Melissa Kendell <billk@planet.net.au><BR>
>Subject: Potential Gamers<BR>
><BR>
>We have recently (last Friday night) had two new potential game players<BR>
>arrive at our local hospital.<BR>
><BR>
>Thanks to my wonderful wife, they are William Ryan Kendell, born at 9.39pm<BR>
>Fri 28/7/00; and Ilona Jade Kendell, born at 9.48pm Fri 28/7/00.<BR>
><BR>
>Keep the flame.<BR>
><BR>
>Bill Kendell<BR>
>Programming since 1974. Gaming since 1980. Husband/Stepfater since 1999.<BR>
>Father of twins August 2000.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Mazletov<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 01:25:23 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
- --- John Groth <wombat@premier.net> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Seriously, why do you object to the existence of ships the size of<BR>
> _Montana_ (500,000 dtons), bearing in mind that _Montana_ is the same<BR>
> size as the canonical _Tigress_-class?  IMHO, the existence of large<BR>
> vessels in the Traveller universe is a _good_ thing for roleplaying,<BR>
> for<BR>
> several reasons:<BR>
 <BR>
OH! You mean the vessel Montana, not the state. <g>.<BR>
<BR>
Terry<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:27:16 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Moving a rock...<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
<<I remember some scientist or someone in a magazine advocating interstellar<BR>
<BR>
journies by moving the sun.  Inducing and keeping a large flare to move the <BR>
sun towards the system you want to visit and having it take the planets with<BR>
<BR>
it.  You get the convienence of not having to leave your home but you end up<BR>
<BR>
buring off 15-40% of the suns mass in the increased fusion needed to produce<BR>
<BR>
this huge drive plume.<BR>
<BR>
I could see some culture developing this form of interstelar drive as a <BR>
varient of the Darrian star trigger technology and coming to pay the<BR>
Imperium <BR>
a visit>><BR>
<BR>
Kinda dangerous, though, surely? <grin><BR>
Creating and sustaining a solar flare if that magnitude would surely have<BR>
some unfortunate magnetic effects on any planets within the life zone, not<BR>
to mention frying any inner planets, but who cares about those, right?<BR>
Certianly there are problems with TV reception on Earth every now and then<BR>
due to solar activity. Naturally, of course, that is under the assumption<BR>
that the stellar flare is not aimed from the poles. If that was the case,<BR>
wouldn't the orbits of the planets would be messed up due to the stars<BR>
gravitational pull acting perpendicular to the momentuum of the plaents in<BR>
their orbit? I'm pretty sure you can't just go spinning planets around like<BR>
billiard balls without throwing the gravitational balance of the system<BR>
seriously out of whack. If the system has gas giants too...ouch.<BR>
Not that these thoughts are all phrased as questions. As Dr. Evil might say<BR>
'I don't know science' :)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:57:02 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Modern Mercury...<BR>
<BR>
Quick gearhead question...<BR>
<BR>
    how difficult would it be to build a modern Mercury launch system<BR>
(one person to orbit and return) using off the shelf components?<BR>
    how expensive would it be?<BR>
    would it be portable/semiportable/launch anywhere capable?<BR>
<BR>
    how bout a modern Gemini (2 person or one+payload for duration)<BR>
<BR>
Rob<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 01:51:50 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
- --- Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
Your route, while shorter, takes longer to get there. 8 jumps as <BR>
opposed to seven. That is also a factor. Time is money. Taking <BR>
the jump three would have made them the same, still. Both your route <BR>
and mine there are viable, if one accepts that trade though zones <BR>
listed as dangerous like Amber zones, would have any real through <BR>
traffic. I tend to agree with Ian that insurance and factors along <BR>
that route would be high enough to keep a good portion of the <BR>
corps from "trading through". <BR>
<BR>
Also, a difference of 19 to 16 makes no difference in an economic<BR>
sense. To make a difference would require an alternate route the <BR>
is 9 pc or shorter. So, the route I chose would count as a viable<BR>
bypass to the "dangerous Amber zone". It would almost make more <BR>
sense if instead of distance, it were the number of jumps that <BR>
mattered more.<BR>
<BR>
> > marker I used. I have trade going to but not through Amber or Red <BR>
> > zones. I figure if there is trade from that world someone will <BR>
> > have specially trained crews to go there and back. I came up with <BR>
> > these limits after a lot of email back and forth with Jim MacLean, <BR>
> > the man that came up with the rules in the first place. Do you<BR>
> agree <BR>
> > with my interpretation?<BR>
> <BR>
> I asked him his opinion on amber zones, he basically said 'call them<BR>
> a tiebreaker' -- i.e. if there's an equal path, don't route through<BR>
> it, but otherwise ignore amber zones.<BR>
<BR>
He really needs to actually write out the rules in clear language <BR>
and post them. <grumble> The book seems to read that you avoid them <BR>
and as far as I was concerned, that was that and I didn't question <BR>
that subject. For the time being, I am going to stick to my view on <BR>
the Amber zones. I respect your opinion (and Jim's words on them <BR>
to you) but am just not swayed. <BR>
<BR>
I have a writeup of the way I interpreted the rules after discussion <BR>
with him. I am going to dig them up and, after cleaning them up, send <BR>
them to him and see if he will endorse a clearly written set of rules <BR>
that removes ambiguities like this.<BR>
<BR>
Thank you very much for your input Anthony. I really appreciate it.<BR>
<BR>
Terry<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 01:57:06 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done <BR>
<BR>
- --- Katharine Whitchurch <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> wrote:<BR>
 <BR>
> > > I can't see how, without going through a starport of less than<BR>
> > > class 3, or an Amber or Red zone.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > It's legit to route through amber zones.  Route is:<BR>
> <BR>
> Thats easy to solve. Imagine a flunky at a starport, somewhere in the<BR>
> Marches ...<BR>
> <BR>
> "See, in the Third Imperium, insurers wont cover freight going<BR>
> through Amber zones.<BR>
> <BR>
> You might argue it's a stupid policy. But it's in the Hortalez <BR>
> et Cie Blue Book (starport flunky points to Blue Book). They <BR>
> might do things differently where y'all are from, but here in <BR>
> the Three-Eye, thats just how it works."<BR>
<BR>
I agree with your view on trade through Amber zones, Ian. I wonder <BR>
how insurers today feel about ships that regularly stop at ports <BR>
where there are armed insurrections and so on. I would imagine those <BR>
that have insurace would see their rates fly up.<BR>
<BR>
> Terry, you did a bloody magnificent job. And if any sharp-eyed <BR>
> player spots a more efficient route, well, let them bid for <BR>
> freight on it, and see if they can make money on a non-standard <BR>
> 'Held Covered' route.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks! I appreaciate the good words.<BR>
<BR>
Terry<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:47:19 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 8:32 AM -0800 7/31/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> [Regarding storing heat and then dumping it, it is also an<BR>
> approach that I haven't gotten into....]<BR>
><BR>
>>Basicly, it's *totally* impractical. You can only dump s much heat into<BR>
>>the mass, and once you've done that and dumped it, it's gone.<BR>
>><BR>
>>At the power levels required for most ships, you'd be lucky to carry a<BR>
>>few turns worth of that sort of coolant.<BR>
><BR>
> [snip]<BR>
><BR>
>>As I recall, it takes one kilogram calorie to raise the temp of a kilo<BR>
>>of (liquid) water by one K. It takes hundreds to convert a kilo of ice<BR>
>>to a kilo of water (both at 0 C). It takes hundreds more to convert a<BR>
>>kilo of water to a kilo of steam. So to go from 0 K to 273 K (0 C)<BR>
>>takes some number of kcal. Say it takes 300. Say it takes another 300<BR>
>>to melt the ice. Then 100 to get from 273 K to 373 K (100 C). Say it<BR>
>>takes another 300 to turn the water to steam. So we are now at 373 K,<BR>
>>and have used up 1100 kcal. Lets say it takes another 900 to raise the<BR>
>>steam to 1000 K. That's 2000 kcal total. Or 8400 Joules.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Water has darn near the highest heat capacity known, if not the<BR>
>>highest. And using the (overly optimistic) figures figures above, we<BR>
>>can get rid of 8.4 kJ per kilo of water (assuming we start with it at<BR>
>>absolute zero).<BR>
><BR>
> Why do yo have to stop there?  Why can't you use gravitic<BR>
> technology to create superheated plasmas?  Heck, you might<BR>
> be able to get all the way up just short of neuclear fusion.<BR>
> (In fact, if you choose Fe, it won't fuse and you can start<BR>
> storing energy in neuclear dissociations).<BR>
<BR>
Because the temp at which you dump the coolant is the max temp you can<BR>
use it to cool you to (well, close enough, their are tricks when<BR>
dealing with state changes). So the higher the temp of the coolant when<BR>
dumped, the higher the temp if whatever you are cooling. <BR>
<BR>
Yes, you can pump heat into it (like a refrigerator does). But that<BR>
increases the amount of heat you need to get rid of drastically. You<BR>
rapidly hit the point of diminishing returns. And since there are<BR>
pretty hard limits on how much coolant you have, "pumping" heat into it<BR>
is a waste of scarce resources.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:54:29 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> <Leonard><BR>
> Actually, it's sort of pinkish. And no, I'm *not* kidding. I don't know<BR>
> if everyone can do this, but I once spotted a soldering iron I'd left<BR>
> plugged in the desk in my bedroom. I was in bed and saw this strange<BR>
> blob of color.<BR>
> </Leonard><BR>
><BR>
> This is very interesting.  Any odd dietary habits around that time?  I ask<BR>
> because of a story I heard about the military trying to give sailors<BR>
> infravision during one of the world wars.  Basically they kept them off<BR>
> normal vitamin-A and gave them lots of a rare variant form.  This causes<BR>
> their rod photopigments to be chemically different and IR sensitive.  ISTR<BR>
> that they had some limited success before the project was terminated (end<BR>
> of the war, I believe).<BR>
<BR>
No, no odd dietary habits. But do keep in mind that this "color" was<BR>
only visible in a *very* dark room. I rather suspect that it was just<BR>
the tail end of normal red sensitivity. <BR>
<BR>
And at the point the first "glow" became visible, the iron was probably<BR>
300-400 F. Well below the normal idea of "red-hot" but way above normal<BR>
temps.<BR>
<BR>
Still, it's an interesting data point. <BR>
<BR>
> <Leonard><BR>
> And I've red that according to many "color blind" people (100% color<BR>
> blind, as I recall), they say they *can* recognize colors, but while<BR>
> it's a visible distiniction, it's not an "important" one.<BR>
> </Leonard><BR>
><BR>
> This is very odd.  It reminds me of the way people describe some pain-drug<BR>
> effects: They still feel the pain, but it just isn't "compelling", they<BR>
> feel no need to do anything about it, it's just another sensation.  <BR>
<BR>
Well, after many discussions with other folks in the BDSM community, it<BR>
seems that *some* of us are wired such that there's a sensation<BR>
*between* "normal" and "pain". Best I can describe it is that it's sort<BR>
of like an itch. Except that it's not so "annoying". You know it's<BR>
there, and that you might want to do something about it, but you don't<BR>
*need* to. <BR>
<BR>
I guess we are wired with two "priority levels" of pain and other folks<BR>
only have one. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 00:11:15 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> Note that some proposed designs use liquid drops (molten metal!), and<BR>
>> these are buildable in the near term. That raises the available<BR>
>> operating temp considerably, and at lower TLs tha you use above.<BR>
><BR>
> What sort on endurance are we looking at here.  How much mass expended per<BR>
> unit time per unit energy?<BR>
<BR>
Indefinite endurance. They spray them  from the nose, aimed at a<BR>
collector at the tail. They cool during the trip (small droplets have<BR>
an *enormous surface to volume ratio), and are collected and recycled<BR>
thru the system.<BR>
<BR>
Think of it as running the liquid thru pipes, but without the pipes. :-)<BR>
<BR>
The spray is "flat" (ie mostly spreads out in only one direction, so as<BR>
to form a "sheet" of droplets). The plane of the "sheet" is at right<BR>
angles to the hull. Sort of like this:<BR>
<BR>
              |<BR>
             /|<BR>
            / |<BR>
           /  |<BR>
          /   |<BR>
         /    |<BR>
        /     |<BR>
       /      |<- hull<BR>
      /       |<BR>
     /        |<BR>
    /         |<BR>
   /          |<BR>
 -------------+<BR>
        ^<BR>
        |   <BR>
    collector<BR>
         <BR>
>>> -Laser radiative cooling<BR>
>><BR>
>> Thermodynamicly impossible. Waste heat is high entropy, laser beams are<BR>
>> near zero entropy.<BR>
><BR>
> Its being done today. (on a small scale, undoubtedly where the tagret<BR>
> material is enclosed in an environment and the external environment entropy<BR>
> increases as a result.<BR>
<BR>
Ah! You are takling about the "laser cooling" done on *individual<BR>
particles* (atoms, protons, that sort of thing). That works by using<BR>
the laser to slow the particle. <BR>
<BR>
It won't cool macroscopic objects. And in any case, it is cooling a<BR>
seperate object, while making the system containing the laser *much*<BR>
hotter. <BR>
<BR>
It sounded like you were making yet another reference to the "cooling<BR>
laser" from Brin's "Sundiver", which can't work for the reasons noted. <BR>
<BR>
>>> -Gaseous-Fluidic cooling - Rejecting the working fluid and<BR>
>>> associated waste heat into space -a good lower tech solution (say<BR>
>>> TL12-)<BR>
>><BR>
>> Impractical. Work out just how *much* material has to be throw away to<BR>
>> cooling *ship*, not just the power plant.<BR>
><BR>
> I think you already addressed this.  I was merely proposing it as a possible<BR>
> alternative.  Based on your numbers, it does appear to be practically<BR>
> ineffective.<BR>
<BR>
Turns out I read the wrong line on the conversion table. Multiply the<BR>
J/kcal figure by 1000.<BR>
<BR>
>> Much simpler, there are ways to convert heat directly into electron<BR>
>> emissions. They were originally developed for the cathodes of vacuum<BR>
>> tubes.<BR>
><BR>
> Cool, and an excellent example of a real application.  Perhaps we have a<BR>
> winner.<BR>
<BR>
They'd be "slow", and as I said, I think they'd not "baffle" very well.<BR>
On the other hand, they might be more practical for cvilian ships. <BR>
<BR>
>> Ships with thruster plates increase their momentum with no balancing<BR>
>> "loss" of momentum by anything else. Ditto for kinetic energy. Worse,<BR>
>> the *amount* of these gaind depends on the relative velocity of the<BR>
>> observer.<BR>
<BR>
> Again, I have always believed that the ecoil momentum is imparted to some<BR>
> aspect of the quantum vacuum.  Thus thrusters are actually a reaction drive<BR>
> using a virtual particle operating medium/fluid.<BR>
<BR>
I have trouble with that, but as long as *something* is getting the<BR>
reaction, it's ok.<BR>
<BR>
>> BTW, we tried playing around with *just* the energy aspect some years<BR>
>> back. And selecting only one frame, that of the planet the ship was<BR>
>> boosting away from.<BR>
>><BR>
>> We came up with a self-consistent set of equations. Alas, they describe<BR>
>> something *far* different than thruster plates. You see, the energy of<BR>
>> the ship, relative to the planet increases as the *square* of the<BR>
>> velocity. Which means that it quickly reaches completely unreasonable<BR>
>> values. Even if you allow vacuum energy, you then have to explain how<BR>
>> come they can't use this huge energy source for anything else.<BR>
><BR>
> Do you mean KE = (1/2)*M*V^2?  If not, I'm afraid I'm not following what you<BR>
> are getting at Leonard.  Can you elaborate?<BR>
<BR>
More or less, yes. If you have the KE obeying conserrvation laws:<BR>
<BR>
V	KE	delta KE<BR>
- --	---	--------<BR>
0	0	n/a<BR>
1	.5	.5<BR>
2	2	1.5<BR>
3	4.5	2.5<BR>
4	8	3.5<BR>
5	12.5	4.5<BR>
6	18	5.5<BR>
<BR>
etc.<BR>
<BR>
So at constant acceleration, the power requirements climb linearly with<BR>
time. Which means that after an hour, you are using truly astronomical<BR>
amounts of power. <BR>
<BR>
If instead you use constant *power*, you get an asymptotically<BR>
decreasing acceleration.<BR>
<BR>
Neither matches canon (or anything else) at all closely.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand bothe the "energy to KE" drive and the "pushes<BR>
against the planet" drive *would* be kinda useful for merely getting<BR>
into space from a planet.<BR>
<BR>
>> Fine. Then it's not a reactionless drive, which is where the violations<BR>
>> of conservation laws come in.<BR>
><BR>
> OK, then we agree on that.  This is essentially why I said they didn't<BR>
> violate the sacred conservation laws.  Now if they violated the 2nd law of<BR>
> thermo, then I would be worried.  Somehow, I bet that they do violate it<BR>
> too.  Just a hunch.<BR>
<BR>
A reactionless drive does. You can easily build a pertpetual motion<BR>
machine with thruster plates as described in the rules. <BR>
<BR>
> Just treat this as food for thought.  I'm open to suggestions and criticisms<BR>
> and would especially like to quantify this for use.  The only thing that I<BR>
> categorically reject is the idea that something like thruster plates is<BR>
> impossible.  I think that our physics just isn't up to the tas because we<BR>
> don't know where the energy is hidden.<BR>
<BR>
*As described* thruster plates require breaking far too many laws. <BR>
<BR>
Of course, there are always Dr. Forward's wilder suggestions. The<BR>
stress-energy tensor is something like:<BR>
<BR>
	E = m*c^2 + p*c + a*c*/L<BR>
<BR>
E = energy<BR>
m = mass<BR>
c = speed of light<BR>
p = momentum<BR>
a = angular momentum<BR>
L = length (Planck length? (1.6e-35 m))<BR>
<BR>
So he suggests that perhaps the following interconversions might be<BR>
possible. <BR>
<BR>
	E = m*c^2 = p*c = a*c*/L<BR>
 <BR>
Which means that one unit of atomic spin would equal 6.5 kg m/s of<BR>
momentum, 22 micrograms of mass or 2 GJ of energy!<BR>
<BR>
Obviously direct energy to momentum conversion is *expensive*. But it<BR>
could work. On the other hand, doing the reverse is a *scary* source of<BR>
power. Stopping a ship moving at many km/s will produce amounts of<BR>
power that are "severely unbalancing".<BR>
<BR>
One minor problem. I can't see how a drive based on momentum/energy<BR>
conversion could avoid being "inertialess", that is, without any<BR>
acceleration. <BR>
<BR>
Converting mass<->momentum without going thru energy avoiding super<BR>
power sources. But it makes it too easy to attain ridiculous<BR>
velocities. And again, no acceleration forces. <BR>
<BR>
And I think it's pretty obvious that we don't even want to *think*<BR>
about converting angular momentum. <BR>
<BR>
Still they provide some ideas.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2855<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb01.mx.aol.com (rly-yb01.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.1]) by air-yb04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 06:12:01 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 06:11:26 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id GAA78333;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:11:19 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:10:54 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id GAA78087<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:10:53 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:10:53 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008011010.GAA78087@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2855<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2856</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 4:22:34 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2856<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Radiators in space<BR>
Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Fusion & Nuclear Dampers<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re: Game report: Striker<BR>
Re : Radiators in Space<BR>
Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 00:59:31 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>> Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
>> Note that some proposed designs use liquid drops (molten metal!), and<BR>
>> these are buildable in the near term. That raises the available<BR>
>> operating temp considerably, and at lower TLs tha you use above.<BR>
><BR>
> The problem with this as a general solution is that you cant really dodge<BR>
> while using it, which precludes it's use in combat.<BR>
<BR>
Sure you can. Remember, other than the forces used to change the<BR>
*orientation* of the ship, all acceleration is *always* from nose to<BR>
tail. So the droplets will still "fall" in the right direction. <BR>
<BR>
You just need to rotate the ship in the same plane as the radiators. Or<BR>
just kill the stream for a few seconds (it'll take only a second or two<BR>
for all the drops to get to the collector. D=.5*a*t^2...)<BR>
<BR>
> It could work as a civilian technology, though.<BR>
<BR>
I think the "electron cloud" bit (if anybody can dig up details and<BR>
figures) would work better for civilian use. It's not suitable for<BR>
military use because you can't use it and IR masking.<BR>
<BR>
With liquid drop radiators, you just run one "fin" on the side away<BR>
from the enemy. <BR>
<BR>
> The reason I put the droplets in a tail is to allow you to dodge in combat.<BR>
<BR>
And as I noted above, it's not a problem. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 01:10:30 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Did Farscape get it right?<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 09:55 AM 7/31/2000 -0400, you wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>This seems to jibe with what I've heard on this group about the<BR>
>>effects of unprotected exposure to vacuum, and makes me like Farscape <BR>
>>even more - I think the last time I remember anyone surviving <BR>
>>explosive decompression without being wrecked was in _2001: A Space <BR>
>>Odyssey_.<BR>
><BR>
> John-boy was exposed for about 45 seconds.  From what I could see, they got<BR>
> the physilogical effects of short-term exposure perfectly.<BR>
><BR>
> My favorite bit was that he clearly exhaled before opening the airlock.<BR>
> Going into the Big Empty with full lungs is *bad*<BR>
<BR>
Much like holding your breath while coming up from depth in scuba gear...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 01:12:27 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 8:44 PM +1000 7/31/00, Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
>>> From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
>>> Subject: RE: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> My handwave for ignoring any possible heat issues.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> We know that jump drives consume massive quantities of liquid<BR>
>>> hydrogen to perform jumps. Tons and tons of the stuff. I am, of<BR>
>>> course, assuming that you are burning the stuff in your fusion<BR>
>>> power plant, or its equivanent in your jump drive.<BR>
>><BR>
>> Nope. Too much energy. If we can do that with a jump drive, then why<BR>
>> cant we pour that energy into a spinal mount ?<BR>
<BR>
Same reason we can generate *incredible* amounts of power via a rocket<BR>
engine, but can't get *near* those power levels out as electrical<BR>
energy. Check out the power output of a Space Shuttle Main Engine. It's<BR>
it's some incredible number of GW. <BR>
<BR>
Jump drive can easily be the same way. It generates the power in a<BR>
"form" useful for jump, but essentially useless for anything else.<BR>
<BR>
> Just a point, you don't really have to worry about waste heat<BR>
> from a beam weapon.  The big beam of energy being sent out is<BR>
> going to be enough of a giveaway that it really doesn't matter<BR>
> of you dump a bunch of heat just after....<BR>
<BR>
You still need to be *able* to dump it afterwards. Which requires<BR>
radiators capable of handling the power in *addition* to ongoing power<BR>
plant (and other) needs.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 02:16:29 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Bruce Macintosh writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> Not quite as strong as that. AEMS may still well be good for<BR>
>> *detecting* targets out to some plausible range. What was less<BR>
>> clear was whether they could *localize* targets well enough to<BR>
>> allow laser fire; and also what that plausible range is.<BR>
><BR>
> Well, radar isn't going to be terribly accurate (it's got a long wavelength <BR>
> and has the same resolution limits as anything else) but it should be able <BR>
> to give you range within a couple of meters and relative velocity forward <BR>
> and backwards, which in combination with a passive sensor allows targeting.<BR>
<BR>
You don't get ranges accurate to within meters at 10,000 to 100,000 km<BR>
ranges. At 10,000 km, that'd require pulse timing accuracy to 1 part in<BR>
10 million. Heck, the pulse duration is likely to be more than that!<BR>
<BR>
Since a hex is 30,000 km, accuracy is going to be a lot rougher than<BR>
"meters". <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 02:20:34 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Fusion & Nuclear Dampers<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> sneadj@mindspring.com writes:<BR>
>> The established tech for nuclear dampers can definitely affect both <BR>
>> fission & fusion power plants.  However, if we don't want folks using <BR>
>> NDs to shut down another ship's power plant we have an easy <BR>
>> handwave.  At TL 12 and above the increase in fusion pp efficiency <BR>
>> seems almost certain to be due to small scale nuclear dampers <BR>
>> being used to moderate and control the fusion.  That being the <BR>
>> case, perhaps TL 12 and above fusion plants cannot be easily <BR>
>> affected by external nuclear dampers.  In that case, fission plants <BR>
>> and TL 11 and lower fusion plants are all susceptible to NDs, and <BR>
>> higher TL ships are not.<BR>
><BR>
> That being the case, why don't TL 12+ nuclear weapons come with their own <BR>
> damper fields to prevent people from shutting them off?<BR>
<BR>
Several reason. First off, *size* and power consumption. Second, the<BR>
required sort of field for a *fission* weapon would interfere with<BR>
detonation. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 02:23:20 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 3:15 PM -0700 7/31/00, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
>>David P. Summers writes:<BR>
>><BR>
>>  > That the question isn't it?  You have been assuming technology<BR>
>>  > pretty much on par with what we have now.  If you look at the<BR>
>>  > amount of space that you need to cover at any reasonable distance<BR>
>>  > from ship (a light second or more) your angle doesn't have to<BR>
>>  > be that small to make detection quite iffy.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Actually, he's been assuming that certain of the laws of physics <BR>
>>remain constant.  Without changing the laws of thermodynamics, there <BR>
>>are specific limits to what can be done.<BR>
><BR>
> Maybe he is, but that isn't clear to me....<BR>
><BR>
>>  > I don't see how.  If you radiate a large amount of low energy<BR>
>>  > radiation with a blackbody radiator with a large surface area,<BR>
>>  > or you emit the same radiation by  another process, it really<BR>
>>  > doesn't matter.  The end state for both processes are the<BR>
>>  > same.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Actually, not necessarily.  Non-blackbody energy generally has a <BR>
>>lower entropy than blackbody energy, and is therefore less useful <BR>
>>for cooling.<BR>
><BR>
> The energy of a state doesn't depend on the path you take to<BR>
> get to that state.  If you emit x photons of a certain energy,<BR>
> the result is the same regardless of how you emit them....<BR>
<BR>
Nope! Very much *un*-true. Emitting low entropy radiation requires<BR>
creation of a *lot* of *high* entropy heat in the system doing the<BR>
emitting. Far more than the amount of low-entropy energy emitted. <BR>
<BR>
In other words, the lower the entropy of the emitted radiation, the<BR>
hotter the *system* doing the emitting gets. <BR>
<BR>
Allowing emission of *thermal* spectrum *doesn't* generate more<BR>
internal heat than is carried away (as long as your radiator isn't<BR>
hotter than the rest of the system).<BR>
<BR>
Remember, you are dealing with a system that is *closed* except for<BR>
the emitted radiation. <BR>
<BR>
Emitting a non-thermal spectrum requires converting heat to "useful"<BR>
energy. Useful in the sense that energy can be extracted by turning it<BR>
back into heat.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 02:35:18 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Looking at things, we have a couple of problems.<BR>
><BR>
> The first one is that, whilst power plant == radiator output looks like it<BR>
> works for small ships, it breaks down for large ships. And I think we all<BR>
> want something the size of the AHL.<BR>
<BR>
I don't think it breaks. Or if it does, then it's the amount of power<BR>
the *ship* requires that needs to be fixed. <BR>
<BR>
Put me down as against any system where "powerplant/efficiency =<BR>
radiator size" isn't true.<BR>
<BR>
I'd rather have radiators at an unreasonable temp than ships that<BR>
should be melting from the energy handled.<BR>
<BR>
> Lets assume that Thrusters do in fact violate the law of conservation of<BR>
> momentum.<BR>
<BR>
See my other post. If we pretend that Dr. Forward has a good idea then<BR>
E=p*c, so 1 g (10 m/s^2) would need 3 TW per tonne at 100% efficiency.<BR>
Note that this is tonne (mass) not DT (volume).<BR>
<BR>
I think this is *far* higher than we want to deal with, right? So we<BR>
can fudge it and assume that some of the energy comes out of where ever<BR>
jump drives dump all that energy they "use".<BR>
<BR>
Is 3 GW per tonne a problem? How about 3 MW? Or something else. Just<BR>
stick with 3 times a power of 10, please.<BR>
<BR>
It's still a hand wave. But at least we've got *some* theoretical<BR>
basis. We didn't jusat pull a number out of the air (no, we got a<BR>
"real" number, then "adjusted" it to fit what we needed :-).<BR>
<BR>
> While we are violating the laws of the universe, why cant we make them<BR>
> violate some other laws as well ?<BR>
<BR>
Because that way lies madness.<BR>
<BR>
> Now, jump drives could get the same rule, which kinda makes sense, since<BR>
> jump drives are fundamentally magic as well (the heat energy goes into<BR>
> changing the phase-space of the lanthanum in the grid, which then changes<BR>
> back in jump space).<BR>
<BR>
The energy goes into the "stress energy" of space. And from there, it<BR>
goes to the T-plates (via several layers of hand waving physics :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 02:50:57 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Looking at things, we have a couple of problems.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> The first one is that, whilst power plant == radiator output looks like it<BR>
>> works for small ships, it breaks down for large ships. And I think we all<BR>
>> want something the size of the AHL.<BR>
><BR>
> Of course, _I_ want ships the size of _Montana_.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Not a problem. It'll just have to be very "flat" to have the required<BR>
amount of radiator surface. :-)<BR>
<BR>
> 3.  I would go ahead and keep the power requirements for facilities such<BR>
> as accomodations, sickbays, etc.  These power requirements (and their<BR>
> resulting radiator requirements) would account for both the "hotel load"<BR>
> of the ship and the waste metabolic heat produced by crew and<BR>
> passengers.  However, I would modify the total "hotel load" requirement<BR>
> with a TL-based multiplier, to account for increased efficiency in power<BR>
> consumption (the higher-tech equivalents of switching from incandescent<BR>
> to fluorescent lighting).<BR>
<BR>
I think the other ships systems *should* have power requirements. That<BR>
helps keep folks from building in too much "stuff". But we can ignore<BR>
their heat output in most cases. That's covered under the power plant<BR>
output. <BR>
<BR>
But I want *realistic* power requirements. <BR>
<BR>
Just to give an idea of how silly that 1250 MW for sickbay is:<BR>
<BR>
supply <BR>
voltage  amps<BR>
- -------  -----<BR>
110 V    11 MA (that's *mega* amperes!)<BR>
220 V     6 MA<BR>
440 V     3 MA<BR>
110 KV	 11 KA<BR>
<BR>
Care to guess what sort of *bus bars* you'd need to carry that<BR>
amperage? And what sort of insulation the 110 KV ones would need? To<BR>
say nothing of the magnetic fields around them?<BR>
<BR>
I can see this for weapons, and maybe for lidar/radar. But for<BR>
computers or sickbay? Get real.<BR>
<BR>
For sickbay, I say we inquire and find out how much power an individual<BR>
"bed" in a modern ICU requires. And if it seems a bit low, double it. <BR>
<BR>
I'm sure *someone* on the list knows someone who can ask a facilities<BR>
"engineer" at a hospital. If not, I can ask the folks on alt.callahans.<BR>
That newsgroup can answer almost any question, given the wide variety<BR>
of folks who frequent it. So much so that they's got a special "flag"<BR>
for subject lines for messages that are looking for "obscure" info.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 06:39:03 EDT<BR>
From: Olegamer@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Game report: Striker<BR>
<BR>
Outstanding! This was the most entertaining post I've read on this list since <BR>
subscribed at the beginning of the summer! Good job. <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:13:18 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Radiators in Space<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch wrote :-<BR>
(of magnetic drop radiators)<BR>
> The problem with this as a general solution is that you cant really dodge<BR>
> while using it, which precludes it's use in combat.<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps one could use molten iron and hold the droplet spray on course<BR>
with magnets, or an electric arc.<BR>
<BR>
A colourful 'exhaust plume' is then possible (??molten alkali metals -<BR>
sodium, lithium, potassium??).<BR>
<BR>
Extending Anthony's table :-<BR>
i. Heat pipe radiators<BR>
TTL  Heat Rejected  Power Consumption  Op. Temp. (K)   Mass<BR>
     (MW/m^2)        (MW/m^2)                          (t/MW)<BR>
6    0.002           0.0005             445            20<BR>
8    0.01            0.004              700            15<BR>
9    0.03            0.03               1000           10<BR>
10   0.1             0.2                1500           10<BR>
12   0.3             1                  2200           7.5<BR>
14   1.0             6                  3300           5<BR>
<BR>
All radiators have a density of 1t/m3.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:13:31 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
<BR>
** Background<BR>
Previous iterations of the rules have :-<BR>
1. Overstated fuel consumption ; 3L (30kg) of 3% U235 salt will produce<BR>
1 megawatt-year of electricity at realistic plant efficiencies [25%] ;<BR>
but <BR>
2. They have compensated somewhat by also overstating the energy density<BR>
of the power plants. <BR>
<BR>
The latter approach isn't too unreasonable - the pressurised water<BR>
reactor that might be providing your electricity has an energy density<BR>
of 12MW/m^3 if we consider the core alone.<BR>
<BR>
If we include power conversion equipment, the overall energy density<BR>
drops to 0.1-0.4MW/m^3.<BR>
<BR>
Energy density could be increased by increasing the enrichment of the<BR>
fuel. The U.S. and Soviet navies use 'fully enriched' - 90+% U235 by<BR>
weight - fuel to keep submarine reactors size down.<BR>
<BR>
Space nuclear power plants are a little different.<BR>
<BR>
The specific mass of space nuclear power plants (40kg/KW electric power)<BR>
is approximately 1/3 radiators, using the SP-100 and Topaz reactors as<BR>
examples.<BR>
<BR>
The overall density of these reactors is low (~180kg/m^3 for the<BR>
SP-100), as is their thermal to electric efficiency (~4% for the<BR>
SP-100).<BR>
<BR>
This low efficiency figure is due to the reliance on thermoelectric<BR>
couples for power generation. Cooling is effected with lithium and<BR>
potassium as the working fluids.<BR>
<BR>
Thermal to electric efficiencies of 40% are achievable with liquid metal<BR>
systems e.g. breeder reactors with their sodium coolant.<BR>
<BR>
Multimegawatt power concepts explored for the SDI program included :-<BR>
- - open systems, where liquid hydrogen is used as coolant and working<BR>
fluid (15 grams LH2/MW-second to maintain reactor at operating temp of<BR>
~1100K) ;<BR>
- - closed systems, utilising thermoelectric power conversion or liquid<BR>
metal heat exchangers with metal vapour turbines (lithium, potassium).<BR>
<BR>
Accelerator driven reactors use proton beams to induce fission in<BR>
subcritical amounts of material. These are being investigated as a<BR>
solution to the problem of nuclear waste disposal. Lead is the most<BR>
likely working fluid with the early systems, and efficiency is similar<BR>
to liquid metal reactors. They are available from TTL 9.<BR>
<BR>
** Conclusions<BR>
TTL   Energy Density (MW/m^3)  Fuel rate (kg/MW-yr) Efficiency<BR>
6     0.1                      50                   25%<BR>
7     0.2                      50                   30%<BR>
8     0.3                      40                   35%<BR>
9+    0.4                      30                   40%<BR>
<BR>
Fuel is considered to be salts of uranium, plutonium or thorium and has<BR>
a density of 10kg/L. Efficiency refers to % thermal power converted to<BR>
electricity.<BR>
<BR>
The varying fuel rates with TTL reflect increases in efficiency and<BR>
specific burnup (the proportion of fissionable material actually<BR>
consumed).<BR>
<BR>
Refuelling is generally carried out every two years.<BR>
<BR>
All reactors have a density of 1t/m^3.<BR>
<BR>
Accelerator driven reactors require a C-PAW with a discharge energy of<BR>
(base reactor output in MW/1000)MJ. Antiproton-catalysed reactors can be<BR>
treated in the same way.<BR>
<BR>
Energy density can be increased by :-<BR>
i. Increasing fuel enrichment - 'highly enriched' fuel increases density<BR>
by 1.5X, 'fully enriched' fuel doubles density.<BR>
<BR>
Fuel rate is divided by 5 and 10 respectively, but the cost of<BR>
refuelling basically remains the same for all plants :-<BR>
- - standard fission fuel 75Cr/L (7.5Cr/kg)<BR>
- - highly enriched fuel  375Cr/L (37.5Cr/kg)<BR>
- - fully enriched fuel   750Cr/L (75Cr/kg)<BR>
<BR>
ii. Damper catalysis - from TTL 12, nuclear dampers can be used to<BR>
accelerate burnup rate. They can also be used to induce fission in<BR>
subcritical masses of material, supplanting accelerator technology.<BR>
<BR>
TTL     Energy density increase    Efficiency<BR>
12      X 1.5                      50%<BR>
13      X 2                        55%<BR>
14      X 3                        60%<BR>
15      X 4                        65%<BR>
<BR>
So a damper catalysed TTL 15 reactor running on fully enriched fuel has<BR>
an energy density of 0.4 X 4 X 2 = 3.2MW/m^3. It requires 3kg of fuel<BR>
per MW-year at a price of 225Cr/3kg.<BR>
<BR>
Items to be considered :-<BR>
reliability/wear modifiers<BR>
scaling relations for power plants in general<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:13:41 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
* Background<BR>
Psionic shield technology relies on low level EM 'white noise'<BR>
generation to prevent telepathic detection or scrutiny.<BR>
<BR>
Neural activity sensors (NAS) were developed after discovering the<BR>
particular EM frequency bands that were relevant to psionic life<BR>
detection and other forms of telepathy.<BR>
<BR>
They are essentially remote electromagnetoencephalographs, and rely on<BR>
advanced sensor technology to pick up the small potential differences<BR>
(10-50 microvolts) and power levels (up to ~0.07W) encountered in the<BR>
central nervous system.<BR>
<BR>
There are two types of units ; a man-portable directional device for<BR>
field use and a larger omnidirectional one for installations or<BR>
vehicles.<BR>
<BR>
A thickness of rock or metal (on the order of centimetres) will obscure<BR>
targets. Directional microphones to detect heartbeat or breath sounds<BR>
are therefore useful adjuncts.<BR>
<BR>
* Portable<BR>
These are highly directional, limited to ~10 degrees of arc. <BR>
<BR>
TTL    Range    Power    Volume   Area    Price<BR>
13     20m      50W      10L      1m2     50kCr<BR>
14     100m     100W     5L       1m2     30kCr      <BR>
15     200m     200W     2L       1m2     20kCr<BR>
<BR>
All mass 1kg/L.<BR>
The high power consumption and relative bulk are due to the need to<BR>
refrigerate the sensor array. <BR>
<BR>
* Fixed<BR>
TTL    Range    Power    Volume   Area    Price<BR>
13     1km      10kW     1000L    100m2   10MCr<BR>
14     2km      20kW     1500L    200m2   10MCr<BR>
15     4km      50kW     2000L    400m2   10MCr<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 03:06:25 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Heat Rules -- Draft<BR>
><BR>
> Summary: having heat from the power plant, and then more heat from<BR>
> the systems being powered, is somewhat annoying doubling.<BR>
<BR>
Agreed. It should be:<BR>
<BR>
Heat = powerplant/(powerplant efficiency).<BR>
<BR>
The only exceptions would be for systems that store and retrieve energy<BR>
(HPGs for weapons, for example). I'll elaborate if anybody cares.<BR>
<BR>
> Therefore,<BR>
> the rule of thumb will be that heat production is (40-TL*2)% of the<BR>
> total energy consumption of the ship (it will be higher for very low<BR>
> tech ships).  You must then get heat control to deal with that heat.<BR>
<BR>
That means that TL 20 ships have no heat production. And TL 20 *is*<BR>
possible. Just unlikely.<BR>
<BR>
I'd also kinda like a number bigger than 40. But then again, I haven't<BR>
tried any designs.<BR>
<BR>
The rest looks ok, though I can see adding various "optional extras"<BR>
that have better performance in some ways worse in others (for example,<BR>
the "electron cloud" cooling, which while really great at getting rid<BR>
of heat, makes you stand out like a sore thumb (the cloud is much<BR>
larger than the ship, and all of it is radiating IR :-))<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 03:20:10 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Been busy again but I wanted to chime in with this.<BR>
> While all this talk of radiators and surface area and such is nice, some of<BR>
> us (me?) were impressed with HG, daunted by Striker and fainted at MT. The<BR>
> on time I glanced at FFS I had to fight from fleeing in outright fear.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, I can sympathize. <BR>
<BR>
> For us non-engineering inclined types, the use of computer size to limit<BR>
> ship size does more than enough to give it that neat sci-fi techie feel<BR>
> without making us whimper in fear every time we have to look at a vehicle<BR>
> stat form not to mentiong think about trying to design one.<BR>
<BR>
Well, consider that one of the ideas for FF&S 2 that failed because of<BR>
the screwups in printing and lack of playtesting was that it *would* be<BR>
used to design parts for a "slap the modules together" system on the<BR>
order of orginial CT ship design or HG.<BR>
<BR>
I *still* think that's the plan. We need a "slap it together fast"<BR>
system that's compatible with the "gearhead deluxe" system. <BR>
<BR>
In this case compatible means that a "fast" design shouldn't be<BR>
impossible under the "detail" system, but should be less optimized.<BR>
<BR>
We *really* need this, because I don't think there's been a single set<BR>
of *published* ships since HG that *didn't* grossly violate the<BR>
supposed design rules in effect at the time. <BR>
<BR>
That's somewhere between annoying and fatal. Fatal to the *game* that<BR>
is. Given how often we've heard folks here complain that it was<BR>
impossible to duplicate various designs from the *rule books* using<BR>
various design systems, I expect that a lot of GMs got turned off when<BR>
they attempted to design a ship that was "just a little different" from<BR>
one in the rules or a supplement, and found that it wouldn't work.<BR>
<BR>
> Soft sciences rule, hard sciences drool.<BR>
<BR>
Pfffbbbt!<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 03:28:59 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> You are not alone Eris, i have been reading the thread and have <BR>
> saved alot of cool ideas.  I too see 100,000 ton ships as to big.<BR>
> I have a soluation to the problem.  Have all these people in favor of <BR>
> 10,000 tons or better draw up deck plans.  That will break them.<BR>
><BR>
> I tried doing deckplans for an 18,000 ton liner for an adventure idea. <BR>
>  It would be 21 two foot by 1 1/2 foot pieces of graph paper.  I <BR>
> stoped that adventure right away.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, it's simple. If you check plans of real buildings (and real<BR>
liners) you'll quickly find that the designers just came up with a few<BR>
standard cabins (of groups of cabins) and used them, repeated over and<BR>
over again to fill most of the area. Then they just had to deal with<BR>
the areas where a standard "block" wouldn't fit. Usually by making them<BR>
storage or equipment areas.<BR>
<BR>
Heck, the apartment building I live in uses *one* floor plan for all<BR>
the apartments, just rotated or mirror imaged. It gave the architect a<BR>
standard rectangle to work with. <BR>
<BR>
Stuff like "deluxe suites" and the like can be handled by making them<BR>
some multiple of the standard size. For example, you can replace 3<BR>
"standard" sized cabins with 2 "deluxe" ones, or 1 "supreme". <BR>
<BR>
A bit of judicicious xeroxing will give you lots of cabin blocks to<BR>
tape together for the "master" copy. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 03:36:45 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Has anyone described what a fire would be like in Zero G? <BR>
<BR>
Yep, long ago in Analog, among other places.<BR>
<BR>
Essentially, without a forced draft, it *won't* burn.<BR>
<BR>
In a gravity field, the combustion products, being hot AND THEREFORE<BR>
LIGHTER, rise. That lets air come in from the bottom.  Think of a<BR>
candle flame...<BR>
<BR>
In zero g, the combustion products weigh the same as the surrounding<BR>
air. Nothing. So they stay where they are. And smother the fire. <BR>
<BR>
A match or a candle flame gives this *globe* of fire which then goes<BR>
out, leaving a globe of smoke. <BR>
<BR>
However, that "smoke" contains a lot of free radicals. And if you apply<BR>
gravity, the flame will *re-light*!<BR>
<BR>
All the above is supposed to be based on experiments in the "Vomit<BR>
Comet" back in the 60s. <BR>
<BR>
Obviously, if you have air circulation, the flame will keep burning,<BR>
wityh the "points" pointed at the downwind direction. And the slower<BR>
the air movement, the poorer the combustion.<BR>
<BR>
> I'm in the <BR>
> finishing touches of a scenario for BITS that needs a description and <BR>
> I've got about a day to complete it (one of our authors had to drop <BR>
> doing a book for unforseen personal circumstances so I'm having to <BR>
> bring something up the queue a lot faster than planned).<BR>
<BR>
Sorry if the above isn't what you expected. Space stuff is like that a<BR>
lot. <BR>
<BR>
Hopefully, you can make something odf it. The "relight when the gravity<BR>
comes back on" (or when it gets a breeze) bit will make things<BR>
interesting. In space "backdraft" is even worse than on Earth. :-)<BR>
<BR>
Just because the fire in the compartment *seems* to be out, doesn't<BR>
mean you can just jerk open the hatch and go in to check for survivors.<BR>
The fire would have lowered the pressure a bit (I'm assuming that the<BR>
ventilators would seal as soon as the fire was detected). Opening the<BR>
hatch could feed in oxygen and blast you across the hall.<BR>
<BR>
Cutting the grav plates (and thrust) might be a standard fire-fighting<BR>
technique. That way you'd only get intermittent flareups as your<BR>
movements stirred up the air in the room.<BR>
<BR>
Hmmm. *That* sounds like it'd be an interesting image. patches of<BR>
"smoke" flaring to life and dying again as you disturbs them, and<BR>
traveling along in weird paths with the intermittent airflow.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2856<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (rly-zb03.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.3]) by air-zb05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 07:22:34 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 07:21:59 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id HAA80807;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 07:21:51 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 07:21:47 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id HAA80763<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 07:21:47 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 07:21:47 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008011121.HAA80763@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2856<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2857</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 8:37:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2857<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Radical Radiator Idea<BR>
RE: Levels of Pain (was Alien Vision)<BR>
RE: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Re : Radiators in Space<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re: Re : Radiators in Space<BR>
Re: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: Modern Mercury...<BR>
Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
re: sensors<BR>
Re: Potential Gamers<BR>
Re: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
Re: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
Re: FFS3: sensor ranges<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re: Should I Get MT?<BR>
FFS3 for Non-Techies (Long)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:23:30 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Radical Radiator Idea<BR>
<BR>
An interesting idea from rec.arts.sf.science :-<BR>
> Lance Purple and Geoffrey Landis have a much more plausible sounding<BR>
> idea for an advanced radiator technology: an axion/neutrino radiator.<BR>
> <BR>
> http://deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=644037638<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
>  > If you had technology to efficiently create weakly-interacting particles<BR>
>  > (neutrinos, axions, whatever) that carried away heat energy, could your<BR>
>  > ship be refrigerated that way?  <BR>
>   <BR>
>  Yes.  Essentially, you're suggesting a radiator that's "black" in some different radiation, and<BR>
>  then radiating in that spectrum in addition to the electromagnetic.  Ordinary matter interacts<BR>
>  only weakly with weakly interacting particles, so matter is "transparent" as far as using<BR>
>  weak radiation goes, but if you could make something black to weak nuclear force<BR>
>  particles, it could radiate.  In this case, if you're black to one type of particle, it would<BR>
>  radiate twice as much energy as a<BR>
>  (electromagnetic) "black" radiator.  <BR>
>   <BR>
>  >The black box spewing out the particles<BR>
>  > would be the high-entropy system, and the space around the ship (which<BR>
>  > is relatively empty of axions, compared to the black box) would be the<BR>
>  > low-entropy heatsink.  Or have I overlooked something?<BR>
>   <BR>
>  No, you've got it.  In terms of statistical mechanics, you're proposing a radiator that can<BR>
>  radiate into twice as many states (photons plus your weak particle states).  Thus, you can<BR>
>  use it to pump energy, including cooling energy.  <BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Geoffrey A. Landis<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:28:08 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Levels of Pain (was Alien Vision)<BR>
<BR>
<<Well, after many discussions with other folks in the BDSM community, it<BR>
seems that *some* of us are wired such that there's a sensation<BR>
*between* "normal" and "pain". Best I can describe it is that it's sort<BR>
of like an itch. Except that it's not so "annoying". You know it's<BR>
there, and that you might want to do something about it, but you don't<BR>
*need* to. <BR>
<BR>
I guess we are wired with two "priority levels" of pain and other folks<BR>
only have one. :-)>><BR>
<BR>
I think I've encountered that once or twice...I actually does 'hurt', but<BR>
theres no real urgency about it and you don't feel especially inclined to do<BR>
anything about it. Hmm, new species idea...:)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:37:43 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
<<A thickness of rock or metal (on the order of centimetres) will obscure<BR>
targets. Directional microphones to detect heartbeat or breath sounds<BR>
are therefore useful adjuncts.>><BR>
<BR>
So someone immobile in a vacc suit/sealed armour would be udetectable to<BR>
NASs?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:41:29 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:37:07 -0500<BR>
>From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
>Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
><BR>
>1.  Player characters flying small merchant vessels should not _expect_<BR>
>to fight major naval units with any hope of winning. <BR>
<BR>
Why not? In the 17th and 18th centuries, most warships were the same size<BR>
as merchantmen; the largest ships-of-the-line carried only ~10-20x as many<BR>
guns as the smallest fighting sloop. The largest modern aircraft are only<BR>
~100x the size of the smallest, and couldn't carry nearly that much more<BR>
ordnance if they wanted to. <BR>
<BR>
>2.  Limiting the size of starships to LBB2 (5000 dton) size would<BR>
>detract from the roleplaying experience, for two reasons.  First, for<BR>
>the price of one _Brooklyn_-class light cruiser (TL-13, 60,000 dtons,<BR>
>MCr 89,296.745), one can purchase 379 800-dton mercenary cruisers, with<BR>
>change left over.<BR>
<BR>
You're assuming a remote central government (an "Imperium") powerful enough<BR>
or interested enough to purchase a 60,000-dton light cruiser or 379<BR>
800-dton mercenary cruisers in the first place. This is a choice, not a given.<BR>
<BR>
>Second, for those<BR>
>campaigns in which the PCs are high-ranking military officers, limiting<BR>
>ships to LBB2 size means that a fleet action will involve hundreds, or<BR>
>even thousands, of "capital" ships on each side.  <BR>
<BR>
Again, this is a choice. How many ships were on each side at Trafalgar?<BR>
<BR>
>How much roleplaying can one experience with<BR>
>such massive numbers of ships on each side?<BR>
<BR>
That's the referee's call, isn't it? I can imagine a fleet action that<BR>
looks more like a massed bombing raid over Western Europe in WWII than the<BR>
Battle of Jutland.<BR>
<BR>
>3.  The premise that an interstellar culture that is over 1100 years old<BR>
>would be unable to build starships larger than late 20th century<BR>
>warships is, IMHO, ludicrous.<BR>
<BR>
Considering that spacecraft are structurally more similar to aircraft than<BR>
surface ships (due to the type of stresses involved), it's not at all<BR>
unreasonable to think there might be a practical limit to how large a<BR>
structure you can build and still have it maneuver in combat. Not certain,<BR>
mind you -- simply not *ludicrous*. Square-cube relationships have killed<BR>
many apparently promising ideas.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:11:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Re : Radiators in Space<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Robert O'Connor wrote:<BR>
> Ian Whitchurch wrote :-<BR>
> (of magnetic drop radiators)<BR>
> > The problem with this as a general solution is that you cant really dodge<BR>
> > while using it, which precludes it's use in combat.<BR>
> <BR>
> Perhaps one could use molten iron and hold the droplet spray on course<BR>
> with magnets, or an electric arc.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Um...don't materials which normally respond to magnetic fields<BR>
cease to do so after reaching a certain (high) temperature?  I dimly<BR>
recall an Arthur C. Clarke novel about a mass driver which fired <BR>
globs of *molten* metal, which turned out to be impossible for that<BR>
very reason...<BR>
                                                       - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 04:59:09 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>>John Groth wrote:<BR>
>>> Of course, _I_ want ships the size of _Montana_.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
> Seriously, why do you object to the existence of ships the size of<BR>
> _Montana_ (500,000 dtons), bearing in mind that _Montana_ is the same<BR>
> size as the canonical _Tigress_-class?  IMHO, the existence of large<BR>
> vessels in the Traveller universe is a _good_ thing for roleplaying, for<BR>
> several reasons:<BR>
<BR>
Ah. I suspect that he (like I) had forgotten that there *was* a ship<BR>
class of that name.<BR>
<BR>
Also, "ships the size of _Montana_" is *not* the same thing as "ships<BR>
the size of the _Montana_". The extra "the" changes it from a reference<BR>
to the *state* to a reference to something named *for* the state.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 05:33:39 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Re : Radiators in Space<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Ian Whitchurch wrote :-<BR>
> (of magnetic drop radiators)<BR>
>> The problem with this as a general solution is that you cant really dodge<BR>
>> while using it, which precludes it's use in combat.<BR>
><BR>
> Perhaps one could use molten iron and hold the droplet spray on course<BR>
> with magnets, or an electric arc.<BR>
<BR>
Iron ceases to be magnetic long before it melts. <BR>
<BR>
But as I noted in another post, manuevering while using a liquid drop<BR>
system isn't really *that* hard.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 05:19:30 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Trevor, Peter wrote :<BR>
>> Eris wrote:<BR>
>> > I'm focused on roleplaying, not wargaming.  Character skills<BR>
>> > *have* to matter in operations, and I want a PC to have to<BR>
>> > worry about juggling software into and out of the computer<BR>
>> > system.<BR>
><BR>
> Didn't see the original, but while I agree with Eris' aim of having PC's<BR>
> make decisions, juggling software does not make sense in anything but a<BR>
> jury-rigged ship, I have to agree<BR>
> with Peter on the swapping of software.<BR>
><BR>
> No modern aircraft changes software in flight, that only happens at<BR>
> overhauls.<BR>
><BR>
> I very much doubt that this will get _worse_ in the future, in other words,<BR>
> not only do I suspect software will not be juggled in flight, but it will be<BR>
> installed when the ship is built and will not change unless there is a major<BR>
> change to the ship's configuration, such as the addition of turrets where<BR>
> there weren't any.<BR>
<BR>
But modern aircraft are a poor model. And some of the stuff the various<BR>
"programs" do is not exactly simple computations. They take enough<BR>
resources that there's a limit to how many you can run at once on a<BR>
given configuration, at least if you want real time responses.<BR>
<BR>
A multitasking system for a civilian ship is apt to have limited<BR>
capacity. They won't be designed to run the "target prediction", "jump<BR>
calc" and "evasion" programs all at the same time as "normal" ship<BR>
operations. Not unless you pay extra. :-)<BR>
<BR>
And it is likely that it's cheaper to have a more or less "general<BR>
purpose" system tying together modules dedicated to controlling various<BR>
parts of the ship than to have every system have a completely dedicated<BR>
processor with enough RAM and drive space for its *peak* needs.<BR>
<BR>
Even "fly by wire" aircraft aren't *nearly* as computer dependent as a<BR>
typical Traveller ship. Navigation is *barely* computerized. And they<BR>
don't have to deal with orbital mechanics.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 05:11:16 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Modern Mercury...<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Quick gearhead question...<BR>
><BR>
>     how difficult would it be to build a modern Mercury launch system<BR>
> (one person to orbit and return) using off the shelf components?<BR>
<BR>
Moderately difficult. You'd have to design the capsule and then figure<BR>
out which (if *any*) of the current commercially available boosters<BR>
it'd take to loft it.<BR>
<BR>
>     how expensive would it be?<BR>
<BR>
*Very*. Launch costs are in the $10k/kg range or higher. I'm not sure<BR>
*how* much higher, as I don't follow that sort of thing as closely as I<BR>
once did. It could easily be $100k/kg.<BR>
<BR>
>     would it be portable/semiportable/launch anywhere capable?<BR>
<BR>
Nope. The Atlas was barely mobile. The redstone wasn't a lot better.<BR>
And an "off the shelf" capsule would likely weigh more and take a<BR>
bigger launch vehicle.<BR>
<BR>
>     how bout a modern Gemini (2 person or one+payload for duration)<BR>
<BR>
See above.<BR>
<BR>
Also, there are limits to what you can get "off the shelf". As G. Harry<BR>
Stine was always pointing out, most aircraft certified electronic gear<BR>
would do okay in low orbit. <BR>
<BR>
Life support? Doable, with some kludges. <BR>
<BR>
But you'd have to custom build the entire capsule. <BR>
<BR>
If you are willing to take a few risks, a few things are easier. The<BR>
Chinese have demonstrated that *oak* works just as well for an ablative<BR>
heat shield as the fancy composites we used. Just watch out for knots.<BR>
:-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 05:30:03 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> ii. Damper catalysis - from TTL 12, nuclear dampers can be used to<BR>
> accelerate burnup rate. They can also be used to induce fission in<BR>
> subcritical masses of material, supplanting accelerator technology.<BR>
><BR>
> TTL     Energy density increase    Efficiency<BR>
> 12      X 1.5                      50%<BR>
> 13      X 2                        55%<BR>
> 14      X 3                        60%<BR>
> 15      X 4                        65%<BR>
><BR>
> So a damper catalysed TTL 15 reactor running on fully enriched fuel has<BR>
> an energy density of 0.4 X 4 X 2 = 3.2MW/m^3. It requires 3kg of fuel<BR>
> per MW-year at a price of 225Cr/3kg.<BR>
<BR>
Also, dampers can allow "burning" of non-fissionables. Accelerated beta<BR>
or alpha decay can produce heat, or, possibly even be used for direct<BR>
electric generation.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 05:04:42 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> The flame itself will tend toward a spherical shape unless elongated in the<BR>
> direction of a breeze. The flame will have a hot (white or blue) center<BR>
> surrounded by cooler (yellow, orange, and finally perhaps red) layers.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, the color of the flame depends a lot on *what* is burning.<BR>
Candle flames are yellow, mostly because of the heated carbon (soot) in<BR>
the flame. Stuff like hydrogen, sulfur, and *simple* hydrocarbons burn<BR>
with a *blue* flame. <BR>
<BR>
The less efficient the combustion, the lower the flame temp, and the<BR>
more orange to red the flame gets. As an example, you can lower a<BR>
burning candle into a container filled with chlorine gas (heavier than<BR>
air). It'll keep burning, but the flame goes this *red* color, because<BR>
the carbon is no longer burning at all. Instead you get the hydrogen in<BR>
the wax burning, leaving behind incredible amounts of soot. <BR>
<BR>
So, as the air supply dwindles, the flame will get redder. So flames in<BR>
very weak air circulation will be very orange to red.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:04:51 -0400<BR>
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net><BR>
Subject: re: sensors<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Bruce Macintosh writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> Not quite as strong as that. AEMS may still well be good for<BR>
>> *detecting* targets out to some plausible range. What was less<BR>
>> clear was whether they could *localize* targets well enough to<BR>
>> allow laser fire; and also what that plausible range is.<BR>
><BR>
> Well, radar isn't going to be terribly accurate (it's got a long<BR>
wavelength<BR>
> and has the same resolution limits as anything else) but it should be able<BR>
> to give you range within a couple of meters and relative velocity forward<BR>
> and backwards, which in combination with a passive sensor allows<BR>
targeting.<BR>
<BR>
You don't get ranges accurate to within meters at 10,000 to 100,000 km<BR>
ranges. At 10,000 km, that'd require pulse timing accuracy to 1 part in<BR>
10 million. Heck, the pulse duration is likely to be more than that!<BR>
<BR>
Since a hex is 30,000 km, accuracy is going to be a lot rougher than<BR>
"meters".<BR>
- --<BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
<BR>
Hhhmmm, .1 microseconds or less is a pretty standard pulse duration for most<BR>
fire control RADARs today.....It does have a huge effect on ranges that<BR>
allow the pulse to still be travelling to the target when the next one is<BR>
fired off. You would then have to "modulate" each pulse with different<BR>
(preassigned) values so you will know what pulse it is that you are<BR>
receiving back so that you can estimate range. It wouldn't take very long to<BR>
get a lock-on for targets out to 30,000 km, with pulses traveling at the<BR>
speed of light and computers at high TL's. The beam width of the LASER out<BR>
to those ranges could be a concern but, I would think that they would have<BR>
that problem licked too by TL 10+.<BR>
<BR>
Thom Harris - GOFIR - <Gnarly Old Fart In Residence><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:28:52 -0400<BR>
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Potential Gamers<BR>
<BR>
C O N G R A T U L A T I O N S!!!!!  It seems to me that having twins to<BR>
increase your gaming group is cheating though.....I wish I had thought of<BR>
that 20 years ago.<BR>
<BR>
Thom Harris - GOFIR - <Gnarly Old Fart In Residence><BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "William & Melissa Kendell" <billk@planet.net.au><BR>
To: <babylon5-wars@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2000 10:56 PM<BR>
Subject: Potential Gamers<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> We have recently (last Friday night) had two new potential game players<BR>
> arrive at our local hospital.<BR>
><BR>
> Thanks to my wonderful wife, they are William Ryan Kendell, born at 9.39pm<BR>
> Fri 28/7/00; and Ilona Jade Kendell, born at 9.48pm Fri 28/7/00.<BR>
><BR>
> Keep the flame.<BR>
><BR>
> Bill Kendell<BR>
> Programming since 1974. Gaming since 1980. Husband/Stepfater since 1999.<BR>
> Father of twins August 2000.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:06:40 +0100<BR>
From: "Ben Aaronovitch" <bem@imaginaryfilms.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
<BR>
'Let's be honest here - you paid for the women.'<BR>
                                       Bill Murrey - Scrooged<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: Jones, Dean <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com>> <BR>
> BTW, is that Ben 'Also People' Aaronovitch?<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
I'm afraid so.<BR>
<BR>
Ben Aaronovitch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:11:35 +0100<BR>
From: "Ben Aaronovitch" <bem@imaginaryfilms.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Help with 5th Frontier war.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks.<BR>
<BR>
This has all been immenesly helpful and given<BR>
me a whole range of options.<BR>
<BR>
I'm edging towards - volounteered for front<BR>
line service, battle rider gets destroyed. Trapped<BR>
in system, crash landing, couple of futile deaths<BR>
(best friend/lover for preference). Heroic actions<BR>
delayed symptoms and invalidity out of the<BR>
service.<BR>
<BR>
Ben<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
'Let's be honest here - you paid for the women.'<BR>
                                       Bill Murrey - Scrooged<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:25:05 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: sensor ranges<BR>
<BR>
>Current FFS sensors assume that the cost and volume of the sensor are linear in<BR>
area,<BR>
>presumably as some sort of phased array.  However, while this formula is true<BR>
for the actual<BR>
>sensors in a phased array, I am reasonably certain that the processing required<BR>
to treat all the<BR>
>smaller sensors as a single larger sensor is non-linear in size (it's at least<BR>
n log n in the number of<BR>
>sensors, but I suspect integrating signals is harder if the sensors are further<BR>
apart).<BR>
<BR>
I'm not sure where the n log n comes from...and the integration (in the absence<BR>
of<BR>
mucky stuff like atmospehre) doesn't care how far apart the sensors are.<BR>
<BR>
The processing required to turn a bunch of measurements into an image does grow<BR>
with number of elements, but computer bulk/volume is generally a small number.<BR>
The computer required to assemble a VLA map fits comfortably on your desk;<BR>
it's volume is small compared to the sensor elements.<BR>
<BR>
Note that a bigger/more sensitive sensor doesn't necessarily have<BR>
more seperate elements, just that the individual elements are bigger, and maybe<BR>
there's a few more of them.<BR>
<BR>
>On a separate point, there is a significant difference between modern<BR>
telescopes<BR>
>and the PEMS on a starship -- a telescope has a very narrow field of view,<BR>
while<BR>
>starship sensors necessarily have extremely broad fields of view (to reliably<BR>
pick<BR>
>up on transient phenomena, they actually need to cover the full sky).  It's<BR>
probably<BR>
>reasonable to adjust sensitivity by about 0.5 between science sensors and<BR>
sensors<BR>
>that can cover the whole sky in a turn, and another 0.5 or even 1 for sensors<BR>
that can<BR>
>cover the whole sky continually.<BR>
<BR>
At low TLs (9-) there is a distinction between the "all sky" sensors (scanners)<BR>
and<BR>
the targeted fire control sensors (trackers).<BR>
<BR>
At any TL,<BR>
the difference in sensitivity between sweeping the whole sky once per turn and<BR>
staring at a single target is built into the DSR; that's why there's a bonus for<BR>
tracking an already-detected target - you know where to look. There isn't a<BR>
distinction between sweeping the whole sky once per 30 minutes and staring at<BR>
the<BR>
whole sky continuously, in part because the tradeoffs between the two are<BR>
complicated<BR>
and (at low TL) involve actual optics modelling I was unwilling to do.<BR>
<BR>
At high TLs, where the sensors become interferometers analagous to a phased<BR>
array (ie electronically combining the light) it seemed that there would not be<BR>
a<BR>
distinction between scanners and trackers; the individual elements can be used<BR>
seperately to sweep the whole sky or combined for high-resolution fire control<BR>
tracking. The distinction at high TL between "science" and non-science is more<BR>
a reflection of additional capabilities in the science array - in particular,<BR>
spectroscopic modes and better far-IR sensitivity.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:24:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Victor Abraham Delnore <vad9m@unix.mail.virginia.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
 <BR>
> Also, "ships the size of _Montana_" is *not* the same thing as "ships<BR>
> the size of the _Montana_". The extra "the" changes it from a reference<BR>
> to the *state* to a reference to something named *for* the state.<BR>
<BR>
This makes sense to civilians like you and me, but not to current US<BR>
Navy personnel.  US Navy preferred usage is to omit the article ("the")<BR>
when referring to ships.  You are supposed to refer to a vessel as<BR>
_Virginia_ or _Nimitz_ or what have you.  "I was aboard _Nimitz_<BR>
during the Gulf War" or "I enjoyed the accommodations on<BR>
_Ticonderoga_ better than on _Virginia_" would be reasonable<BR>
utterances, as would "_Nimitz_ is larger than _Virginia_," which would<BR>
strike most civilians as ludicrous, as the late admiral did not outsize<BR>
the commonwealth.  But this is how they talk!  Saying *the* _Nimitz_, or<BR>
worse yet *the* USS _Nimitz_ instantly marks you as a civilian ignorant of<BR>
naval custom.  Don't ask me why they do this, but they do.  <BR>
<BR>
- --Abe Delnore<BR>
 <BR>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------- <BR>
| V. A. Delnore          	      vad9m@virginia.edu            |<BR>
| Graduate Student       	      (804) 971-8806                |<BR>
| Corcoran Department of History      1821 Jefferson Park Ave #4    |<BR>
| University of Virginia              Charlottesville VA 22903      |<BR>
| Mica mica parva stella miror quaenam sis tam bella  (Anon. lyric) |<BR>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:30:46 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Should I Get MT?<BR>
<BR>
Arthur Boff <ajboff@yahoo.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
<<(I'd love to have all the procedures for making humans, aliens,<BR>
and animals in one lovely tome...)>><BR>
<BR>
Unfortunately, no. The MT core books are humans only. However, they do<BR>
include the careers from "Citizens of the Imperium."<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<<Looking up the BITS task system, would I be right in<BR>
thinking that the task system allows one to decide<BR>
what roll the players have to make in any situation?<BR>
If so, then that's excellent, because that's what in<BR>
my opinion CT sorely needed.>><BR>
<BR>
Precisely. The MT system is extremely flexible and easy to use. It<BR>
rationalizes the entire skill system of Traveller (just go through the<BR>
supplement reprints to see all the different success rolls that they came up<BR>
with before the task system!) Also, by using a target number that you have<BR>
to roll *higher* than, the system neatly avoids the problems of the T4<BR>
system, namely that for a given difficulty, some characters are going to<BR>
have *no chance* to succeed. Impossible tasks, for example, are almost<BR>
always that--impossible.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<<What did annoy me about Merc/High<BR>
Guard/Scouts/Merchant Prince was that the CharGen<BR>
system presented was blatantly unfair. You couldn't<BR>
realisticly integrate Mercenary etc CharGen into a<BR>
campaign that had started off using the basic CharGen.<BR>
I can't think why they didn't make the new CharGen<BR>
system 100% compatible with the old one (that includes<BR>
making PCs of similar ability) since CharGen is such a<BR>
fundamental part of every RPG.>><BR>
<BR>
MT does include revised versions of the 'enhanced' systems, but the basic<BR>
CharGen was spruced up and you don't necessarily have to use the enhanced<BR>
sysetems anymore.<BR>
<BR>
<<If and when I get the game I'll take a look at the<BR>
combat rules and may get back to you, but at the<BR>
moment I'm happy with CT combat for the simple reason<BR>
that it lets me run quick, simple combats which aren't<BR>
too slowed down by rules.>><BR>
<BR>
Well, the MT system was supposed to solve everything in one roll, (which<BR>
should be quick enough for anyone) but I'm not enchanted by the results.<BR>
Creating a hybrid system which uses the MT task system isn't too difficult;<BR>
I have my ideas on that score.<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:31:07 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: FFS3 for Non-Techies (Long)<BR>
<BR>
Well, I've been enjoying as much as I can follow the posts about radiators<BR>
and power consumption, and heartily concur that FFS needs a revision.<BR>
<BR>
However, I have to agree with Sam that the system will be incomplete unless<BR>
there's a non-gearhead way for people to use it. This would seem to require<BR>
either a 'modular' design (similar to LBB2 method, perhaps) or a table-heavy<BR>
design sequence ala MegaTraveller.<BR>
<BR>
FWIW, I used to be pretty good at designing MT ships. ISTR that I could<BR>
finish a ship in between ten minutes and a half an hour with only pencil,<BR>
paper and a calulator. I would recommend that this be the rule of thumb for<BR>
FFS designs that are not heavily customized.<BR>
<BR>
Since I'm contributing my thoughts along the matter, how about a design<BR>
sequence that is flowcharted with tables and notes in the text accompanying<BR>
each stage of the design sequence saying, in effect, "the above values are<BR>
optimized along assumption x. You can customize these designs by referring<BR>
to page X."<BR>
<BR>
Also, Bruce Macintosh's DSR post seems to me a good model, in that he had<BR>
basic, moderate, and advanced levels. Perhaps this could be accomplished in<BR>
the design sequence by: optimizing known designs along such lines as<BR>
'civilian' or 'military' (or 'survey', etc.) (basic design); replacing<BR>
variables with basic constants to provide 'stripped-down' formulas for easy<BR>
customability (moderate); providing the complete, from-scratch design<BR>
sequence (advanced). I think the most daunting thing to me in FFS1 was the<BR>
impression, valid or not, that I would have to design every component of a<BR>
ship totally from scratch each time.<BR>
<BR>
However, the QSDS design sequence was inadequete because it simply did not<BR>
provide enough customability. I don't mind necessary calculating easy<BR>
things, like how many tons of power plant to install given a certain power<BR>
requirement.<BR>
<BR>
Other points that that you might want to take or leave:<BR>
<BR>
- --Game effects must still take a high priority. The radiator discussion has<BR>
been pretty enlightening, but some care must be taken to consider how it<BR>
will effect the game, especially space combat. How will new radiator<BR>
assumptions effect ships using a black globe? Will it be too easy to disable<BR>
ships by overloading their radiators (changing radically the face of<BR>
Traveller combat?) This isn't a criticism of realism, just a reminder of the<BR>
meta-design needs to fit into a game that has certain assumptions going back<BR>
to the LBBs.<BR>
<BR>
- --Maybe it's because I'm reading a book about complexity studies, but I<BR>
would like to see the tech slope become a little more jagged, with<BR>
efficiences also becoming jagged. My somewhat uniformed estimation is that<BR>
most technology doesn't proceed in a linear fashion, but gradually increases<BR>
until a certain critical breakthrough is made that produces radical new<BR>
possibilities.<BR>
<BR>
- --Perhaps there should be some consensus statements on a few of the<BR>
assumptions each person who is responsible for a component of the revised<BR>
FFS, along the lines of materials technology, power consumption/generation,<BR>
Traveller tech slopes, etc. I'm thinking of something along the lines of the<BR>
introduction to MT vehicle design that would serve as the Bible for the<BR>
project as a whole.<BR>
<BR>
- --It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to allow the text describing<BR>
the design sequence to be looked over/written by those list members who make<BR>
a living in the English language. I'm sure we can all think of several<BR>
examples of RPG products whose ambiguous, misleading, or incomprehensible<BR>
wording caused us grief. Anybody here do technical writing?<BR>
<BR>
Just my Cr .02. Keep up the good work, everybody, I'm eager to see the<BR>
results.<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2857<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (rly-yh01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.33]) by air-yh03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:37:25 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:36:54 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id LAA06128;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:36:33 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:32:32 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id LAA06009<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:32:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:32:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008011532.LAA06009@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2857<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2858</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 11:53:11 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2858<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Radiators<BR>
Re : Radiators<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: sensors<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Fusion & Nuclear Dampers<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Radiators<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Definite Articles (OT) (was Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Radiators<BR>
CT Reprint sales<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:40:42 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
> That the question isn't it?  You have been assuming technology<BR>
> pretty much on par with what we have now.  If you look at the<BR>
> amount of space that you need to cover at any reasonable distance<BR>
> from ship (a light second or more) your angle doesn't have to<BR>
> be that small to make detection quite iffy.<BR>
<BR>
("Reasonable distance" doesn't matter - what matters is what<BR>
fraction of the sky your radiators can be seen by)<BR>
<BR>
The questions (which I was hoping you would suggest actual<BR>
numbers for) are (a) how small, exactly? and (b) how much<BR>
radiation "spills" into other directions, since this isn't a<BR>
particularly collimated beam?<BR>
<BR>
Clearly if you know exactly where the single enemy ship is<BR>
out there, you can keep your radiators away from it.<BR>
However, trying to avoid a ship whose position you already know<BR>
isn't the usual "detection" case. More relevant is when<BR>
you don't know where the enemy is and they don't know<BR>
where you are. That does end up requiring a pretty narrow<BR>
beam, which is hard to do. (Do you sink your radiators into<BR>
the hull of the ship so they radiate out of tunnels? If you sink<BR>
a 1m radiator into a 1m hole, you've only reduced your<BR>
emitting angle to about 90 degrees, and already used up<BR>
1m3 of ship volume per 1m of radiator...) It's even harder<BR>
if ships are maneuvering, in which case your "beam" is<BR>
sweeping out lots of space...<BR>
<BR>
In any event (see previous posts) I wasn't arguing that this is<BR>
impossible, just that it's hard, doesn't work perfectly,<BR>
and that it's (pause to say this<BR>
slowly) *already present in the rules*. A "normal" ship<BR>
is assumed to have its radiators oriented so that under "normal"<BR>
maneuvering the enemy only sees about 10% of the energy -<BR>
either spillover or through chance as the radiators intersect<BR>
the enemy sensor. (Ships that don't bother to do this are<BR>
referred to as having "idiot masking".)<BR>
If you know where the enemy is and<BR>
employ "agressive baffling" to keep the sensors turned away<BR>
this goes down to 1% or 0.1% (can't remember which.)<BR>
Advanced IR masking bought for the ship means that enemies<BR>
normally only see 0.1-0.5% of the energy, implying pretty good<BR>
collimation and orientation of radiators in combination with<BR>
bigger lower-temperature radiators.<BR>
<BR>
The rules fudge slightly the fact that you can see the thermal<BR>
IR from the hull of the target ship as well. "Normal" ships<BR>
don't have any way to cool their hulls. Masking includes some<BR>
active hull cooling. I didn't model this seperately but sort-of<BR>
fudged it, but another reason that radiating in some directions<BR>
isn't 100% effective is the thermal IR from the hull.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:44:11 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators<BR>
<BR>
>1.  I would raise the radiator requirements somewhat.  As a<BR>
>"quick-and-dirty" solution, all ships intended for combat would need to<BR>
>have what in FF&S2 is Basic thermal masking (double the radiator area),<BR>
>with no reduction in signature.<BR>
>2.  Ships without at least Combat [Basic] thermal masking are<BR>
>automatically disabled after the first combat turn in which they are hit<BR>
>by effective (i.e., not blocked by sandcasters) laser or PAW fire, due<BR>
>to heat buildup.  Penetration is not required to disable such a ship.<BR>
It was assumed already that there's some redundancy in even the<BR>
normal amount of radiator area - even non-combat ships want a way<BR>
to keep going if a radiator is taken out by a mechanical breakdown or<BR>
by a meteor hit.<BR>
<BR>
>3.  I would go ahead and keep the power requirements for facilities such<BR>
>as accomodations, sickbays, etc.  These power requirements (and their<BR>
>resulting radiator requirements) would account for both the "hotel load"<BR>
>of the ship and the waste metabolic heat produced by crew and<BR>
>passengers.<BR>
<BR>
The waste metabolic heat is in megawatts? (Sickbay power requirements<BR>
are several MW...for a small sickbay.)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:54:34 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re : Radiators<BR>
<BR>
There were a couple of reasons we fudged things in FFS2 on<BR>
radiators - in particular, very high outputs and not requiring them<BR>
to use power themselves.<BR>
<BR>
(1) Adding radiators at all was already a big change likely to<BR>
irritate conservative people<BR>
(2) Having radiators cost power themselves seemed likely to be<BR>
too complicated. You can already see it scaring people on<BR>
this list...<BR>
(3) Since power requirements for ship systems were already<BR>
high, and power plant efficiencies were undefined, we<BR>
implicitly assumed that the power required to run the radiator<BR>
was included in the power requirements of ship systems and/or<BR>
folded into the power plant output.<BR>
<BR>
an example: (and I'm just going to put in simple numbers rather than<BR>
the accurate ones already calcualted...)<BR>
<BR>
let's assume that power plant volume is 2 MW per m3.<BR>
A 10 MW plant is 5 m3.<BR>
let's assume that a 10 MW power plant generates 1 MW of<BR>
waste heat.<BR>
<BR>
let's assume that our radiator heat pumps require 5 MW of<BR>
energy per MW of waste heat radiated, and 1 m2 per MW<BR>
radiated.<BR>
<BR>
we'll then need 1 m2 of radiator area and an additional<BR>
2.5 m3 of power plant to get an effective 10 MW of useable<BR>
power; so I end up with a 7.5 m3 power plant generating 15 MW,<BR>
5 MW of which is sucked up by the radiators.<BR>
<BR>
Since there's no alternative to having the radiators, I can vastly<BR>
simply life for the designers if I just say that power plants have<BR>
an "effective" output of 1.33 MW/m3. To get 10 MW then I<BR>
require a 7.5 m3 power plant, just like before, but I haven't forced<BR>
the poor designer to do as much calculation.<BR>
<BR>
So, all the heat pump stuff can be fudged by adjusting the<BR>
powerplant numbers. Since the powerplant numbers were<BR>
(a) completely made up in the first place, and (b) we wanted<BR>
some compatibility with FFS1, we just assumed that the<BR>
heat pump stuff was *already* folded in.<BR>
<BR>
I don't have time to be very involved in this FFS3 project,<BR>
but my advice would be to always look for ways to make<BR>
things simple, and always fold in calculation steps when you<BR>
can.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:43:12 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Considering that spacecraft are structurally more similar to aircraft than<BR>
> surface ships (due to the type of stresses involved), it's not at all<BR>
> unreasonable to think there might be a practical limit to how large a<BR>
> structure you can build and still have it maneuver in combat. Not certain,<BR>
> mind you -- simply not *ludicrous*. Square-cube relationships have killed<BR>
> many apparently promising ideas.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, the stresses on a spacecraft aren't that much like those on<BR>
aircraft. The majority of the stress is from the main drive and that<BR>
*always* occurs along a fixed axis. <BR>
<BR>
Changing the orientation of the space craft requires much smaller<BR>
forces. And since changing *course* occurs very solely, you don't need<BR>
to be able to change orientation all that fast. A few seconds will do<BR>
just fine.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:47:28 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: sensors<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> You don't get ranges accurate to within meters at 10,000 to 100,000<BR>
>> km ranges. At 10,000 km, that'd require pulse timing accuracy to 1<BR>
>> part in 10 million. Heck, the pulse duration is likely to be more<BR>
>> than that!<BR>
>><BR>
>> Since a hex is 30,000 km, accuracy is going to be a lot rougher than<BR>
>> "meters".<BR>
<BR>
> Hhhmmm, .1 microseconds or less is a pretty standard pulse duration<BR>
> for most fire control RADARs today.....<BR>
<BR>
Which means that at 1 hex, you can't determine distance closer than +/-<BR>
3 meters. At 10 hexes, it's up to 30 meters.<BR>
<BR>
> It does have a huge effect on ranges that allow the pulse to still be<BR>
> travelling to the target when the next one is fired off. You would<BR>
> then have to "modulate" each pulse with different (preassigned)<BR>
> values so you will know what pulse it is that you are receiving back<BR>
> so that you can estimate range.<BR>
<BR>
Or have the pulses at different frequencies, with the "pattern" being<BR>
psuedo-random. That makes it harder to spoof the radar anyway, and<BR>
makes for it harder to stealth things too.<BR>
<BR>
"Spread Spectrum" radar. :-)<BR>
<BR>
> It wouldn't take very long to get a lock-on for targets out to 30,000<BR>
> km, with pulses traveling at the speed of light and computers at high<BR>
> TL's. The beam width of the LASER out to those ranges could be a<BR>
> concern but, I would think that they would have that problem licked<BR>
> too by TL 10+.<BR>
<BR>
In Traveller space combat 30,000 km is "point blank" range. One hex.<BR>
You have to deal with ranges out to 100 hexes (3,000,000 km or 10 light<BR>
seconds).<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:19:25 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
> >The simplest method is to say 'you feed X tons of hydrogen into the <BR>
> >drive to jump' and ignore the idea that its fused at all.<BR>
> <BR>
> I'm not sure if you mean, it is simplest to not worry about it<BR>
> ("you need X tons of hydrogen and that's that...) or if you<BR>
> are saying some sort of jump bubble idea is simpler.<BR>
<BR>
Either one.<BR>
> <BR>
> The idea that you create a jump bubble has a few problems.<BR>
> One is that if the bubble is large, then the volume of the ship<BR>
> shouldn't matter a lot and if the bubble is small, then the<BR>
> requirement should be based on surface area not volume.<BR>
<BR>
I assume the hydrogen is actually consumed to create the bubble; the size of the bubble is directly proportional to the amount of hydrogen fed in.<BR>
  It<BR>
> also doesn't explain why you can use jump projectors at higher TLs,<BR>
> doesn't tie directly into the need for lanthanum.  An energy<BR>
> use also doesn't require addition explanation about why you<BR>
> get an energy signature, and not a mass signature, when you<BR>
> enter and leave jump space, why you need purified hydrogen, why<BR>
> it is call "fuel", and how alternate sources like  black globes,<BR>
> solar energy, drop tanks, etc. work.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, purified hydrogen is needed because jump space doesn't like neutrons.  It's<BR>
called fuel because it gets consumed.  Black globes require hydrogen as well<BR>
as energy (canon has never been clear on this anyway).  The solar energy<BR>
idea is physically absurd, because (a) it takes about a million years for a <BR>
100 ton ship to absorb solar energy equal to fusing ten tons of hydrogen, and<BR>
(b) if you can use solar power, you can also just use a fusion power plant,<BR>
and we'd see all sorts of fuel-less jump ships.<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Now I'm not saying you can't handwave these.  But with an<BR>
> energy use you don't have to.  The original concept was clearly<BR>
> that it was used for energy and any explanation that stays<BR>
> closer to that is going to be simpler and run into few<BR>
> problems.<BR>
<BR>
The problem is that if you have a magic power source which can fuse ten tons<BR>
of hydrogen in an hour or less, you can use it for other useful tricks, such<BR>
as incinerating planets.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:25:11 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Fusion & Nuclear Dampers<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Several reason. First off, *size* and power consumption. Second, the<BR>
> required sort of field for a *fission* weapon would interfere with<BR>
> detonation. <BR>
<BR>
Damper boxes aren't terribly large, at least on the scale of the missiles used<BR>
in traveller, though as long as a damper box has a volume considerably greater<BR>
than its contents the mechanics of using it become complex.  As for the second<BR>
point, turn it off 10 milliseconds before detonation.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 12:26:27 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Michael Houghton <herveus@Radix.Net><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
Howdy!<BR>
<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> <BR>
> >>>John Groth wrote:<BR>
> >>> Of course, _I_ want ships the size of _Montana_.... ;-)<BR>
> <BR>
> <snip><BR>
> <BR>
> > Seriously, why do you object to the existence of ships the size of<BR>
> > _Montana_ (500,000 dtons), bearing in mind that _Montana_ is the same<BR>
> > size as the canonical _Tigress_-class?  IMHO, the existence of large<BR>
> > vessels in the Traveller universe is a _good_ thing for roleplaying, for<BR>
> > several reasons:<BR>
> <BR>
> Ah. I suspect that he (like I) had forgotten that there *was* a ship<BR>
> class of that name.<BR>
> <BR>
> Also, "ships the size of _Montana_" is *not* the same thing as "ships<BR>
> the size of the _Montana_". The extra "the" changes it from a reference<BR>
> to the *state* to a reference to something named *for* the state.<BR>
> <BR>
Of course, the ambiguity makes for fun! Imagine a ship the size of<BR>
_Montana_... That would be one hell of an adventure just encountering<BR>
it (as a sub-light ship coming in from spinward...just detected in<BR>
Beyond). <BR>
<BR>
yours,<BR>
Michael<BR>
- -- <BR>
Michael and MJ Houghton   | Herveus d'Ormonde and Megan O'Donnelly<BR>
herveus@radix.net         | White Wolf and the Phoenix<BR>
Bowie, MD, USA            | Tablet and Inkle bands, and other stuff<BR>
                          | http://www.radix.net/~herveus/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:26:58 GMT<BR>
From: "Jeff Rowse" <jeffrowse@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
<BR>
(Please excuse the lack of quotes/"You write"s, but I'm using Hotmail and <BR>
don't have time to dig the relevant bits out..).<BR>
<BR>
Montana: so how many non-Americans on the list knew there was a boat called <BR>
'Montana'?  How many Americans, come to think of it?  Please remember that <BR>
not everybody has exactly the same spheres of reference here!  Likewise for <BR>
describing warships as BI, BB etc - to me, BI (normally) means British Isles <BR>
and BB is a pellet of about 6mm radius.<BR>
<BR>
Sensors and Computers: just because the current generation of computers <BR>
generate bucketloads of heat and have certain capabilities, please remember <BR>
that it always been so.  Just fifty years ago computers were the size of <BR>
double-decker buses and needed punched cards for input and output - the <BR>
thought that you could have one sat on *your* desk was unheard of, never <BR>
mind the thought that you could have one (or more!) at home...  The next <BR>
generation of Pentium (called, strangely enough, Pentium 4) is (supposedly) <BR>
going to run at 1.5GHz *at least*.  Hard disks are now storing up to 33Gb of <BR>
data in a box about 4"x6"x1", including the power supply and control system <BR>
- - the manufacturers are now aiming for hundreds of GigaBytes of data instead <BR>
of 'just' tens of Gb.  Anyone care to guess what sort of capacity they will <BR>
be working on in ten years time..?<BR>
Also, harking back to the "you can't see well enough with Passive sensors to <BR>
hit something" debate, how about Electro-optical guidance?  Kinda like <BR>
watching the 'tv' camera mounted on the nose of the bomb as it falls down <BR>
the bunker airvent...<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav:  (Montana) The pc's get jumped on when they say about how 'New <BR>
London' is more comfortable and a nicer assignment than [insert current <BR>
location here] - *they* know they were talking about starships, but the <BR>
locals obviously didn't.<BR>
(Computers) So that npc is plugging his 'mobile phone' into your ship's <BR>
datafeeds - who's getting the shock; him cos his phone *won't* recharge or <BR>
*you* when his mini-microcomputer suddenly takes over your ship's <BR>
computer..?<BR>
<BR>
One more thing, did you know that a certain well-known Webmail provider has <BR>
modified it's anti-spam software to block anything with three or more <BR>
exclamation marks next to each other and/or a dollar sign in front of <BR>
5-comma-zero-zero-zero on the grounds that "most people don't use such <BR>
things in their (e)mail"... I kid you not.  I'll try to find the original <BR>
source if anyone's interested...<BR>
<BR>
Jeff (aka Captain Chicken, Leg-end in his own Lunchbox).<BR>
"I see no ships.."<BR>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:30:32 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> You don't get ranges accurate to within meters at 10,000 to 100,000 km<BR>
> ranges. At 10,000 km, that'd require pulse timing accuracy to 1 part in<BR>
> 10 million. Heck, the pulse duration is likely to be more than that!<BR>
<BR>
The accuracy of radar rangefinding is unaffected by range.  If you can be <BR>
accurate to 10 meters at a kilometer, you can do it at 300,000 kilometers.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:02:14 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
Terry Mixon writes:<BR>
> --- Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Your route, while shorter, takes longer to get there. 8 jumps as <BR>
> opposed to seven. That is also a factor. Time is money. Taking <BR>
> the jump three would have made them the same, still. Both your route <BR>
> and mine there are viable, if one accepts that trade though zones <BR>
> listed as dangerous like Amber zones, would have any real through <BR>
> traffic. I tend to agree with Ian that insurance and factors along <BR>
> that route would be high enough to keep a good portion of the <BR>
> corps from "trading through". <BR>
<BR>
Well, the main reason I route through Porozlo is that its probably a very cheap<BR>
route, because the two worlds are on a super route with each other, and Porozlo probably has significant trade of its own going to Efate.  If you want maximum speed, go with Rhylanor-Fulacin-Keanou-Yori-Roup-Alell-Efate in 6 weeks (this has the advantage that all but the Alell-Efate jump is J3, minimizing transshipping).<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Also, a difference of 19 to 16 makes no difference in an economic<BR>
> sense.<BR>
Actually, it does make a difference (of about 15%), the difference just falls below the resolution of the economic system.<BR>
<BR>
 To make a difference would require an alternate route the <BR>
> is 9 pc or shorter. So, the route I chose would count as a viable<BR>
> bypass to the "dangerous Amber zone". It would almost make more <BR>
> sense if instead of distance, it were the number of jumps that <BR>
> mattered more.<BR>
<BR>
Number of jumps matters more if its impractical to shift cargo to a lower-jump ship for that leg (which might be a problem with the Mourghes-Enope link on your route).  In general, minor differences in speed are not particularly important for tasks which take months anyway.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment and consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
<BR>
Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible arguments<BR>
against large ships could include<BR>
   *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
   *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
   *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
   *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
	defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
   *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  DSR-style sensors are<BR>
   sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
   system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a bit<BR>
   less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either one<BR>
   can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
   there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved pretty<BR>
   easily too).<BR>
What is the relative importance of <BR>
   *Completeness.<BR>
   *Technical accuracy.<BR>
   *Quickness of use.<BR>
What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 13:47:04 -0400<BR>
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 10:24 AM 08/01/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
How brutally realistic does it *have* to be?  One of the things that drew <BR>
me to Traveller in '79 was that it still had the elements of the classic <BR>
space opera about it as well as a nod to the real world.  It was easy and <BR>
quick to build a ship.  MT locked in a setting and made things a bit more <BR>
difficult to design, but it could be done without a spreadsheet and <BR>
required basic addition/subtraction/multiplication/division skills.  TNE <BR>
escalated the complexity with FF&S, and T4 with FF&S2 added even more.  I <BR>
want the design sequences to be enjoyable, not an exercise in college <BR>
mathematics.  Spreadsheets are nice, but they shouldn't be a requirement <BR>
for most people just to design a ship.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe I'm just a curmudgeon when it comes to design, but I still want a <BR>
sense of the fantastic rather explanations why my 15MT Battleship is <BR>
impossible.<BR>
<BR>
YMMV<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger<BR>
<BR>
"To our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations,<BR>
    may she always be in the right, but our country, right or wrong!"<BR>
      ~Stephen Decatur<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
mailto:kurt@blazenet.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 13:48:55 -0400<BR>
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 10:24 AM 08/01/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
One other thing...<BR>
<BR>
Alternate technology.  I liked the concept of subspace from FF&S as well as <BR>
stutterwarp that was ported from 2300.<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger<BR>
<BR>
"To our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations,<BR>
    may she always be in the right, but our country, right or wrong!"<BR>
      ~Stephen Decatur<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
mailto:kurt@blazenet.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:11:07 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> <BR>
> >> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> >> Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
> >> Note that some proposed designs use liquid drops (molten metal!), and<BR>
> >> these are buildable in the near term. That raises the available<BR>
> >> operating temp considerably, and at lower TLs tha you use above.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > The problem with this as a general solution is that you cant really dodge<BR>
> > while using it, which precludes it's use in combat.<BR>
<BR>
I have what are probably a couple of stupid questions regarding <BR>
this technology.<BR>
<BR>
(1) Can you enclose the radiator spray in a shell made of a hypothetical<BR>
substance which is very transparent in the IR-to-visible range, thereby<BR>
ensuring you don't lose any of the goop while still radiating away?<BR>
<BR>
(2) The individual drops have excellent surface/volume ratios, but if <BR>
they're densely packed, they'll occlude each other. Is there really a <BR>
point at which droplets are better than a single planar radiator fin <BR>
working at the same temperature? Or is the whole point that you get to <BR>
run it at a temp which melts your radiator?<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:18:08 +0100 <BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger wrote:<BR>
> At 10:24 AM 08/01/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
> > What other questions should we answer?<BR>
><BR>
> How brutally realistic does it *have* to be?  One of the things<BR>
> that drew me to Traveller in '79 was that it still had the<BR>
> elements of the classic space opera about it as well as a nod<BR>
> to the real world.<snip><BR>
<BR>
I tend to agree with Kurt here, but I know that many people  want<BR>
something uber-realistic too.  Why can't we have the best of both<BR>
worlds?  The book 2 starship construction sequence was  basically<BR>
about plugging some standardised modules together.  With a little<BR>
careful forethought FFS3 should be  capable  of  designing  basic<BR>
modules ... a library of which can  form  a  book  2  style  meta<BR>
sequence.  People can then  choose  between  these  2  levels  of<BR>
complexity, but ships produced with  either  being  approximately<BR>
compatable.  (I would think  that  the  detailed  sequence  would<BR>
produce more optimal  performance,  but  standardised  components<BR>
would have  a  mass-production  discount  that  would  make  them<BR>
attractive to cost-conscous players.)<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 11:18:12 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Definite Articles (OT) (was Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
Victor Abraham Delnore wrote<BR>
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  <BR>
> > Also, "ships the size of _Montana_" is *not* the same thing as "ships<BR>
> > the size of the _Montana_". The extra "the" changes it from a reference<BR>
> > to the *state* to a reference to something named *for* the state.<BR>
> <BR>
> This makes sense to civilians like you and me, but not to current US<BR>
> Navy personnel.  US Navy preferred usage is to omit the article ("the")<BR>
> when referring to ships.  You are supposed to refer to a vessel as<BR>
> _Virginia_ or _Nimitz_ or what have you.  "I was aboard _Nimitz_<BR>
> during the Gulf War"... [snip]<BR>
<BR>
Apropos of nothing, this is analogous to a sure way to distinguish <BR>
Northern Californian drivers from Southern Californians. NoCals say <BR>
"I was driving on 280" or "you need to get on 101 North"; SoCals say <BR>
"driving on _the_ 405" or "_the_ 15".<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 23:39:34 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 18:28 -0400 31/7/00, eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
>Hey, now that Ian has ruled that "everything uses 1/5 it's former<BR>
>power" and we're "rationalizing" power requirements, can we cut an<BR>
>EP down to something more reasonable?<BR>
><BR>
>Hum, even at 1/5, that's 250 Mw for the computer.  Still a little<BR>
>much, don't you think? <g><BR>
<BR>
Grumble. I just liked those days when an EP was an EP and we didn't <BR>
have to worry so much about real life :-)<BR>
<BR>
I mean 2300AD was always the hard SF game  not Traveller. Traveller <BR>
was just quite firm, not hard. ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:47:13 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators<BR>
<BR>
Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
<BR>
> (1) Can you enclose the radiator spray in a shell made of a hypothetical<BR>
> substance which is very transparent in the IR-to-visible range, thereby<BR>
> ensuring you don't lose any of the goop while still radiating away?<BR>
<BR>
You'll have trouble if the spray hits your hypothetical substance.  I suspect<BR>
its easiest to just use gravetics to control the goop.<BR>
> <BR>
> (2) The individual drops have excellent surface/volume ratios, but if <BR>
> they're densely packed, they'll occlude each other. Is there really a <BR>
> point at which droplets are better than a single planar radiator fin <BR>
> working at the same temperature? Or is the whole point that you get to <BR>
> run it at a temp which melts your radiator?<BR>
<BR>
Well, the droplets can possibly be larger.  Other than that, its probably just<BR>
temperature (and honestly, it probably can't operate at temperatures any higher<BR>
than a solid graphite radiator).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 11:47:43 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Arthur Boff <ajboff@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: CT Reprint sales<BR>
<BR>
<<I doubt it'll outsell itself; CT has around 250,000<BR>
copies in its various incarnations. A good run for an<BR>
RPG printing would be 10k copies these days, as a<BR>
guess...>><BR>
<BR>
True, but then I was thinking of later versions. It<BR>
will be interesting to see how many people, like<BR>
myself, were totally disinterested in TNE/T4 but<BR>
snapped up the CT Reprints as soon as they saw them...<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 13:52:11 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment and consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
> <BR>
> Do we want to discourage huge ships?<BR>
<BR>
I certainly don't. I _like_ big ships.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
<BR>
Opposed.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
<BR>
How much harsher?  I have no problem with a minor increase in radiator<BR>
requirements (say, a factor of two), especially if Ian's suggestion that<BR>
t-plate power is effectively radiated by the t-plates is used.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
<BR>
I don't see any need for this.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
>         defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
<BR>
Overall, I think that this is a bad idea (but see below).<BR>
<BR>
> Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?<BR>
<BR>
One offensive tweak that might work without upsetting the balance too<BR>
much would be to allow cheaper, lighter det-laser missiles.  Those who<BR>
know more than I about the efficiency of det-laser missiles can provide<BR>
more input about how much det-lasers can be realistically tweaked.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
<BR>
The current grav comp rules seem adequate. <BR>
<BR>
> How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  DSR-style sensors are<BR>
>    sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
>    system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a bit<BR>
>    less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either one<BR>
>    can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>    there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved pretty<BR>
>    easily too).<BR>
<BR>
I like the current (DSR) sensors.  However, I would like to see an<BR>
increased emphasis on ECM/ECCM, as well as rules for cooperative<BR>
engagement.  BTW, the relative effectiveness of sensors can serve to<BR>
limit useful warship size at lower tech levels; a ship that is so large<BR>
that it can be detected and engaged by smaller craft before it can<BR>
detect and engage them is a liability.<BR>
<BR>
> What is the relative importance of<BR>
>    *Completeness.<BR>
>    *Technical accuracy.<BR>
>    *Quickness of use.<BR>
<BR>
These three factors are listed according to my priorities.<BR>
<BR>
> What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
How many roads must a man walk down?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2858<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (rly-zc02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.2]) by air-zc05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 14:53:10 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 14:52:11 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id OAA14615;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:52:03 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:51:17 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id OAA14551<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:51:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:51:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008011851.OAA14551@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2858<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2859</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 1:43:15 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2859<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Radiators<BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
FF&S 3<BR>
[BITS] WE NEED *YOUR* HELP! (GenCon UK)<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re: Radiators<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
Re: CT Reprint sales<BR>
Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
Re: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Re: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2854<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
DSR and landed ships<BR>
Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 12:05:45 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
> <BR>
> > (1) Can you enclose the radiator spray in a shell made of a hypothetical<BR>
> > substance which is very transparent in the IR-to-visible range, thereby<BR>
> > ensuring you don't lose any of the goop while still radiating away?<BR>
> <BR>
> You'll have trouble if the spray hits your hypothetical substance.  I suspect<BR>
> its easiest to just use gravetics to control the goop.<BR>
<BR>
That occurred to me as I hit "Send". But let's say it's frictionless and <BR>
transparent! Yeah, that's the ticket! Frictionless, heatproof, and <BR>
transparent! And infinitely strong, and weightless! Heck, I'm sure Niven's<BR>
developed at least three kinds of stuff that'll fit the bill...<BR>
<BR>
- -RB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 12:24:19 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
From: Leonard Erickson <shadow@krypton.rain.com><BR>
<BR>
>Well, after many discussions with other folks in the BDSM community, it<BR>
>seems that *some* of us are wired such that there's a sensation<BR>
>*between* "normal" and "pain". Best I can describe it is that it's sort<BR>
>of like an itch. Except that it's not so "annoying". You know it's<BR>
>there, and that you might want to do something about it, but you don't<BR>
>*need* to.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    Two things.<BR>
    1) Yes, some of you are wired to enjoy pain, while some can be taught to<BR>
enjoy pain.<BR>
    2) My fem sub is not one of them, she enjoys serving me, but she does<BR>
not enjoy most types of pain, other types she does enjoy.  For example, she<BR>
hates to be whipped, but she loves nipple clamps.  Two different forms of<BR>
pain.<BR>
<BR>
>I guess we are wired with two "priority levels" of pain and other folks<BR>
>only have one. :-)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    Well, it can also be learned, that some forms of pain are good, while<BR>
other forms of pain are bad.<BR>
<BR>
    ObTrav:  How many colonies are made up of BDSM groups?  I.e. ones that<BR>
do practice a "legal" form of slavery.  One in which a male of female enters<BR>
willingly into slavery because that is what he or she wants out of life.<BR>
And, how are these people treated by mainstream 3I culture?<BR>
    For example, say Jack is a Master & jill decides that all she wants out<BR>
of life is to be Jack's slave, what would the 3I do about it?  Would they<BR>
arrest Jack for "owning" jill?  Would they commit jill to a hospital?  What<BR>
if Jack joins up with the IA, IN, IMC, or ISS & brings jill allong as a<BR>
dependent, would she be treated by the other people on the base as a spouse,<BR>
or something else?  Or, would his culture be respected by the 3I because of<BR>
the fact that jill is Jack's slave because she wants to be his slave?<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:40:29 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: FF&S 3<BR>
<BR>
Detailed design rules used to produce tables and plug'n'play modules.<BR>
<BR>
The final chapter could be a quick & dirty starship design sequence using <BR>
tables & modules produced by the rest of the book.<BR>
<BR>
Hull Alpha + Bridge Module 2 + Powerplant/MDrive 3 + Jump Drive 1 + Crew <BR>
module 2 + extra space = subsidized merchant.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
Exigis Domus Hillaria - http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:51:11 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: [BITS] WE NEED *YOUR* HELP! (GenCon UK)<BR>
<BR>
BITS - British Isles Traveller Support<BR>
http://www.bits.org.uk/<BR>
<BR>
Once again, GenCon UK is upon us and we are putting out our regular<BR>
call for helpers to run tournaments and demonstrations with BITS.<BR>
<BR>
We have three tournaments again this year - two serious and one fun. <BR>
They are being held on Friday afternoon, Saturday afternoon and <BR>
Sunday Morning, and we need referees!<BR>
<BR>
In addition, we will be running demonstration games ranging from <BR>
sit-down-and-play adventures to Traveller Full Thrust space battles <BR>
to competitive skirmish games using our At Close Quarters rule set.<BR>
<BR>
Whether you're a frequency Gen Con attendee or simply If you think <BR>
you can help with any of the above (and there will be a small reward <BR>
from BITS at the end of it) please email me ( <BR>
dom@cybergoths.u-net.com ) as soon as possible so we can organise the <BR>
events to promote Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
Please do NOT respond to andl@nortelnetworks.com, the mailing list or <BR>
bits@bits.org.uk<BR>
...DO contact Dominic at dom@cybergoths.u-net.com.<BR>
<BR>
Cheers and many thanks,<BR>
<BR>
Dominic Mooney (BITS Webmaster and GebCon UK Go'fer)<BR>
- -------------Dom Mooney---webmaster@bits.org.uk----------------<BR>
                  BITS - British Isles Traveller Support.<BR>
  http://www.bits.org.uk/              mailto:bits@bits.org.uk<BR>
Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
GURPS is a registered trademark of Steve Jackson Games, Inc.<BR>
BITS, CORE and their respective logos are trademarks of BITS UK Limited.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 20:51:14 +0100 <BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
Eris wrote:<BR>
> My idea of gearheading isn't to get real results, it's just to<BR>
> get reasonable ones...and that's not the same thing.<BR>
<BR>
I believe in having my cake *and* eating it!  (Or at least trying<BR>
to.)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> What I want is for 1 of the player's characters to have *actions*<BR>
> to take.  I want one to have to make decisions about how to maneuver<BR>
> the ship, another to have to juggle computer programs, a third to<BR>
> move power resources around, a fourth to detect and lock their<BR>
> opponent with the sensors, a fifth to work the sandcasters, and the<BR>
> sixth to operate the laser turret.  I want all the PC's skills to<BR>
> come into play.<BR>
<BR>
IMTU:<BR>
<BR>
- - The pilot rolls for evasion ... and moves the miniture  when  I<BR>
  use them.<BR>
<BR>
- - The engineer either rolls for keeping the engines  going  while<BR>
  they are red-lined, or performs damage control.<BR>
<BR>
- - The  navigator  rolls  for  sensor  operations  (lock-ons   and<BR>
  countermeasures).<BR>
<BR>
- - The gunners work their turrets.<BR>
<BR>
- - And the Captain sets overall strategy, and has his Ship Tactics<BR>
  as a roving DM to apply where he feels it is most necessary.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe your bridge  positions  aren't  set  out  right?  When  the<BR>
computer is used in starship combat it is to identify the  target<BR>
vessal from the sensor readings ... which  can  provide  a  small<BR>
bonus DM to damage rolls  once  the  target's  achilles  heal  is<BR>
known.<BR>
<BR>
Also, I borrowed an idea from a gaming magazine for  FASA's  Star<BR>
Trek RPG ... so that players don't parrot  the  ship's  computer,<BR>
etc, (like Sigorney Weaver in Galaxy Quest) each position  has  a<BR>
sheet of codes.  I give the player a code, he looks  it  up,  and<BR>
then (in character) tells the others.<BR>
<BR>
Example:<BR>
(Before)<BR>
<BR>
    Ref: "Engineer, the port thruster  plate  is  overheating<BR>
        and about to shut down."<BR>
<BR>
    Engineer PC: "I reduce the power a bit and roll  to  keep<BR>
        it going."  (rolls dice)<BR>
<BR>
    Ref: "You reduce motive power by 10% ... you think that's<BR>
        enough.  Pilot-"<BR>
<BR>
    Pilot PC: "Yeah, I heard."<BR>
<BR>
    Captain PC: "Gunners standby.  Here they come."<BR>
<BR>
    Ref: "Navigator: You detect a missile  spread  coming  at<BR>
        you."<BR>
<BR>
    ... and so on.<BR>
<BR>
(Now)<BR>
    Ref: "Enginner: H7."<BR>
<BR>
    Engineer PC: "Er, Engineering to Bridge.  We're about  to<BR>
        blow the engine, I've got to throttle back a bit."<BR>
<BR>
    Captain PC: "Bridge here.  They're  right  on  our  tail,<BR>
        Chief.  Are you sure?"<BR>
<BR>
    Engineer PC:  "Yeah,  the  port  thruster's  overheating.<BR>
        Ref?  I reduce the power a bit and roll  to  keep  it<BR>
        going."  (rolls dice)<BR>
<BR>
    Ref: "Enginner: B1, pilot I5."<BR>
<BR>
    Engineer PC: "Whew!"<BR>
<BR>
    Pilot PC: "Captain, I've lost about 10% motive power."<BR>
<BR>
    Captain PC: "Gunners standby.  Here they come."<BR>
<BR>
    Ref: "Navigator: G40 and G45."<BR>
<BR>
    Nav PC: "INCOMING!"<BR>
<BR>
    ... and so on.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 15:58:59 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 05:04:42 PST<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
><BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>> The flame itself will tend toward a spherical shape unless elongated in<BR>
the<BR>
>> direction of a breeze. The flame will have a hot (white or blue) center<BR>
>> surrounded by cooler (yellow, orange, and finally perhaps red) layers.<BR>
><BR>
>Actually, the color of the flame depends a lot on *what* is burning.<BR>
>Candle flames are yellow, mostly because of the heated carbon (soot) in<BR>
>the flame. Stuff like hydrogen, sulfur, and *simple* hydrocarbons burn<BR>
>with a *blue* flame.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks. I was working from the flame from a bic lighter. Blue near the<BR>
source fading out to orange at the tip. And extrapolating based on<BR>
remembrances of bunsen burners, etc. I wasn't really thinking of different<BR>
fuel constituents.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>The less efficient the combustion, the lower the flame temp, and the<BR>
>more orange to red the flame gets. As an example, you can lower a<BR>
>burning candle into a container filled with chlorine gas (heavier than<BR>
>air). It'll keep burning, but the flame goes this *red* color, because<BR>
>the carbon is no longer burning at all. Instead you get the hydrogen in<BR>
>the wax burning, leaving behind incredible amounts of soot.<BR>
><BR>
>So, as the air supply dwindles, the flame will get redder. So flames in<BR>
>very weak air circulation will be very orange to red.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Cool. (No pun intended)<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:02:24 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
<BR>
At 11:47 PM -0800 7/31/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  > Why do yo have to stop there?  Why can't you use gravitic<BR>
>  > technology to create superheated plasmas?  Heck, you might<BR>
>  > be able to get all the way up just short of neuclear fusion.<BR>
>  > (In fact, if you choose Fe, it won't fuse and you can start<BR>
>  > storing energy in neuclear dissociations).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Because the temp at which you dump the coolant is the max temp you can<BR>
>use it to cool you to (well, close enough, their are tricks when<BR>
>dealing with state changes). So the higher the temp of the coolant when<BR>
>dumped, the higher the temp if whatever you are cooling.<BR>
><BR>
>Yes, you can pump heat into it (like a refrigerator does). But that<BR>
>increases the amount of heat you need to get rid of drastically. You<BR>
>rapidly hit the point of diminishing returns. And since there are<BR>
>pretty hard limits on how much coolant you have, "pumping" heat into it<BR>
>is a waste of scarce resources.<BR>
<BR>
I don't follow.  You can use a heat pump.  Sure it get less<BR>
efficient, but it does let you go beyond the number you mentioned.<BR>
If you can contain a high enough temperature, you can store<BR>
more heat.  Is it significant?  The drop in inefficiency is<BR>
linear with temperature so I would say, that if you can get<BR>
lot hotter than the limits you discuss, then the difference<BR>
will be significant, but I haven't run through the numbers.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 21:13:18 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
> Seriously, why do you object to the existence of ships the size of<BR>
> _Montana_ (500,000 dtons), bearing in mind that _Montana_ is the same<BR>
> size as the canonical _Tigress_-class?<BR>
<BR>
No, no, no, no....<BR>
<BR>
I thought you'd finally slipped over the edge, gearhead-wise, and wanted a<BR>
ship the size of *Montana*. I figured it was better to try and knock you<BR>
out before somebody let you near a design spreadsheet.<BR>
<BR>
Incidentally, what is a _Montana_? I don't believe I've ever heard of that<BR>
ship/class.<BR>
<BR>
Slipping back into seriousness, my own take on the Big Ship Issue runs<BR>
something along the following lines:<BR>
<BR>
1) I like big ships. Pay enough attention to visualising them for the<BR>
players and they're downright awe inspiring - a naval cruiser a hundred<BR>
times bigger than your ship has a feel of omnipotence about it, and better<BR>
yet one which is totally believable. That's an incredibly useful thing for<BR>
a GM to have in his pocket.<BR>
<BR>
2) I kinda feel navies really ought to have bigger ships than 5kdT, just<BR>
from a 'look and feel' point of view. World navies, perhaps not - but<BR>
subsector and Imperial fleets definitely do. A 5kdT dreadnought makes for<BR>
2-3kdT cruisers, and 1kdT destroyers, by which point a well tooled-up party<BR>
in a customised-to-hell fat trader can go toe to toe with a destroyer. The<BR>
Imperial fleet sudenly becomes a lot less scary.<BR>
<BR>
3) However, I don't really like enormous ships, by which *I*, in my own<BR>
head and TU, consider to be past about 50,000 tons except in really extreme<BR>
cases. A five hundred thousand ton megadreadnought is really no more awe<BR>
inspiring for a PC group in a far trader than a fifty thousand ton heavy<BR>
cruiser is; it only really becomes an issue if the ship they're flying is<BR>
the fifty kiloton cruiser. Fair enough, if you're playing that kind of<BR>
game, but I tend not to, and I don't get the impression it happens a lot.<BR>
Besides, I can't really visualise a five million ton ship myself. Once you<BR>
get into the hundreds of turrets and hundreds of fighters, they just become<BR>
numbers - I lose the imagary.<BR>
<BR>
4) Agreed, this means worlds with a population of 60 billion suddenly have<BR>
ludicrous numbers of frigates and light cruisers, rather than a more<BR>
reasonable number of megabattleriders and uberdreadnoughts, but I think the<BR>
problem here is one of population, and I personally will be implementing<BR>
one of the suggestions made here lately about reinterpreting the UWP<BR>
population digit.<BR>
<BR>
Your mileage may very well vary - I concede that my view's not exactly the<BR>
Imperial standard. But it works for me.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:00:16 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>> In mail you write:<BR>
>> <BR>
>>>> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>>>> Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
>>>> Note that some proposed designs use liquid drops (molten metal!), and<BR>
>>>> these are buildable in the near term. That raises the available<BR>
>>>> operating temp considerably, and at lower TLs tha you use above.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> The problem with this as a general solution is that you cant really dodge<BR>
>>> while using it, which precludes it's use in combat.<BR>
><BR>
> I have what are probably a couple of stupid questions regarding <BR>
> this technology.<BR>
><BR>
> (1) Can you enclose the radiator spray in a shell made of a hypothetical<BR>
> substance which is very transparent in the IR-to-visible range, thereby<BR>
> ensuring you don't lose any of the goop while still radiating away?<BR>
<BR>
Shouldn't be necessary given the way manuevering space works.<BR>
<BR>
> (2) The individual drops have excellent surface/volume ratios, but if <BR>
> they're densely packed, they'll occlude each other. Is there really a <BR>
> point at which droplets are better than a single planar radiator fin <BR>
> working at the same temperature?<BR>
<BR>
I'd be rather surprised if there was. Then again, there's a reason the<BR>
spray is a "fan" (flat sheet), rather than a cone. <g><BR>
<BR>
> Or is the whole point that you get to run it at a temp which melts<BR>
> your radiator?<BR>
<BR>
That'd be where I put my money.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:05:12 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> Now I'm not saying you can't handwave these.  But with an<BR>
>> energy use you don't have to.  The original concept was clearly<BR>
>> that it was used for energy and any explanation that stays<BR>
>> closer to that is going to be simpler and run into few<BR>
>> problems.<BR>
><BR>
> The problem is that if you have a magic power source which can fuse ten tons<BR>
> of hydrogen in an hour or less, you can use it for other useful tricks, such<BR>
> as incinerating planets.<BR>
<BR>
Not necessarily. Again, look at things like the SSME. They generate<BR>
enourmous amounts of energy, but deliver it as *thrust*. It's very hard<BR>
to deliver it as electrical energy. Jump drives could be something similar.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:17:07 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
At 9:19 AM -0700 8/1/00, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
>I assume the hydrogen is actually consumed to create the bubble; the <BR>
>size of the bubble is directly proportional to the amount of <BR>
>hydrogen fed in.<BR>
<BR>
Consumed where?  Why does the bubble depends on how much hydrogen<BR>
you put in?  If it isn't a bubble of hydrogen, what is it a<BR>
bubble of?<BR>
<BR>
>   It<BR>
>  > also doesn't explain why you can use jump projectors at higher TLs,<BR>
>  > doesn't tie directly into the need for lanthanum.  An energy<BR>
>  > use also doesn't require addition explanation about why you<BR>
>  > get an energy signature, and not a mass signature, when you<BR>
>  > enter and leave jump space, why you need purified hydrogen, why<BR>
>  > it is call "fuel", and how alternate sources like  black globes,<BR>
>  > solar energy, drop tanks, etc. work.<BR>
><BR>
>Ok, purified hydrogen is needed because jump space doesn't like <BR>
>neutrons.  It's<BR>
>called fuel because it gets consumed.  Black globes require hydrogen as well<BR>
>as energy (canon has never been clear on this anyway).  The solar energy<BR>
>idea is physically absurd, because (a) it takes about a million years for a<BR>
>100 ton ship to absorb solar energy equal to fusing ten tons of hydrogen, and<BR>
>(b) if you can use solar power, you can also just use a fusion power plant,<BR>
>and we'd see all sorts of fuel-less jump ships.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
First of all, I do think you can handwave this stuff.  But to<BR>
me things are simpler, more consistent, and more believable if<BR>
you don't have to pile in additional explanations and effects<BR>
to make things fit.<BR>
<BR>
And the fact is that canon does clearly indicate, in addition<BR>
to everything else, the ability at higher TL's to use jump<BR>
projects indicates that you don't need to have hydrogen.  As to<BR>
using fusion power plants to have a fuel less ship.  If you<BR>
can find a source of big enough you should be able to, but at<BR>
TTL 15 they don't have anything.  Which is exactly why things<BR>
like jump projectors don't appear until later.<BR>
<BR>
>  > Now I'm not saying you can't handwave these.  But with an<BR>
>  > energy use you don't have to.  The original concept was clearly<BR>
>  > that it was used for energy and any explanation that stays<BR>
>  > closer to that is going to be simpler and run into few<BR>
>  > problems.<BR>
><BR>
>The problem is that if you have a magic power source which can fuse ten tons<BR>
>of hydrogen in an hour or less, you can use it for other useful tricks, such<BR>
>as incinerating planets.<BR>
<BR>
Not really.  The only difference between what we are talking<BR>
about and what Traveller can already do is what they can<BR>
control (the energy from fusing that much hydrogen is there<BR>
regardless).  The ability to control the energy is linked<BR>
to jumping and can only be used for jumping.  That control<BR>
doesn't create bombs because the energy goes into jump space.<BR>
If you don't need that control to make a bomb, then the<BR>
issue doesn't even involve what theory to jump drives you use.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:20:59 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
At 3:36 AM -0800 8/1/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>  > Has anyone described what a fire would be like in Zero G?<BR>
><BR>
>Yep, long ago in Analog, among other places.<BR>
><BR>
>Essentially, without a forced draft, it *won't* burn.<BR>
><BR>
>In a gravity field, the combustion products, being hot AND THEREFORE<BR>
>LIGHTER, rise. That lets air come in from the bottom.  Think of a<BR>
>candle flame...<BR>
><BR>
>In zero g, the combustion products weigh the same as the surrounding<BR>
>air. Nothing. So they stay where they are. And smother the fire.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'm going by memory here, but they did an experiment on the<BR>
space shuttle.  In fact, the fire doesn't go out completely.<BR>
If chokes down but hangs on due to diffusion....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:18:14 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: pengebos@nmsu.edu<BR>
Subject: Re: CT Reprint sales<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Arthur Boff wrote:<BR>
> True, but then I was thinking of later versions. It<BR>
> will be interesting to see how many people, like<BR>
> myself, were totally disinterested in TNE/T4 but<BR>
> snapped up the CT Reprints as soon as they saw them...<BR>
<BR>
My FLGS complained about how hard it was to get them.  The idea I got was<BR>
that their distributor didn't have enough copies.<BR>
<BR>
Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu><BR>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<degaalth@prodigy.net><BR>
		http://www.geocities.com/degaalth/<BR>
<BR>
  "Here at Ortillery Command we have at our diposal hundred megawatt laser<BR>
beams, mach 20 titanium rods and guided thermonuclear bombs. Some people say<BR>
 we think that we're God. We're not God. We just borrowed his SMITE button<BR>
                        for our fire control system"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:27:14 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
Knowing that many of us are SF fen, I would have trouble believing that<BR>
listmembers - especially the active ones - would not have read at least<BR>
some of Dr. Linebarger's writings.  How well do you feel they fit into<BR>
Traveller?  Would the Scanners and Habermen (from 'Scanners Live In Vain')<BR>
be a possible development somewhere in Charted Space?  What about the<BR>
beastmen (catmen, dogmen, bullmen - some examples in 'The Ballad of Lost<BR>
C'mell' and 'Alpha Ralpha Boulevard')?  A government that looks like the<BR>
Instrumentality of Mankind?  Thoughts?  Comments?  Flames (keep 'em<BR>
polite!)?  Am I totally off my nut?<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:25:07 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
At 9:13 PM +1000 8/1/00, Robert O'Connor wrote:<BR>
>They are essentially remote electromagnetoencephalographs, and rely on<BR>
>advanced sensor technology to pick up the small potential differences<BR>
>(10-50 microvolts) and power levels (up to ~0.07W) encountered in the<BR>
>central nervous system.<BR>
><BR>
>There are two types of units ; a man-portable directional device for<BR>
>field use and a larger omnidirectional one for installations or<BR>
>vehicles.<BR>
><BR>
>A thickness of rock or metal (on the order of centimetres) will obscure<BR>
>targets. Directional microphones to detect heartbeat or breath sounds<BR>
>are therefore useful adjuncts.<BR>
<BR>
I expect a sheet of metal of almost any thickness would obscure the<BR>
signal....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:32:57 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
 <BR>
> I expect a sheet of metal of almost any thickness would obscure the<BR>
> signal....<BR>
<BR>
In particular, a thin layer of aluminum foil in a hat will protect you.  It also helps against the orbital mind control lasers.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:31:03 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2854<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 22:20:40 -0500<BR>
>From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Dang it those are HUGE ships!  Part of the<BR>
>problem, I think, is that these monster maniacs don't realize just<BR>
>how bloody big even a 5,000 dton ship really is...think 100 meters<BR>
>long by 20 meters wide by 35 meters high.  That's an 8 story<BR>
>apartment block...and it flies!!!<BR>
<BR>
Yes, but to qualify as proper space opera every SF universe *must*<BR>
include 1,600 metre long ships, at least as an option...<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:37:18 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
> At 9:19 AM -0700 8/1/00, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> >I assume the hydrogen is actually consumed to create the bubble; the <BR>
> >size of the bubble is directly proportional to the amount of <BR>
> >hydrogen fed in.<BR>
> <BR>
> Consumed where?  Why does the bubble depends on how much hydrogen<BR>
> you put in?  If it isn't a bubble of hydrogen, what is it a<BR>
> bubble of?<BR>
<BR>
The bubble is a bubble of normal space in a cavity of jump space.  The hydrogen<BR>
is consumed by the jump drive to create the bubble.  It's certainly possible<BR>
that some other method can also be used to create the bubble (and if jump<BR>
projectors don't use hydrogen, presumably such a method exists).<BR>
<BR>
The big point is really that claiming that the hydrogen used by a J-drive is<BR>
fused doesn't add anything except maybe a factor of 150 reduction in fuel<BR>
consumption for antimatter-powered ships (which I'm not sure is indicated in<BR>
canon in any case), and buys you a variety of headaches related to disposing<BR>
of the energy.  It also buys you a problem that there's no plausible reason<BR>
why 0.1% contaminants in the fuel would have any effect on fusion, and therefore we lose any good excuse for fuel purification.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:37:28 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: DSR and landed ships<BR>
<BR>
On looking at the DSR, the penalties for detecting a landed ship in atmosphere-6 with vision is -0.5.  Assuming that we have a bare hull, <BR>
a 100 m^2 ship has a visual signature of 0.  <BR>
Thus, a 1 meter PEMS-12.5 can detect the ship at 5 million kilometers.<BR>
<BR>
Assuming 4,000 angstrom light and diffraction-limited sensors, the resolution<BR>
of this sensor is 4 x 10^-7 radians.  At 5 million kilometers that's 2 kilometers, and unless the object is considerably brighter than its background<BR>
(which is true in space, but not on the ground) detecting an object smaller<BR>
than about a kilometer should be impossible.  Given this, it seems like the<BR>
modifier for 'ship landed' for visual spotting should be around -2.5 (and <BR>
shadow probably doesn't actually have much effect).<BR>
<BR>
Now, with this same sensor in IR, if we assume the ship is using 100 MW<BR>
(signature-0) it can be detected at 1,500 km.  As IR has longer wavelength,<BR>
our resolution is probably similar to the above.  However, two square <BR>
kilometers of land are going to be emitting around a gigawatt of IR (vs <BR>
around 10 MW for the ship), which once again will completely wash out the<BR>
ship.  Given this, the 'ship landed' modifier for IR spotting should probably<BR>
be around -2 (maybe only -1.5 at night).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 13:40:01 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
Hmmm..perhaps somewhere in the Solomani sphere... those Impie mongrels<BR>
don't go in for uplift and genetic manipulation all that much. The 'true<BR>
human' bit fits though.<BR>
<BR>
But it's been a looong time since I read any of that stuff, even though<BR>
I still remember the pain I felt reading 'The Ballad of Lost C'mell'.<BR>
<BR>
Me also feel stupid...I never knew Cordwainer Smith's real name...<BR>
<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Knowing that many of us are SF fen, I would have trouble believing that<BR>
> listmembers - especially the active ones - would not have read at least<BR>
> some of Dr. Linebarger's writings.  How well do you feel they fit into<BR>
> Traveller?  Would the Scanners and Habermen (from 'Scanners Live In Vain')<BR>
> be a possible development somewhere in Charted Space?  What about the<BR>
> beastmen (catmen, dogmen, bullmen - some examples in 'The Ballad of Lost<BR>
> C'mell' and 'Alpha Ralpha Boulevard')?  A government that looks like the<BR>
> Instrumentality of Mankind?  Thoughts?  Comments?  Flames (keep 'em<BR>
> polite!)?  Am I totally off my nut?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2859<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (rly-zc01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.1]) by air-zc02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:43:15 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:42:43 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA19308;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:42:38 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:39:48 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA19214<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:39:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:39:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008012039.QAA19214@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2859<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2860</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 3:14:17 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2860<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Montana Class<BR>
Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
Re: Definite Articles (OT) (was Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Montana Class<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: [TNFPLAYERS] Re: Modern Mercury...<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:40:28 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
At 2:23 AM -0800 8/1/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  > The energy of a state doesn't depend on the path you take to<BR>
>  > get to that state.  If you emit x photons of a certain energy,<BR>
>  > the result is the same regardless of how you emit them....<BR>
><BR>
>Nope! Very much *un*-true. Emitting low entropy radiation requires<BR>
>creation of a *lot* of *high* entropy heat in the system doing the<BR>
>emitting. Far more than the amount of low-entropy energy emitted.<BR>
><BR>
>In other words, the lower the entropy of the emitted radiation, the<BR>
>hotter the *system* doing the emitting gets.<BR>
><BR>
>Allowing emission of *thermal* spectrum *doesn't* generate more<BR>
>internal heat than is carried away (as long as your radiator isn't<BR>
>hotter than the rest of the system).<BR>
><BR>
>Remember, you are dealing with a system that is *closed* except for<BR>
>the emitted radiation.<BR>
><BR>
>Emitting a non-thermal spectrum requires converting heat to "useful"<BR>
>energy. Useful in the sense that energy can be extracted by turning it<BR>
>back into heat.<BR>
<BR>
OK, lets step back. I'm trying to take these points one at<BR>
a time.  The point I was addressing in my previous post<BR>
is whether essentially you have to use black body emission.<BR>
If you emit the same radiation as a black body, but you<BR>
use another process, are the thermodynamics the same?<BR>
Now it _is_ a law of thermodynamics any state is the same,<BR>
no matter how you got there.  So if you can emit radiation,<BR>
of any entropy, it doesn't matter how you emit it.  Whether<BR>
it is by radiator fins or by some currently unknown higher<BR>
TL technology.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:04:57 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
<BR>
>Alternate technology.  I liked the concept of subspace from FF&S as well as<BR>
>stutterwarp that was ported from 2300.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    Agreed.  Now with LUG being taken over by WotC, I want to be able to<BR>
play in a Star Trek Game using Traveller Rules.  *weg*<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 21:45:58 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
> First of all, I do think you can handwave this stuff.  But to<BR>
> me things are simpler, more consistent, and more believable if<BR>
> you don't have to pile in additional explanations and effects<BR>
> to make things fit.<BR>
<BR>
What about:<BR>
<BR>
The jump drive works if you pump in exactly /this/ much fiel when you hit<BR>
the power. The theory says it should work fine with just the electrical<BR>
power through the crystals, but the early prototypes all blew up when they<BR>
did that. Somebody tried pumping in hydrogen at the same time, and it<BR>
worked. Nobody knows why, but every race that's developed the jump drive<BR>
has reached this conclusion independantly.<BR>
<BR>
There's probably a reason, but the Imperium's been researching it for the<BR>
last thousand years, and all they have is a big pile of theories. Maybe<BR>
we'll never know.<BR>
<BR>
Do we need any more explanation?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:48:44 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment <BR>
> and consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
> <BR>
> Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible <BR>
> arguments against large ships could include<BR>
>    *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
<BR>
I don't mind big ships, but I'd prefer them to be sluggish (largely for<BR>
aesthetic reasons).  I see the freighters operated by megacorporations as<BR>
"the very biggest things aloft," with naval warships placing a pretty <BR>
distant second.<BR>
<BR>
Yes.  The output of the "standard reactionless drive" ought to depend <BR>
strictly upon the surface area of its external "business end," not on the<BR>
volume of all the stuff tucked away inside the hull.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
<BR>
Yes.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
<BR>
Yes.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
> 	defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
> Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
>    *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
<BR>
I can't say I find fighters very interesting, and see no need to encourage<BR>
their use.  I tend to see them being used for patrol, convoy escort<BR>
(launched from little "escort carriers"), and scouting duties, not but in<BR>
actual battle against real naval vessels.  Most large (cruiser-sized, or<BR>
bigger) naval vessels are "casual" carriers of about a dozen fighters, but<BR>
really big "specialist" carriers, carrying hundreds of fighters and<BR>
equipped with launch tubes, aren't really very useful or common.<BR>
<BR>
> How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  DSR-style sensors are<BR>
>    sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
>    system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a bit<BR>
>    less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either one<BR>
>    can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>    there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved pretty<BR>
>    easily too).<BR>
<BR>
I have to say that I find cat-and-mouse electronic warfare a bit tedious.<BR>
I prefer to believe that hiding starships (particularly large ones with<BR>
big engines, powerful reactors, and lots of weapons) is *so* difficult<BR>
that nobody really bothers trying very hard, except in very special cases.  <BR>
It *should* be possible to build a "stealthy" starship, but it's going to<BR>
be small, fragile, and probably pretty sluggish, too (at least when it's<BR>
"in sneaky mode").  Ideal for scouting (and smuggling), but *not*<BR>
combat-worthy.  Anything remotely resembling a battleship, however, should<BR>
stick out like a sore thumb, and will be designed accordingly...<BR>
<BR>
                                                               - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:59:07 +1200<BR>
From: pbroeder@wave.co.nz<BR>
Subject: Montana Class<BR>
<BR>
Jeff Rowse wrote:<BR>
Montana: so how many non-Americans on the list knew there was a boat<BR>
called<BR>
'Montana'?  How many Americans, come to think of it?  Please remember<BR>
that<BR>
not everybody has exactly the same spheres of reference here!  Likewise<BR>
for<BR>
describing warships as BI, BB etc - to me, BI (normally) means British<BR>
Isles<BR>
and BB is a pellet of about 6mm radius.<BR>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>
USS Montana (BB67) was a battleship, lead ship of the last class<BR>
designed for the US navy.<BR>
The Links below will tell you probably more than you want to know about<BR>
these ships.<BR>
The short version is that 'Montana' was designed as a heavy Battleship<BR>
to 'Iowa's' fast Battleship design, with a top speed of 27 knots (to<BR>
Iowa's 32) and 4 triple turrets (Against Iowa's 3)<BR>
All were cancelled.<BR>
http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/battleships/us_wwii.htm#mon-cl<BR>
http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/usnshtp/bb/bb67.htm<BR>
<BR>
Jonathan<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:00:56 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor writes:<BR>
<BR>
> ii. Damper catalysis - from TTL 12, nuclear dampers can be used to<BR>
> accelerate burnup rate. They can also be used to induce fission in<BR>
> subcritical masses of material, supplanting accelerator technology.<BR>
<BR>
At least as importantly, they can also be used for safety purposes, since a<BR>
subcritical reactor will shut off if you turn off the damper.  This is probably<BR>
much easier and safer than the control rods in conventional reactors.  <BR>
<BR>
Since the control mechanism is actually outside of the fuel pellet, that <BR>
also means you can have fully-enclosed pellets, which means you could <BR>
build a reactor consisting of a chunk of uranium contained in a shell <BR>
of graphite, with an operating temperature of around 3500K (that's below <BR>
the boiling point of either graphite or uranium), and then use various<BR>
photoelectric converters to get power out of the system.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:00:17 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
>David P. Summers writes:<BR>
>  > That the question isn't it?  You have been assuming technology<BR>
>  > pretty much on par with what we have now.  If you look at the<BR>
>  > amount of space that you need to cover at any reasonable distance<BR>
>  > from ship (a light second or more) your angle doesn't have to<BR>
>  > be that small to make detection quite iffy.<BR>
><BR>
>("Reasonable distance" doesn't matter - what matters is what<BR>
>fraction of the sky your radiators can be seen by)<BR>
<BR>
Exactly, "almost".<BR>
<BR>
The fraction of the sky is determined by the angle of emmission.<BR>
But as you want to detect the ship from further away, the total<BR>
area of the sphere increases.  So the number of ships you need<BR>
to make sure that one of them is in that fraction of the sky<BR>
goes up.<BR>
<BR>
>The questions (which I was hoping you would suggest actual<BR>
>numbers for) are (a) how small, exactly? and (b) how much<BR>
>radiation "spills" into other directions, since this isn't a<BR>
>particularly collimated beam?<BR>
<BR>
Well, the reason I'm not suggesting actually numbers it that<BR>
part of my point is that one can't really constrain things<BR>
as being possible because those number aren't constrained.<BR>
Unless you want to make it easy to detect ships one can<BR>
make the angle pretty small, though I'm not sure there<BR>
really is any point in trying to get below 1-5% of a sphere<BR>
(unless you are trying to sneak in amongst a dense<BR>
cloud of ship :-).<BR>
<BR>
I don't know how much radiation scatters.  It will depend<BR>
on how much dust or gas is floating around.  It will be<BR>
orders of magnitude less, but it could be estimated by<BR>
assuming the vacuum is like that in far orbit around the<BR>
earth.  That is something that you could calc but I<BR>
don't have any books on scattering.  It would better, if<BR>
that was an issue (and it might be the best way to detect<BR>
such a ship) it would be best not to make your radiation<BR>
beam tighter than you have to.  So maybe you would end up<BR>
around 5-10% of the sky.<BR>
><BR>
>Clearly if you know exactly where the single enemy ship is<BR>
>out there, you can keep your radiators away from it.<BR>
>However, trying to avoid a ship whose position you already know<BR>
>isn't the usual "detection" case. More relevant is when<BR>
>you don't know where the enemy is and they don't know<BR>
>where you are. That does end up requiring a pretty narrow<BR>
>beam, which is hard to do.<BR>
<BR>
You don't need to know where they all are.  You just need to<BR>
know one place where they _aren't_.  Back along the way you<BR>
came in is a good choice.  If you are a defender you probably have<BR>
a planet or something behind you....<BR>
<BR>
>  (Do you sink your radiators into<BR>
>the hull of the ship so they radiate out of tunnels? If you sink<BR>
>a 1m radiator into a 1m hole, you've only reduced your<BR>
>emitting angle to about 90 degrees, and already used up<BR>
>1m3 of ship volume per 1m of radiator...) It's even harder<BR>
>if ships are maneuvering, in which case your "beam" is<BR>
>sweeping out lots of space...<BR>
<BR>
It depends on what technolgy they use.  At Traveller TLs you<BR>
probably could do a lot better than just sinking thermal<BR>
radiators in tunnels.  (Gravitic focussing of the photons?<BR>
Who knows...)<BR>
><BR>
>In any event (see previous posts) I wasn't arguing that this is<BR>
>impossible, just that it's hard, doesn't work perfectly,<BR>
>and that it's (pause to say this<BR>
>slowly) *already present in the rules*.<BR>
<BR>
I wouldn't say "hard" but otherwise I agree.  The lower<BR>
chance of detection is based on the odds that they caught<BR>
the emmission.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:05:36 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers writes:<BR>
<BR>
> OK, lets step back. I'm trying to take these points one at<BR>
> a time.  The point I was addressing in my previous post<BR>
> is whether essentially you have to use black body emission.<BR>
> If you emit the same radiation as a black body, but you<BR>
> use another process, are the thermodynamics the same?<BR>
Well, if the output is the same, you have to start at a lower-entropy input if<BR>
you use a non-thermal method.<BR>
<BR>
> Now it _is_ a law of thermodynamics any state is the same,<BR>
> no matter how you got there.  So if you can emit radiation,<BR>
> of any entropy, it doesn't matter how you emit it.  Whether<BR>
> it is by radiator fins or by some currently unknown higher<BR>
> TL technology.<BR>
<BR>
Well, if you can come up with another way to generate thermal radiation <BR>
without a higher non-thermal power requirement, sure.  However, a point to<BR>
bear in mind is: a focused beam of heat has lower entropy than an unfocused beam.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 13:15:36 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Montana: so how many non-Americans on the list knew there was a boat called <BR>
> 'Montana'?<BR>
<BR>
Actually, the reference is to a *huge* starship posted on the list some<BR>
months back, not to the battleship. <BR>
<BR>
> Sensors and Computers: just because the current generation of computers <BR>
> generate bucketloads of heat and have certain capabilities, please remember <BR>
> that it always been so.  Just fifty years ago computers were the size of <BR>
> double-decker buses and needed punched cards for input and output - the <BR>
> thought that you could have one sat on *your* desk was unheard of, never <BR>
> mind the thought that you could have one (or more!) at home...  The next <BR>
> generation of Pentium (called, strangely enough, Pentium 4) is (supposedly) <BR>
> going to run at 1.5GHz *at least*.<BR>
<BR>
Believe it or not, CPU speed is going to be less and less important for<BR>
some time in the future. Consider that signals only travel thru wiring<BR>
at about 50% of c. Now, figure that there's about 15 cm of wiring<BR>
between the cpu and the system RAM. Ditto more most peripherals. That<BR>
means that a signal has to travel 15 cm to get the data, and another 15<BR>
cm to for the data to get to the CPU. That's 2 nanoseconds. At 1.5<BR>
GHz, a clock cycle is 667 *pico*seconds. That means it takes three<BR>
clock cycles just for the data transfer.<BR>
<BR>
The faster the clock, the longer the wait. And there are limits to how<BR>
much closer things can get to the cpu, and still allow users<BR>
installation of stuff like RAM. <BR>
<BR>
> Hard disks are now storing up to 33Gb of <BR>
> data in a box about 4"x6"x1", including the power supply and control system <BR>
> - the manufacturers are now aiming for hundreds of GigaBytes of data instead <BR>
> of 'just' tens of Gb.  Anyone care to guess what sort of capacity they will <BR>
> be working on in ten years time..?<BR>
<BR>
The limits are a long ways away. On the other hand, we've long since<BR>
passsed the point at which a user can easily *find* things on a disk<BR>
that size. We need some breaktroughs in file system *indexing* and<BR>
searchability. <BR>
<BR>
> (Computers) So that npc is plugging his 'mobile phone' into your ship's <BR>
> datafeeds - who's getting the shock; him cos his phone *won't* recharge or <BR>
> *you* when his mini-microcomputer suddenly takes over your ship's <BR>
> computer..?<BR>
<BR>
By the time of Traveller, they'll have had computers for as almost as<BR>
long as we've had *writing*. I think that they'll have licked most of<BR>
the "stupid design" type security problems. <BR>
<BR>
We'll always have "stupid user" problems, though most users will be a<BR>
lot less naive about security. Just as we wouldn't dream of thinking<BR>
that a message is secret merely because it's written down, they won't<BR>
think that something is secret just because it's encrtypted or password<BR>
protected. They'll *know* that it's only as secret as the password or<BR>
encryption key. <BR>
<BR>
They'll likely have jokes about computer security analogous to the<BR>
classic joke "... I'm locked out of my car. Could you hurry, it looks<BR>
like rain and I left the top down..."<BR>
<BR>
> One more thing, did you know that a certain well-known Webmail provider has <BR>
> modified it's anti-spam software to block anything with three or more <BR>
> exclamation marks next to each other and/or a dollar sign in front of <BR>
> 5-comma-zero-zero-zero on the grounds that "most people don't use such <BR>
> things in their (e)mail"... I kid you not.  I'll try to find the original <BR>
> source if anyone's interested...<BR>
<BR>
No need. It's been on comp.risks. You should read that newsgroup. It'll<BR>
amaze yuou the *stupid* things people do with designs of hardware and<BR>
software. <BR>
<BR>
Do you have any *idea* how many outfits set up new accounts that deal<BR>
with *important* stuff (like *money*) using things like your social<BR>
security number or mother's maiden name as the only "password"? <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 14:16:08 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> By the time of Traveller, they'll have had computers for as almost as<BR>
> long as we've had *writing*. I think that they'll have licked most of<BR>
> the "stupid design" type security problems. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, due to scaling factors, I suspect that there will be stupid design<BR>
errors in just about every bit of software.  However, finding those errors <BR>
will be plenty difficult (if the OS for your computer is ten billion lines<BR>
of code, there's going to be some unfound errors.  OTOH, searching through<BR>
ten billion lines of code seeking security flaws isn't trivial either).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:12:44 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Definite Articles (OT) (was Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 11:18 AM,  Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Apropos of nothing, this is analogous to a sure way to distinguish <BR>
>Northern Californian drivers from Southern Californians. NoCals say  "I<BR>
>was driving on 280" or "you need to get on 101 North"; SoCals say <BR>
>"driving on _the_ 405" or "_the_ 15".<BR>
<BR>
Here we mix and match.  I cross the Escambia Fill on 90, then I turn<BR>
onto the Nine Mile Road and go two miles before merging with 110.  I<BR>
get off at Fairfield just after passing the Bayou Texar (pronounced<BR>
Bi-ou Ta-har).  Then I turn onto Navy Boulevard, and off it onto Six<BR>
Mile.  From Six Mile I can see the Three Mile Bridge crossing<BR>
Pensacola Bay across from the Navy Yard.  <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:17:30 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 04:27 PM,  Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Knowing that many of us are SF fen, I would have trouble believing that<BR>
>listmembers - especially the active ones - would not have read at least<BR>
>some of Dr. Linebarger's writings.  How well do you feel they fit into<BR>
>Traveller?  Would the Scanners and Habermen (from 'Scanners Live In<BR>
>Vain') be a possible development somewhere in Charted Space?  What about<BR>
>the beastmen (catmen, dogmen, bullmen - some examples in 'The Ballad of<BR>
>Lost C'mell' and 'Alpha Ralpha Boulevard')?  A government that looks like<BR>
>the Instrumentality of Mankind?  Thoughts?  Comments?  Flames (keep 'em<BR>
>polite!)?  Am I totally off my nut?<BR>
<BR>
"Scanners Live in Vain" wasn't by Cordwainder Smith?  Wasn't *all*<BR>
of the Instrumentality of Man stuff by Cordwainder Smith...I'm<BR>
either seriously misremembering, or there's a pseudonym in there<BR>
somewhere.  <g> But, no I haven't considered using his stuff in<BR>
Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:28:44 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 04:59 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>Ah. I suspect that he (like I) had forgotten that there *was* a ship<BR>
>class of that name.<BR>
<BR>
>Also, "ships the size of _Montana_" is *not* the same thing as "ships the<BR>
>size of the _Montana_". The extra "the" changes it from a reference to<BR>
>the *state* to a reference to something named *for* the state.<BR>
<BR>
Well, if he had used quotes or underlines around Montana, then it<BR>
would have been clear to me that he didn't mean the state.  OTOH, he<BR>
*did* say he wanted ships that put small continents into shadow so I<BR>
thought he meant something the size of the state.<BR>
<BR>
Now about the ship, "Montana"...are you sure it is 500,000 *dtons*<BR>
in volume?  That would be a 2,000,000 register ton ship, 7,000,000<BR>
cubic meters...probably over 2 kilometers long.  Wow!  That's one<BR>
BIG ship!<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:39:32 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 14:51 -0400 1/8/00, Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
>Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible arguments<BR>
>against large ships could include<BR>
<snip><BR>
>Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
>   *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
>What is the relative importance of<BR>
>   *Completeness.<BR>
>   *Technical accuracy.<BR>
>   *Quickness of use.<BR>
>What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
Okay some thoughts:<BR>
<BR>
1) If you do all this radiator stuff etc and invalidate CT/MT <BR>
starships then I'm not interested in FFS3 at all for Traveller the <BR>
background.<BR>
<BR>
2) Deliberately designing the system to (a) screw big ships and (b) <BR>
make fighters deadly is not the Traveller background I enjoy and <BR>
risks the same level of alienation that TNE's changes with HePLAR <BR>
resulted in. Big ships exist. Fighters are lousy in any Traveller <BR>
combat system against warships. You undermine the background of the <BR>
game the same way that GURPS vehicles is (ie GV2e says you can do <BR>
this, so it must be so....)<BR>
<BR>
3) If you're going to go this far and create a new game technonology <BR>
architecture that just happens to use say T5's system (maybe we <BR>
should call it 'Wanderer') then I want to see Hamilton style bio and <BR>
nano tech in, Adamist and Viodhawk warships etc.<BR>
<BR>
4) As to complexity. FFS2.5/FFS3 can be as complex as it likes but <BR>
(1) the more complex it is the less use it will be to most people and <BR>
(2) you need a modular, abstract and quick system designed from the <BR>
core tech architecture no more complex than HG. QSDS1.5, although a <BR>
laudable attempt at this, is *too* complex. I can design a decent HG <BR>
ship in 10-15 minutes (30 tops). QSDS needed more than an hour. Make <BR>
the surface area abstract (eg a hull has x points of surface, bays <BR>
take y points). These could be rounded up approximations so you can <BR>
optimise with FFS2.5/3...<BR>
<BR>
5) Traveller is a game, a background to play in. That is why it is <BR>
still with us after 23 years. The sales of GT support this (it is a <BR>
background not the rules) argument. The Technology Architecture <BR>
underlies and underpins the background. Change it without thought and <BR>
the whole thing comes crashing down. I can handle magitech in <BR>
Traveller. If I want hard SF I play 2300 ; Traveller's core is a <BR>
space opera background...<BR>
<BR>
Thank you for listening.,...<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:41:05 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Montana Class<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 08:59 AM,  pbroeder@wave.co.nz said:<BR>
<BR>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><BR>
>USS Montana (BB67) was a battleship, lead ship of the last class designed<BR>
>for the US navy.<BR>
>The Links below will tell you probably more than you want to know about<BR>
>these ships.<BR>
>The short version is that 'Montana' was designed as a heavy Battleship to<BR>
>'Iowa's' fast Battleship design, with a top speed of 27 knots (to Iowa's<BR>
>32) and 4 triple turrets (Against Iowa's 3)<BR>
>All were cancelled.<BR>
<BR>
>http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/battleships/us_wwii.htm#mon-cl<BR>
<BR>
Let's see...<BR>
<BR>
It masses 71,000 tons and has dimensions of 281.9 x 36.9 x 11.2<BR>
meters.<BR>
<BR>
Jimminy!  This is, at best, an 8,000 dton ship, not 500,000!<BR>
<BR>
Sure!!!  I want you to be able to build ships the size of "Montana"<BR>
too.  Heck, go to town, build them *twice* as big as "Montana!"  <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 17:48:28 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Viktor Haag <vhaag@rim.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
 > <BR>
 > Now about the ship, "Montana"...are you sure it is 500,000 *dtons*<BR>
 > in volume?  That would be a 2,000,000 register ton ship, 7,000,000<BR>
 > cubic meters...probably over 2 kilometers long.  Wow!  That's one<BR>
 > BIG ship!<BR>
<BR>
I have a most probably ignorant question. When you say 'dtons'<BR>
you mean 'displacement tons' correct? This *is* the 'tons'<BR>
measurement used in CT LBB2 and HG, correct?<BR>
<BR>
What are 'register tons' and where is this measurement used?<BR>
<BR>
And how does one convert from displacement tons to cubic meters<BR>
(incredibly ignorant question, I know...)?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Viktor Haag                           Senior Technical Writer, RIM<BR>
'79 99, '89 9000T, '00 9-3 SE         My opinions are my own, only.<BR>
tc++ ru ge(+) !3i c jt- au(-) pi+ he(+)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 17:52:09 -0400<BR>
From: trentfs@ix.netcom.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
Eris wrote:<BR>
>"Scanners Live in Vain" wasn't by Cordwainder Smith?  Wasn't *all*<BR>
>of the Instrumentality of Man stuff by Cordwainder Smith...I'm<BR>
>either seriously misremembering, or there's a pseudonym in there<BR>
>somewhere.   But, no I haven't considered using his stuff in<BR>
>Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
You've failed your "Fan: SF" test.  Dr. Paul Linebarger is Cordwainer Smith's real name.  However, don't feel bad; by referring to him in this way, Jeff Zeitlen has placed himself in same the ostentatious company as my old lit-professors who insisted on referring to Mark Twain as Samuel Clemens, mauch to everyone's annoyance. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Trent<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 17:55:44 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:43:12 PST<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
><BR>
>> Considering that spacecraft are structurally more similar to aircraft than<BR>
>> surface ships <BR>
><BR>
>Actually, the stresses on a spacecraft aren't that much like those on<BR>
>aircraft. The majority of the stress is from the main drive and that<BR>
>*always* occurs along a fixed axis.<BR>
<BR>
All I asserted was that the stresses are _more similar_ to aircraft than to<BR>
watercraft, which otherwise seem to be everyone's favorite analogy.<BR>
Watercraft are largely supported by bouyancy, and accelerate very slowly<BR>
(under most circumstances). Aircraft and spacecraft are largely<BR>
self-supporting, and subject to higher and more varied accelerations. <BR>
<BR>
Your comment implies that certain types of building might be better<BR>
analogies yet, and I don't disagree. My original point, however, is that<BR>
others have said in essence that because we can build horizontal structures<BR>
(watercraft) as large as we like, that there are no engineering limits to<BR>
building vertical ones (air- and spacecraft).<BR>
<BR>
>Changing the orientation of the space craft requires much smaller<BR>
>forces. And since changing *course* occurs very solely [sic], you don't need<BR>
>to be able to change orientation all that fast. A few seconds will do<BR>
>just fine.<BR>
<BR>
I've never seen an adequate discussion of rotational moment, and its effect<BR>
on maneuverability and movement control systems in Traveller, so I couldn't<BR>
say how large the forces are.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:31:37 +1000<BR>
From: Robert Houghton <rhoughto@one.net.au><BR>
Subject: Re: [TNFPLAYERS] Re: Modern Mercury...<BR>
<BR>
when I say off the shelf...i mean readily available aerospace tech<BR>
stuff...not "we need a seat...here's a couple of million dollars, build<BR>
*one*"...but "the pilots seat in the F-16 looks okay, we'll take it"...<BR>
<BR>
I was also thinking of booster...what is available in a compact<BR>
(semi-)portable LF rocket that would get a one-man capsule into orbit?<BR>
<BR>
The thing is I want to build and ride the sucker....<BR>
<BR>
Jerry Revell wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> --- In TNFPLAYERS@egroups.com, Robert Houghton <rhoughto@o...> wrote:<BR>
> > Quick gearhead question...<BR>
> ><BR>
> >how difficult would it be to build a modern Mercury launch<BR>
> >system (one person to orbit and return) using off the shelf<BR>
> >components?<BR>
><BR>
> Out of commercially available off the shelf components? Nigh<BR>
> on impossible I should think. Components made for every day<BR>
> use aren't robust enough to stand the stresses of a high-g<BR>
> launch. Spacecraft need specially ruggedised components which<BR>
> is why they remain so expensive.<BR>
><BR>
> Cheers Jerry<BR>
><BR>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------<e|-<BR>
> Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds!<BR>
> 1. Fill in the brief application<BR>
> 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds<BR>
> 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR<BR>
> http://click.egroups.com/1/6628/4/_/429231/_/965128204/<BR>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------|e>-<BR>
<BR>
Jerry Revell wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> --- In TNFPLAYERS@egroups.com, Robert Houghton <rhoughto@o...> wrote:<BR>
> > Quick gearhead question...<BR>
> ><BR>
> >how difficult would it be to build a modern Mercury launch<BR>
> >system (one person to orbit and return) using off the shelf<BR>
> >components?<BR>
><BR>
> Out of commercially available off the shelf components? Nigh<BR>
> on impossible I should think. Components made for every day<BR>
> use aren't robust enough to stand the stresses of a high-g<BR>
> launch. Spacecraft need specially ruggedised components which<BR>
> is why they remain so expensive.<BR>
><BR>
> Cheers Jerry<BR>
><BR>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------<e|-<BR>
> Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds!<BR>
> 1. Fill in the brief application<BR>
> 2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds<BR>
> 3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR<BR>
> http://click.egroups.com/1/6628/4/_/429231/_/965128204/<BR>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------|e>-<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2860<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za04.mx.aol.com (rly-za04.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.100]) by air-za05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:14:17 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:13:37 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA23177;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:13:15 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:08:55 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA22955<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:08:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:08:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008012208.SAA22955@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2860<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2861</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 4:05:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2861<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re : Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Sickbay Power Requirements<BR>
Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
Traveller campaing in west Los Angeles<BR>
Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
Re: Montana Class?<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
Tons and tons (was Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:03:18 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
Dean Jones wrote :-<BR>
> So someone immobile in a vacc suit/sealed armour would be udetectable to<BR>
> NASs?<BR>
> <BR>
Yes. Hopefully someone has IR gear and a heartbeat detector handy.<BR>
<BR>
David Summers wrote :-<BR>
> I expect a sheet of metal of almost any thickness would obscure the<BR>
> signal....<BR>
> <BR>
Yes. Centimetres was an overstatement.<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote :-<BR>
> In particular, a thin layer of aluminum foil in a hat will protect you.  It also helps against the orbital mind control lasers.<BR>
> <BR>
Hmm. A budget psionic shield helmet?<BR>
<BR>
;-)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:04:22 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Sickbay Power Requirements<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> For sickbay, I say we inquire and find out how much power an individual<BR>
> "bed" in a modern ICU requires. And if it seems a bit low, double it. <BR>
<BR>
Your upper bound here is going to be a kilowatt :-<BR>
(looks around 'the office') :-<BR>
ventilator 200W<BR>
dialysis 100W<BR>
cooling/warming blankets 200W<BR>
intra-aortic balloon pump 200W<BR>
monitoring equipment 100W<BR>
lighting, airconditioning, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Note that not everyone is on all the gadgets listed above. For long,<BR>
anyway...<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:05:46 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> Also, dampers can allow "burning" of non-fissionables. Accelerated beta<BR>
> or alpha decay can produce heat, or, possibly even be used for direct<BR>
> electric generation.<BR>
<BR>
I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that nuclear dampers had no effect on<BR>
stable isotopes (e.g. lead 208, carbon 12). For convenience, I'd<BR>
lump non-fissionable radioisotopes in the 'radioactives' basket at<BR>
75Cr/kg.<BR>
<BR>
RTGs rely on alpha/beta decay for power generation.<BR>
<BR>
Using decay products to produce DC current via travelling wave<BR>
conversion to microwaves is eminently reasonable. The technology is well<BR>
described in the accelerator literature, and is being suggested for use<BR>
in fusion plants.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 20:33:12 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
> From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
> Subject: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Anthony, this stuff is exactly what I was hoping for with the FFS3 project.<BR>
<BR>
It's usable rules we can argue about, amend and playtest.<BR>
<BR>
It's great :)<BR>
<BR>
> Heat Rules -- Draft<BR>
><BR>
> Summary: having heat from the power plant, and then more heat from<BR>
> the systems being powered, is somewhat annoying doubling.  Therefore,<BR>
> the rule of thumb will be that heat production is (40-TL*2)% of the<BR>
> total energy consumption of the ship (it will be higher for very low<BR>
> tech ships).  You must then get heat control to deal with that heat.<BR>
> Heat control consists of radiators, rechargeable heat sinks, and<BR>
> non-rechargeable heat sinks.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
One nice thing about 'magic thruster plates' is that the general rule is<BR>
that a ship has to get rid of all the energy it produces, and I kinda like<BR>
that as a principle. But it's a 'like'.<BR>
<BR>
> Radiators simply eliminate heat.  The listed stats are per megawatt<BR>
> of heat eliminated.  Note that radiators really do draw power, though<BR>
> no additional heat is charged for this.<BR>
<BR>
I dont get the 'but no additional heat is charged for this'.<BR>
<BR>
To take the AHL below. Does it have a 'power budget' of 30 000 MW minus 18<BR>
000 MW for running the heat pumps to the radiators for a 'net discretionary<BR>
power' budget of 12 000 MW, or does it have a power budget of 48 000 MW, of<BR>
which 30 000 MW is available as 'net discretionary power' ?<BR>
<BR>
>It is possible to create<BR>
> folding radiators; choose a multiple from 2 to 5.  Multiply radiator<BR>
> volume by this amount; divide folded area by the same.  A folded<BR>
> radiator is reduced effect (divide as above).  Folding radiators are<BR>
> not normally armored, but can be armored without substantially affecting<BR>
> their performance (they will take longer to cool).<BR>
<BR>
What does folding a radiator do to it's mass ? Should mass be related to<BR>
gees acceleration, in a similar way to FFS2 Solar Power Arrays ?<BR>
<BR>
> TL      8       9       10      12      14<BR>
> Area    100     30      10      3       1<BR>
> Volume  10      3       1       .3      .1<BR>
> Weight  20      10      5       2       1<BR>
> Power   .4      1       2       3       5<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
OK, lets look at a TL8 ship.<BR>
<BR>
Lets assume it's a 100 dton open frame (1210 m^2), and has a power output of<BR>
10 megawatts, so we need to get rid of 2.4 MW of heat.<BR>
<BR>
This takes 0.96 MW of power, 48t, 24 m^3 and 240 m^2 of area (about one<BR>
sixth of the surface area).<BR>
<BR>
Next, lets look at a TL9 Dome-shaped Free Trader of 200 dtons (1057 m^2)<BR>
with 60 MW power output, which means we need to get rid of 13.2 MW of heat.<BR>
<BR>
At TL9, this takes 13.2 MW of power for the heat pumps, 132t of mass, 39.6<BR>
m3 of volume and 396 m2 of area.<BR>
<BR>
What is the effect of atmospheres on these radiators ?<BR>
<BR>
I'm also thinking we need to split the actual radiating surfaces from the<BR>
heat pumps, unless people think you should be charged for 10 sets of heat<BR>
pumps if you want a ship that can play games with passive sensors.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Any undischarged heat will heat up the hull, at a rate of 1 degree *<BR>
> (unresolved power) / (vehicle weight in tons).<BR>
><BR>
> This means that an AHL-sized ship, displacing 60,000 tons and weighing<BR>
> 600,000 tons, with 1,200,000 tons of T-plates (covering 6,000 M^2),<BR>
> drawing 30,000 MW, has a heat output of 3600 MW from the drives.  That<BR>
> requires 3600 M^2 (TL 14) and an extra 18,000 MW of power.  If for<BR>
> some reason the radiators shut off, it will overheat at 3600/600000 or<BR>
> 0.006 degrees/second (11 degrees per space combat turn).<BR>
<BR>
The 3600 m^2 is less than 10% of the AHL's surface area. On the other hand,<BR>
it probably wont be doing strange things with directional radiation.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 15:11:59 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: "Evan S. Dodd" <esdodd@physics.ucla.edu><BR>
Subject: Traveller campaing in west Los Angeles<BR>
<BR>
A GURPS Traveller game is starting up in west Los Angeles and we are in<BR>
need of players. Anyone intersted, who is resonably close to Westwood<BR>
can email me, I'll be the GM. So far its looks like there are two players<BR>
out of five we were hoping for.  <BR>
<BR>
The campaign will center around an Empress Marava class far trader in the<BR>
Spinward Marches. The characters so far include a merchant captain/owner<BR>
and an ex-corsair acting as gunner. There was someone planning to play a<BR>
medical/steward role, but he seems to have bailed. The current engineer<BR>
is an NPC, but that isn't a necessity.<BR>
<BR>
Evan Dodd<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:11:57 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
<BR>
I wrote :-<BR>
> I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that nuclear dampers had no effect on<BR>
> stable isotopes (e.g. lead 208, carbon 12). <BR>
Ugh. Non sequitur alert.<BR>
Hopefully my assumption is correct, otherwise a real big can of worms is<BR>
about to be opened... <BR>
<BR>
> For convenience, I'd lump non-fissionable radioisotopes in the <BR>
> 'radioactives' basket at 75Cr/kg.<BR>
This is just a gut feeling - I think it would take a little effort to<BR>
accumulate a quantity of carbon 14, etc. that would be useful for power<BR>
generation.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:18:23 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Montana Class?<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 8/1/00 9:13 PM, nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk<BR>
issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Incidentally, what is a _Montana_? I don't believe I've ever heard of that<BR>
> ship/class.<BR>
<BR>
I believe it was posted to this list a couple months ago or so while folks<BR>
were talking about honking big ships, by either FS or X-TEK or somesuch. I<BR>
believe there was some debate at the time considering multiple sonic booms,<BR>
and this monster was made to demonstrate such.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 17:31:12 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
>From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment<BR>
and consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
><BR>
>Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible<BR>
arguments<BR>
>against large ships could include<BR>
>   *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
<BR>
I like this especially if it was tied to configuration in such a way as to<BR>
create<BR>
trade offs between thrust/cost/streamlining/sensor footprint etc.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
<BR>
Somewhat.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
<BR>
Again somewhat.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
> defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
<BR>
Increase the lethality of small weapons. Lower the lethality of big weapons.<BR>
<BR>
>Do we want to encourage fighters?<BR>
<BR>
Yes.<BR>
<BR>
>If so, how?<BR>
<BR>
Make smaller vessels harder to detect and hit. Allow for usefull surface<BR>
hit damage (IE sensors grids, radiators, and thruster plates should be<BR>
unarmored or lightly armored.) And of course the ever popular 2m wide<BR>
exaust tube that leads directly to the power plant core of very large<BR>
ships. :-)<BR>
<BR>
>Basically as above, plus<BR>
>   *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
<BR>
We could tweek these I supose but the general scheme of compenstated G's<BR>
advancing by tech works for me.<BR>
<BR>
>How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?<BR>
<BR>
Stealth should only be an issue if a ship is deliberately running cool to<BR>
avoid<BR>
detection. Which is to say power generation/usage limited to the minimum<BR>
necesary to keep the crew alive and maybe run some passive sensors. Once<BR>
a ship powers up to combat mode (or even just to skedadle mode) I don't see<BR>
stealthing being possible.<BR>
<BR>
>   DSR-style sensors are<BR>
>   sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
>   system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a bit<BR>
>   less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either<BR>
one<BR>
>   can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>   there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved pretty<BR>
>   easily too).<BR>
>What is the relative importance of<BR>
>   *Completeness.<BR>
First<BR>
<BR>
>   *Technical accuracy.<BR>
Third<BR>
<BR>
>   *Quickness of use.<BR>
Second<BR>
<BR>
>What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
I'd personally like to see more non military style fittings for starships.<BR>
Sure FFS2 has the Yet Other Facilities component (basically an<BR>
instruction to make it up yourself) but why cant we have more of the<BR>
civillian bits detailed.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 17:23:17 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Nick Bradbeer wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> 2) I kinda feel navies really ought to have bigger ships than 5kdT, just<BR>
> from a 'look and feel' point of view. World navies, perhaps not - but<BR>
> subsector and Imperial fleets definitely do. A 5kdT dreadnought makes for<BR>
> 2-3kdT cruisers, and 1kdT destroyers, by which point a well tooled-up party<BR>
> in a customised-to-hell fat trader can go toe to toe with a destroyer. The<BR>
> Imperial fleet sudenly becomes a lot less scary.<BR>
<BR>
Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, if you're willing to dramatically<BR>
change the setting you play in.  The point has been made before here that<BR>
the notion that a military ship should always be able to blast an<BR>
independent freighter to atoms only arose in the twentieth century.  In<BR>
the 18/19th centuries, you had privateers, essentially armed,<BR>
privately-owned merchant ships (the sort of thing a group of PCs might<BR>
command), that could threaten naval vessels. Those centuries were<BR>
interesting enough that a Traveller variant with a beatable navy could<BR>
also be interesting.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 15:35:36 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
> You've failed your "Fan: SF" test.  Dr. Paul Linebarger is Cordwainer<BR>
Smith's real name.  However, don't feel bad; by referring to him in this<BR>
way, Jeff Zeitlen has placed himself in same the ostentatious company as my<BR>
old lit-professors who insisted on referring to Mark Twain as Samuel<BR>
Clemens, mauch to everyone's annoyance.<BR>
<BR>
Charles Dodgson for Lewis Carroll?<BR>
Aurore Dudevant for George Sand?<BR>
<BR>
etc, etc, etc. Come one now, some of our favorite SF writers have lot's of<BR>
pen names.  Going to the trouble to seek out an author's real name<BR>
(especially if he decides to try to keep it private) smacks of obsession.<BR>
Oh well.  Fan--from Fanatic.  Just remember that.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 15:36:10 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Tons and tons (was Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
Viktor Haag wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I have a most probably ignorant question. When you say 'dtons'<BR>
> you mean 'displacement tons' correct? This *is* the 'tons'<BR>
> measurement used in CT LBB2 and HG, correct?<BR>
<BR>
Correct. <BR>
<BR>
> And how does one convert from displacement tons to cubic meters<BR>
> (incredibly ignorant question, I know...)?<BR>
<BR>
One displacement ton is defined as the volume of 1 metric<BR>
mass-ton of liquid hydrogen, approximately 14 cubic meters. <BR>
<BR>
An acceptable approximation to one dton is 3m x 3m x 1.5m = 13.5m^3, or <BR>
two CT deck squares. <BR>
<BR>
> What are 'register tons' and where is this measurement used?<BR>
<BR>
Can't help you here.<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:43:24 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
>From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
>Subject: FFS3: POLL<BR>
><BR>
>Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible arguments<BR>
>against large ships could include<BR>
>   *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
>   *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
>   *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
<BR>
You know, as one of the most strident advocates of limits on ship sizes, I<BR>
don't really care about "harsher". I don't think huge ships are necessary<BR>
- -- Traveller got along fine without them for years, and still can, if you<BR>
choose your economic and social parameters correctly. Besides, for all<BR>
practical purposes a 5,000-dton ship /is/ huge! Our perceptions and our<BR>
expectations are inflated.<BR>
<BR>
What I want is _realistic_ radiator rules, _realistic_ structure rules<BR>
(though the ones in FF&S2 look okay, on first glance). Not *real*, mind<BR>
you, *realistic* -- "real-like". Figure out how things work in the real<BR>
world first, extrapolate to future tech (materials, etc.), check against<BR>
known physical limits, and only *then* abstract the results down to<BR>
something playable.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
>	defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
>Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
>   *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
<BR>
Fighters are canon. We need to make sure our final result adequately<BR>
answers, "Why?"<BR>
<BR>
>How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  <BR>
<BR>
As powerful as they ought to be, given the science involved, and let the<BR>
chips fall where they may.<BR>
<BR>
>What is the relative importance of <BR>
>   *Completeness.<BR>
<BR>
Reasonably. I'd sacrifice completeness for consistency in the part that is<BR>
covered.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Technical accuracy.<BR>
<BR>
Absolutely essential, so far as real-world engineering and physics are<BR>
concerned.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Quickness of use.<BR>
<BR>
A goal, not an objective. <BR>
<BR>
>What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
"What changes, if Traveller: The Roleplaying Game is not synonymous with<BR>
Traveller: The Imperial Space Setting?" That is, what parts of the<BR>
technical architecture are required by the nature of Traveller (jump<BR>
drives, nuclear dampers, fusion power, and gravitics), and which are simply<BR>
chrome created to support the Official Traveller Universe?<BR>
<BR>
Ideally, the Technical Architecture should never mention "The Imperium"<BR>
except as one examplar campaign.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:49:28 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
> 2) Deliberately designing the system to (a) screw big ships and (b)<BR>
> make fighters deadly is not the Traveller background I enjoy and<BR>
> risks the same level of alienation that TNE's changes with HePLAR<BR>
> resulted in. Big ships exist. Fighters are lousy in any Traveller<BR>
> combat system against warships.<BR>
<BR>
That's rather more extreme than I was hoping for.<BR>
<BR>
I'd like to make fighters better, if not actually combatants. I'd like a<BR>
result where you can throw six squadrons of fighters at a light cruiser,<BR>
take some (maybe a lot of) casualties, and have a good chance of sending it<BR>
partway to dead. Main sensor antennae, radiators et al are all tools to<BR>
this end. I don't think fighters will ever be a ship killer, but it would<BR>
be nice if they were a handy adjunct to cruisers.<BR>
<BR>
Big ships - like I said, I like big ships. But how big is big? 100,000 dT<BR>
is about the top end of warships I'd like to see (with most topping out at<BR>
around 50k). What does everybody else think?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 15:46:50 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
> Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, if you're willing to dramatically<BR>
> change the setting you play in.  The point has been made before here that<BR>
> the notion that a military ship should always be able to blast an<BR>
> independent freighter to atoms only arose in the twentieth century.  In<BR>
> the 18/19th centuries, you had privateers, essentially armed,<BR>
> privately-owned merchant ships (the sort of thing a group of PCs might<BR>
> command), that could threaten naval vessels. Those centuries were<BR>
> interesting enough that a Traveller variant with a beatable navy could<BR>
> also be interesting.<BR>
<BR>
I'd question that.  18/19th century merchant ships _sometimes_ had similar<BR>
guns for a given hull, and might be better sailers.  But military ships had<BR>
much larger crews, who were generally (in the bigger navies) trained to a<BR>
much higher standard in working guns.  Burning powder cost dearly and eats<BR>
profit. And more hands meant a better ability to work the sails to best<BR>
advantage and perform damage control, not to mention boarding.  Merchants<BR>
were armed to deal with pirates and such.  It was a foolish captain who<BR>
tried to match broadsides with even a modest frigate.  Most tried to flee,<BR>
or surrendered when caught.<BR>
<BR>
I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval vessel.Can<BR>
anyone think of an example?<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:56:05 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
> I'd personally like to see more non military style fittings for<BR>
starships.<BR>
> Sure FFS2 has the Yet Other Facilities component (basically an<BR>
> instruction to make it up yourself) but why cant we have more of the<BR>
> civillian bits detailed.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, this is the section I was hemming and hawing about volounteering for,<BR>
simply because very little has ever been done for it (and as the<BR>
stateroom/sickbay power comment said) a fair bit of what has been made<BR>
seems to have been ballparked.<BR>
<BR>
Why not - I'll volounteer for 'Miscellanious Other Facilities', if you've<BR>
no objections. Anybody else want to do this too? There's plenty of<BR>
potential work.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 15:57:19 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS2 radiator requirements<BR>
<BR>
At 1:37 PM -0700 8/1/00, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
>David P. Summers writes:<BR>
>  > At 9:19 AM -0700 8/1/00, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
>  > >I assume the hydrogen is actually consumed to create the bubble; the<BR>
>  > >size of the bubble is directly proportional to the amount of<BR>
>  > >hydrogen fed in.<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > Consumed where?  Why does the bubble depends on how much hydrogen<BR>
>  > you put in?  If it isn't a bubble of hydrogen, what is it a<BR>
>  > bubble of?<BR>
><BR>
>The bubble is a bubble of normal space in a cavity of jump space. <BR>
>The hydrogen<BR>
>is consumed by the jump drive to create the bubble.  It's certainly possible<BR>
>that some other method can also be used to create the bubble (and if jump<BR>
>projectors don't use hydrogen, presumably such a method exists).<BR>
><BR>
>The big point is really that claiming that the hydrogen used by a J-drive is<BR>
>fused doesn't add anything except maybe a factor of 150 reduction in fuel<BR>
>consumption for antimatter-powered ships (which I'm not sure is indicated in<BR>
>canon in any case), and buys you a variety of headaches related to disposing<BR>
>of the energy.  It also buys you a problem that there's no plausible reason<BR>
>why 0.1% contaminants in the fuel would have any effect on fusion, <BR>
>and therefore we lose any good excuse for fuel purification.<BR>
<BR>
To be honest, to me you explination is much beyond "it is used"<BR>
except that you want to exclude it being fused (it used but<BR>
not fused).  You are so vague on what the bubble is (what<BR>
is a bubble of real space?) that I don't see why it is invoked.<BR>
At that rate, IMO, one might as well just go ahead an say<BR>
it "uses" hydrogen.  This explanation doesn't provide much<BR>
insight past that.<BR>
<BR>
I simply don't see any headaches for using it for fuel as<BR>
long as you take simple, and incremental step, of linking<BR>
it to jumping.  I do see handwaves you have add for other<BR>
explanations.  Whether you patch other explinations, or<BR>
try and leave them so vague that they simply don't answer<BR>
any questions, I think you are better off leaving it as close<BR>
as possible to what the original vision appears to have<BR>
been.<BR>
<BR>
As to using it for energy and purity, I'm no "nukee" but in<BR>
fact carbon is a known catalyst for nuclear reactions and may<BR>
well affect the rate of reaction (and you don't need to require<BR>
99% purity to have to purify a gas giant).  Other sources are<BR>
even more grossly impure.  Given how senstive jumping is, it<BR>
make more sense to me than some invokation that you need mass<BR>
but it can't be anything but what you happen to use for fuel.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 00:01:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
> Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, if you're willing to dramatically<BR>
> change the setting you play in.<BR>
<BR>
True, but I was kind of hoping to leave setting changes as an option,<BR>
rather than forcing them upon the GM.<BR>
<BR>
The impression I always had of the Imperium from the LBBs (the second thing<BR>
I bought after TNE), was that there were an awful lot of little SDBs, armed<BR>
merchants and so on, floating around at about 400dT to 800dT, and argueing<BR>
frequently - even fighting wars between little worlds. But every so often<BR>
somebody went too far, and the small but hideously scary Imperial Navy<BR>
turned up in ships that could just swat your SDBs and frigates, and orbital<BR>
drop marines to take your capital after a minimum of fighting.<BR>
<BR>
Players fighting p*rates, or SDBs, or tinpot dictators 'Glorious Star Navy'<BR>
of converted traders - fine. But if we're going to have players taking on<BR>
IN warships, then I think we might just be changing the background a little<BR>
too much there.<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps I presume too much. <shrug><BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:01:24 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
> carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval vessel.Can<BR>
> anyone think of an example?<BR>
<BR>
Here are some:<BR>
http://www.usmm.org/warof1812.html<BR>
<BR>
I'll admit that I'm no expert on the history of naval warfare, so I'm a<BR>
bit relieved that such examples do exist.  It means I'm not making a total<BR>
fool of myself.  I'll probably read some more about this stuff in the near<BR>
future, because it's pretty interesting.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:02:55 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
>David P. Summers writes:<BR>
><BR>
>  > OK, lets step back. I'm trying to take these points one at<BR>
>  > a time.  The point I was addressing in my previous post<BR>
>  > is whether essentially you have to use black body emission.<BR>
>  > If you emit the same radiation as a black body, but you<BR>
>  > use another process, are the thermodynamics the same?<BR>
>Well, if the output is the same, you have to start at a lower-entropy input if<BR>
>you use a non-thermal method.<BR>
<BR>
Why is that?  If you are cooling the same heat source it should<BR>
be the same.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>  > Now it _is_ a law of thermodynamics any state is the same,<BR>
>  > no matter how you got there.  So if you can emit radiation,<BR>
>  > of any entropy, it doesn't matter how you emit it.  Whether<BR>
>  > it is by radiator fins or by some currently unknown higher<BR>
>  > TL technology.<BR>
><BR>
>Well, if you can come up with another way to generate thermal radiation<BR>
>without a higher non-thermal power requirement, sure.  However, a point to<BR>
>bear in mind is: a focused beam of heat has lower entropy than an <BR>
>unfocused beam.<BR>
<BR>
Yes, this is a second point.  But the most efficient way of<BR>
loosing heat is not the same thing as the only possible way.<BR>
But lets go through this step by step....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:04:29 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Nick Bradbeer wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Players fighting p*rates, or SDBs, or tinpot dictators 'Glorious Star Navy'<BR>
> of converted traders - fine. But if we're going to have players taking on<BR>
> IN warships, then I think we might just be changing the background a little<BR>
> too much there.<BR>
<BR>
I threw the idea out on the table, but I agree it should be reserved for<BR>
heretics and their non-canon games.  I enjoy Battle Rider far too much to<BR>
give up behemoths in the OTU.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:03:11 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
> >> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
> >> Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
><BR>
> You just need to rotate the ship in the same plane as the radiators. Or<BR>
> just kill the stream for a few seconds (it'll take only a second or two<BR>
> for all the drops to get to the collector. D=.5*a*t^2...)<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I should have been clearer. By 'maneuvering' I meant jinking so as to take<BR>
advantage of the speed-of-light lag. Lots of changes in direction and<BR>
thrust.<BR>
<BR>
> > It could work as a civilian technology, though.<BR>
><BR>
> I think the "electron cloud" bit (if anybody can dig up details and<BR>
> figures) would work better for civilian use. It's not suitable for<BR>
> military use because you can't use it and IR masking.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I'm thinking that IR masking would be used before you cranked the power<BR>
plant up all the way for combat. Basically, once you are shooting at things,<BR>
I dont think you'll be stealthy, so at that point, you might as well go all<BR>
the way.<BR>
<BR>
> With liquid drop radiators, you just run one "fin" on the side away<BR>
> from the enemy.<BR>
><BR>
> > The reason I put the droplets in a tail is to allow you to dodge in<BR>
combat.<BR>
><BR>
> And as I noted above, it's not a problem.<BR>
<BR>
I think it's still a problem, it just may not be a show-stopper.<BR>
<BR>
Could you toss some numbers together ? Maybe with a 'agility efficiency<BR>
penalty', with the efficiency loss being related to how many gees<BR>
acceleration you are using for agility purposes.<BR>
<BR>
I'd like them to be in the ballpark of Anthony Jackson's radiator numbers.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2861<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (rly-yc04.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.36]) by air-yc05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:05:58 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:05:01 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id TAA25463;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:04:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:04:56 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id TAA25419<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:04:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:04:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008012304.TAA25419@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2861<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2862</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 5:11:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2862<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
The intent of the FFS3 project<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: FFS3 Poll<BR>
Tech Level 13<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Tech Level 13<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:08:56 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: The intent of the FFS3 project<BR>
<BR>
The reason I'm doing this is to be able to create a modular design system.<BR>
<BR>
I also want to 'infill' some detail from TL9-11 - better fission plants,<BR>
more pre- T plate thrust systems and so on.<BR>
<BR>
Fixing some of the more annoying bugs would be nice (better laser design<BR>
sequence, better small arms, smaller power requirements, armour that lets<BR>
you build battledress etc).<BR>
<BR>
I dont really want to radically change the effectiveness of fighters or big<BR>
ships, but changing the thruster plate or radiator rules will do this.<BR>
<BR>
I want to retain as much canon as possible, in short - if a rules change<BR>
radically changes a lot of what already exists, it probably wont get through<BR>
me.<BR>
<BR>
I'm also 90% certain that the losers of 'magic thruster plates', 'only power<BR>
plants create heat' and 'power plant output == radiator output' are going to<BR>
show up as optional rules.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 16:15:38 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
> > carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval<BR>
vessel.Can<BR>
> > anyone think of an example?<BR>
><BR>
> Here are some:<BR>
> http://www.usmm.org/warof1812.html<BR>
><BR>
> I'll admit that I'm no expert on the history of naval warfare, so I'm a<BR>
> bit relieved that such examples do exist.  It means I'm not making a total<BR>
> fool of myself.  I'll probably read some more about this stuff in the near<BR>
> future, because it's pretty interesting.<BR>
<BR>
Not to pick nits, but the example there are of privateers.  Merchant ships<BR>
crewed as men-o-war, and usually with uprated guns as well.  I was speaking<BR>
of crewed and armed merchant ships.<BR>
<BR>
Also, note that these privateers were attacking British merchants for the<BR>
most part.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:15:55 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 Poll<BR>
<BR>
> From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
> I'd personally like to see more non military style fittings for starships.<BR>
> Sure FFS2 has the Yet Other Facilities component (basically an<BR>
> instruction to make it up yourself) but why cant we have more of the<BR>
> civillian bits detailed.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Congratulations, Dave. You just won the contract as Chief Fitting Supplier.<BR>
<BR>
Ditzie would like a spa, and a sound system (thats small-s sound system, not<BR>
the riot control device from Famile Spofulam).<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:25:46 -0500<BR>
From: tim@premier.net<BR>
Subject: Tech Level 13<BR>
<BR>
Hi<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
A quick question, around what year  did the Imperium reach tech <BR>
13 or GTL 11<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tim Reynolds<BR>
tim@premier.net <BR>
225-334-5063<BR>
www.premier.net/~tim<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Knowledge, information, power, words...Flying through<BR>
the air, invisible<BR>
And suddenly the world was tap dancing on quicksand.<BR>
In that case, the prize went to the best dancer<BR>
Terry Pratchett: The Fifth Elephant <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:24:58 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
Gregory Carl Kettler wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
> > carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval vessel.Can<BR>
> > anyone think of an example?<BR>
> <BR>
> Here are some:<BR>
> http://www.usmm.org/warof1812.html<BR>
> <BR>
> I'll admit that I'm no expert on the history of naval warfare, so I'm a<BR>
> bit relieved that such examples do exist.  It means I'm not making a total<BR>
> fool of myself.  I'll probably read some more about this stuff in the near<BR>
> future, because it's pretty interesting.<BR>
<BR>
Actually that page supports Tod.<BR>
<BR>
(from the web page)<BR>
<BR>
 Comparison of Navy vs Privateers during War of 1812<BR>
                              <BR>
			U.S. Navy	Privateers<BR>
Total ships		23		517<BR>
Total guns on ships	556		2893<BR>
Enemy ships captured	254		1300<BR>
<BR>
There were 11 ships captured per US naval vessel, while only 2 per<BR>
privateer were captured. Naval vessels mounted an average of 24 guns,<BR>
the privateers mounted an average of 5.5. That tells. Purpose-built<BR>
warships are far more effective at the task than armed merchants. There<BR>
is one anecdote on the web page regarding the capture of a far larger<BR>
warship by a privateer. What is left out is _how_ that happened; I<BR>
somehow doubt that straight-up one on one combat was involved ;-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:11:52 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
Warning for those that worry about such things, I will be discussing<BR>
non-canon material here, so it may not bear on FFS3, depending on how<BR>
canonical people want FFS3 to be.<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :<BR>
> > No modern aircraft changes software in flight, that only happens at<BR>
> > overhauls.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I very much doubt that this will get _worse_ in the future, in<BR>
> > other words,not only do I suspect software will not be juggled<BR>
> > in flight, but it will be installed when the ship is built and<BR>
> > will not change unless there is a major change to the ship's<BR>
> > configuration, such as the addition of turrets where<BR>
> > there weren't any.<BR>
><BR>
> But modern aircraft are a poor model.<BR>
<BR>
I disagree when talking about computers.<BR>
Yes, a starship will have _more_ computing capability, but it will be<BR>
_at_least_ as reliable and well designed.<BR>
<BR>
> And some of the stuff the various<BR>
> "programs" do is not exactly simple computations. They take enough<BR>
> resources that there's a limit to how many you can run at once on a<BR>
> given configuration, at least if you want real time responses.<BR>
<BR>
I agree, but, while they are not simple computations, they are predictable<BR>
computations. and they are also not very complex, all they require is a lot<BR>
of processing power.<BR>
Because they are predictable they will be better implemented in specialist<BR>
hardware than on a general computing platform, just as they are now.<BR>
<BR>
> A multitasking system for a civilian ship is apt to have limited<BR>
> capacity. They won't be designed to run the "target prediction", "jump<BR>
> calc" and "evasion" programs all at the same time as "normal" ship<BR>
> operations. Not unless you pay extra. :-)<BR>
<BR>
It is highly unlikely that a computing network for a spaceship will have a<BR>
single computer that is shared amongst tasks. "target prediction" software<BR>
will be in the firmware for the fire control systems, not time sharing with<BR>
the "evasion" program, which will be running on the navigational computer.<BR>
Certain data will be shared betwen systems, but puting them all in one would<BR>
be like running a modern aircraft on a single PC.<BR>
<BR>
While that single PC may have as much computing power as all the computers<BR>
on the aircraft put together, it is far less survivable, and would never get<BR>
past FAA certification.<BR>
<BR>
If you buy a weapon system, you need to buy fire control for it, and the<BR>
software will be in that fire control system. There may be "client" software<BR>
to install on your bridge computers for control purposes, but the work will<BR>
be done in the specialist fire control system.<BR>
<BR>
> And it is likely that it's cheaper to have a more or less "general<BR>
> purpose" system tying together modules dedicated to controlling various<BR>
> parts of the ship than to have every system have a completely dedicated<BR>
> processor with enough RAM and drive space for its *peak* needs.<BR>
<BR>
While that is most likely true if you assume that each Traveller starship is<BR>
individually hand-crafted by specialist craftsmen, it is not if you assume<BR>
that most starships are built from mass produced components on assembly<BR>
lines.<BR>
<BR>
Even if they _are_ handcrafted, given the current cost of computing<BR>
hardware, the saving involved will likely be so small as to be not worth the<BR>
costs of integrating all the many systems in to one.<BR>
<BR>
It also assumes that there are no minimum standards for commercial starships<BR>
enforced by some regulatory body, because no such body is going to approve<BR>
such an unsafe design. Distributed computing is inherently safer and more<BR>
reliable than centralised computing, and I suspect no regulatory body will<BR>
ever approve a centralized computing-based starship.<BR>
<BR>
Obviously this depends on whether you are stuck on canon or not. Book 2 & 5<BR>
computers are based arround the idea of computer power being extremely<BR>
expensive, as it was in the 70's when the rules were designed. Having  one<BR>
general purpose computer makes sense in such an environment, but not in a<BR>
modern environment where compute power is extremely cheap.<BR>
<BR>
Realistically, specialist hardware and firmware is far more efficient, and<BR>
easier to produce in quantity than general purpose systems. While we happily<BR>
pay several hundred dollars for the latest CPU in our generalist PC's, the<BR>
commercial embedded systems people expect to pay only few hundred cents at<BR>
most. The Rockwell 6502C's we used in radios in the late eighties were<BR>
purchsed in bulk for about $3.50, while the equivalent PC chip at the time<BR>
was (I think) the 80286, which was being sold for around $300.<BR>
<BR>
Most experts expect to see the generalist "PC" to largely dissappear from<BR>
the market over the next decade or two, being replaced in all but a minority<BR>
of cases by specialist media hardware such as Playstation-2, X-Box, smart<BR>
telephones and "Free" PDA's tied to supermarket selling schemes such as the<BR>
SafeWay initiative in the UK.<BR>
<BR>
Not that I want to lose my PC, and _I_ probably won't, but I'm atypical, I'm<BR>
an IT professional who plays with computers in his spare time, which is a<BR>
minority even in IT, let alone in the general population. Heck I still play<BR>
with my sixteen-year-old BBC Model B on occassion, though I have disposed of<BR>
all of my 80286-based machines. But wait, I may still have a chip<BR>
somewhere...<BR>
<BR>
This is because in mass production it is cheaper to specialize than be<BR>
general. So, if one takes the idea that Traveller starships are all<BR>
individually hand crafted, then yes maybe a central generalist computer is<BR>
cheaper<BR>
<BR>
Things like X-Box, with specialist hardware/firmware for generating<BR>
triangles and Gourad shading them, etc, are far more efficient than a<BR>
generalist computer, and can be produced much more cheaply than an<BR>
equivalent system designed around a generalist computer, because the<BR>
required compute power increase, and thus cost, to get the generalist<BR>
computer to the same performance level is huge.<BR>
<BR>
> Even "fly by wire" aircraft aren't *nearly* as computer dependent as a<BR>
> typical Traveller ship. Navigation is *barely* computerized. And they<BR>
> don't have to deal with orbital mechanics.<BR>
<BR>
A Traveller starship could continue along it's present course in space if<BR>
all it's computers were turned off. An unstable fighter design such as the<BR>
F-22 cannot do so. I beleive there is an AirBus design that has no control<BR>
casbles, and requires the computer system in order to be flown.<BR>
<BR>
Flight in atmosphere is actually much harder than "flight" in space, in the<BR>
same way that "flight" at ground level is much harder than flight in free<BR>
air (which incidentally is why we had auto-pilots for aircraft before the<BR>
equivalent for ground vehicles, and auto-landing systems came much later<BR>
than auto-pilots).<BR>
<BR>
Orbital mechanics calculations for normal starship operations can be done by<BR>
hand if neccessary.<BR>
<BR>
Interstellar navigation is more compute intensive, but canonicaly can be<BR>
done by hand if neccessary as well, though with higher risk.<BR>
<BR>
I would assume that each pilot (or naviigaator) will buy their own portable,<BR>
specialist hardware, nav-computer for just such occassions, and they will be<BR>
trained to use them. That's what happens now, though the nav-computer in<BR>
question is usually a specially designed slide-rule-like piece of plastic,<BR>
rather than an electronic device, at present.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:33:44 +1000<BR>
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Jeff Rowse <jeffrowse@hotmail.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 2:26:am<BR>
Subject: Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> (Please excuse the lack of quotes/"You write"s, but I'm using Hotmail and<BR>
> don't have time to dig the relevant bits out..).<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
     <Snip Lots of comments - Oh!  And I knew about the Montana :^) ><BR>
<BR>
> One more thing, did you know that a certain well-known Webmail provider<BR>
has<BR>
> modified it's anti-spam software to block anything with three or more<BR>
> exclamation marks next to each other and/or a dollar sign in front of<BR>
> 5-comma-zero-zero-zero on the grounds that "most people don't use such<BR>
> things in their (e)mail"... I kid you not.  I'll try to find the original<BR>
> source if anyone's interested...<BR>
<BR>
Hotmail??  I don't know, but on this subject for any Aussies on the list,<BR>
you may be interested to know that Austar (a cable TV company now offereing<BR>
Internet connections for approx. $1/hour) has an automated censoring sweep<BR>
of personal/private e-mails.  They search out, shall we say, "dirty words"<BR>
and send the post back telling you to clean it up as follows!<BR>
<BR>
"This message has been found to contain words, that are deemed to be<BR>
profane and unsuitable for business correspondence, by Austar Entertainment<BR>
Pty Ltd.<BR>
<BR>
Please remove any words that may be deemed offensive and resend the message.<BR>
<BR>
=========================================================<BR>
This message was automatically generated by MailSweeper.<BR>
========================================================="<BR>
<BR>
The post I had sent was to a non-business, private and personal e-mail<BR>
account, and frankly, I HAVE written business mail where I have politely<BR>
told the other end to "Go get F***ed!" and personally deem such a phrase as<BR>
perfectly adequate in certain circumstances.  In this case however, the<BR>
original post was addressing a mutual friend that has a streetnick (that is<BR>
ALWAYS used in mixed company - an Aussie thing?) of "F***face"<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav:  This is thin, but I don't see an X-mail coming back to a sender<BR>
with such a message!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 17:25:58 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 10:24 AM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment<BR>
>and consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
<BR>
>Do we want to discourage huge ships?  <BR>
<BR>
My vote is yes...with a reservation.  <BR>
<BR>
One of the features of FFS1 (not 2) was the designer was able to<BR>
make some decisions about the technology his universe used and how<BR>
it affected his designs.  That's what all the alter-tech was there<BR>
for.  I'll come back to how important I think *that* is, but on this<BR>
point, let me say there could be a set of switches that the designer<BR>
could turn on or off that would affect ship volumes.  If you want<BR>
really huge ships use this formula, table, algorithm, if you want<BR>
really small ships use this set, and if you want medium volumes use<BR>
this one...something like that.<BR>
<BR>
>If so, how heavily?  Possible<BR>
>arguments against large ships could include<BR>
<BR>
>   *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
<BR>
Yes, by TL<BR>
<BR>
>   *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
<BR>
Yes, a good bit harsher and staying fixed or only improving slightly<BR>
by TL.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe, but I don't *think* this is needed.  We really debated on FFS2's<BR>
structure requirements and I think the consensus was that they are<BR>
fairly reasonable.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
>	defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
<BR>
No, If you make offense significantly more powerful, that means<BR>
small PC type ships become mear eggshells.<BR>
<BR>
>Do we want to encourage fighters?  <BR>
<BR>
No, *I* don't, but I suspect many others do.  I want to encourage<BR>
boats and ships in the 100 to 1,000 dton range, not 20 to 50 dtons.<BR>
<BR>
>If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
>   *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
<BR>
NO!  <BR>
<BR>
>How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  <BR>
<BR>
I would *prefer* shorter ranges for sensors than DSR gives.  If that<BR>
means unrealistically cutting sensor effectiveness then I won't<BR>
complain (just be up front about what and why).  This is another<BR>
good spot for those switches I was talking about earlier.<BR>
<BR>
>DSR-style sensors are sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly<BR>
>   a non-factor in any major system.  This could be changed by<BR>
>   either making sensors in general a bit less powerful, or by<BR>
>   changing the scaling formula for sensors; either one can be<BR>
>   handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>   there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be<BR>
>   handwaved pretty easily too).<BR>
<BR>
Like I said I'd prefer shorter *effective* ranges.  It doesn't have<BR>
to be "subs in space", but I'd just as soon not have *every* ship<BR>
within 20,000,000 km easily detected. <BR>
<BR>
>What is the relative importance of <BR>
>   *Completeness.<BR>
<BR>
High for those things that are *used* in gameplay, lower for things<BR>
that aren't.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Technical accuracy.<BR>
<BR>
Moderate.  A few well thought-out and documented handwaves that give<BR>
the results we want are fine with me.  The *results* should be<BR>
reasonable and stick to physical laws outside of the publicly stated<BR>
and explained handwaves.<BR>
<BR>
>   *Quickness of use.<BR>
<BR>
High on the design side.  Extremely high on the use side.<BR>
<BR>
>What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
Alter-tech needs to be included and integrated.  The offical<BR>
Traveller Technical Architecture is one set of sequences, but FFS<BR>
*should* include the ability to replace parts of the offical TTA<BR>
with alternative technologies and even to create entirely new<BR>
architectures.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:13:00 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 11:41 PM,  tim@premier.net said:<BR>
<BR>
>> LOL!  Me too, unfortunately we seem to be a minority.  I'm willing<BR>
>> to let them have their monster ships, but want to push them back a<BR>
>> few TL's and cut them down a trifle.  Why can't 60,000 dton ships<BR>
>> become 15,000, 100,000 dton ships become 25,000 and 300,000 dtons<BR>
>> ships become 75,000?  Dang it those are HUGE ships!  Part of the<BR>
>> problem, I think, is that these monster maniacs don't realize just<BR>
>> how bloody big even a 5,000 dton ship really is...think 100 meters<BR>
>> long by 20 meters wide by 35 meters high.  That's an 8 story<BR>
>> apartment block...and it flies!!!<BR>
<BR>
>You are not alone Eris, i have been reading the thread and have  saved<BR>
>alot of cool ideas.  I too see 100,000 ton ships as to big. I have a<BR>
>soluation to the problem.  Have all these people in favor of  10,000 tons<BR>
>or better draw up deck plans.  That will break them.<BR>
<BR>
LOL!<BR>
<BR>
>I tried doing deckplans for an 18,000 ton liner for an adventure idea. <BR>
> It would be 21 two foot by 1 1/2 foot pieces of graph paper.  I  stoped<BR>
>that adventure right away.<BR>
<BR>
Tim, I suspect that a lot of the Huge Ship Contingent aren't<BR>
interested in deckplans, or in using their monsters in roleplaying<BR>
gmaes.  I'm thinking they are mostly wargamers and pure gearhead<BR>
designers.  Neither clouds of tiny fighters or hulding monster ships<BR>
are a problem for wargames and pure gearheads are only concerned<BR>
about the design process, not the use of that design, anyway.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:29:54 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 08:41 AM,  Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 00:37:07 -0500<BR>
>>From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
>>Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
>><BR>
>>1.  Player characters flying small merchant vessels should not _expect_<BR>
>>to fight major naval units with any hope of winning. <BR>
<BR>
>Why not? In the 17th and 18th centuries, most warships were the same size<BR>
>as merchantmen; the largest ships-of-the-line carried only ~10-20x as<BR>
>many guns as the smallest fighting sloop. The largest modern aircraft are<BR>
>only ~100x the size of the smallest, and couldn't carry nearly that much<BR>
>more ordnance if they wanted to. <BR>
<BR>
Chris I agree with you on this point!  Like anyone is surprised at<BR>
that, eh?  ;-) However, I don't have a problem with letting folks<BR>
that want them to have their Monster Ships.  HOWEVER, can't we find<BR>
a way to let groups pick *either* model?  Either doing it by Tech<BR>
Level (we play at 10 to 12, they play at 13 to 15, and 13 is a<BR>
transition level) or with switches in the design sequences.<BR>
<BR>
>>2.  Limiting the size of starships to LBB2 (5000 dton) size would<BR>
>>detract from the roleplaying experience, for two reasons.  First, for<BR>
>>the price of one _Brooklyn_-class light cruiser (TL-13, 60,000 dtons,<BR>
>>MCr 89,296.745), one can purchase 379 800-dton mercenary cruisers, with<BR>
>>change left over.<BR>
<BR>
>You're assuming a remote central government (an "Imperium") powerful<BR>
>enough or interested enough to purchase a 60,000-dton light cruiser or<BR>
>379 800-dton mercenary cruisers in the first place. This is a choice, not<BR>
>a given.<BR>
<BR>
He's also making assumptions about population, military spending,<BR>
and the ability and willingness of a weak central governement to<BR>
build, crew and supply really big ships or really big fleets.<BR>
<BR>
And a thought here, which costs *more* to crew, supply and maintain<BR>
in the field, 379 - 800 dton ships or 1 - 60,000 dton ship?  If the<BR>
design sequence comes down on the side of the 1, or even equal<BR>
costs, then it is flawed.<BR>
<BR>
>>Second, for those<BR>
>>campaigns in which the PCs are high-ranking military officers, limiting<BR>
>>ships to LBB2 size means that a fleet action will involve hundreds, or<BR>
>>even thousands, of "capital" ships on each side.  <BR>
<BR>
>Again, this is a choice. How many ships were on each side at Trafalgar?<BR>
<BR>
>>How much roleplaying can one experience with<BR>
>>such massive numbers of ships on each side?<BR>
<BR>
How much roleplaying can one experience in a war on a world where<BR>
several million people are fighting on each side?  <BR>
<BR>
>That's the referee's call, isn't it? I can imagine a fleet action that<BR>
>looks more like a massed bombing raid over Western Europe in WWII than<BR>
>the Battle of Jutland.<BR>
<BR>
Or just don't put the PCs in massed actions all that often.  Do it one<BR>
time and they might do whatever it takes to avoid that fact in the<BR>
future. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:41:36 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 07/31/00 at 11:39 PM,  SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>At 18:28 -0400 31/7/00, eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
>>Hey, now that Ian has ruled that "everything uses 1/5 it's former<BR>
>>power" and we're "rationalizing" power requirements, can we cut an<BR>
>>EP down to something more reasonable?<BR>
>><BR>
>>Hum, even at 1/5, that's 250 Mw for the computer.  Still a little<BR>
>>much, don't you think? <g><BR>
<BR>
>Grumble. I just liked those days when an EP was an EP and we didn't  have<BR>
>to worry so much about real life :-)<BR>
<BR>
Dom, I don't have a problem you using EP's. Heck I don't have a problem using them for a lot of things myself. However, we also need to know how many MW are in each EP, because my players are going to ask...and you know it. <g> <BR>
<BR>
So, why can't EP's be defined as being a much smaller number of MW's?  <BR>
<BR>
Hey, let's say, 1 EP = 1 MW!! That would make us both happy wouldn't it? <weg><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 16:54:32<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Tech Level 13<BR>
<BR>
At 06:25 PM 8/1/2000 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>A quick question, around what year  did the Imperium reach tech <BR>
>13 or GTL 11<BR>
<BR>
300 (MT Referee's Companion, page 34)<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 01:09:47 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 19:04 -0400 1/8/00, "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>I'd like to make fighters better, if not actually combatants. I'd like a<BR>
>result where you can throw six squadrons of fighters at a light cruiser,<BR>
>take some (maybe a lot of) casualties, and have a good chance of sending it<BR>
>partway to dead. Main sensor antennae, radiators et al are all tools to<BR>
>this end. I don't think fighters will ever be a ship killer, but it would<BR>
>be nice if they were a handy adjunct to cruisers.<BR>
<BR>
Fighters will strip the surface fixtures in HG (weapon hits etc).<BR>
<BR>
>Big ships - like I said, I like big ships. But how big is big? 100,000 dT<BR>
>is about the top end of warships I'd like to see (with most topping out at<BR>
>around 50k). What does everybody else think?<BR>
<BR>
In CT Sup 9 - Fighting ships Dreadnaughts (exception Tigress) are <BR>
around 200 kDT<BR>
<BR>
Next biggest ships are HCs at 75 kdT and Fleet Carrier at 100 kDT.<BR>
<BR>
This is around the figures you are talking about (ish). Bear in mind <BR>
optimised spinal mount platforms are almost certainly <50 kdT.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 01:08:59 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 19:04 -0400 1/8/00,  Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com> wrote:<BR>
>You know, as one of the most strident advocates of limits on ship sizes, I<BR>
>don't really care about "harsher". I don't think huge ships are necessary<BR>
>- -- Traveller got along fine without them for years, and still can, if you<BR>
>choose your economic and social parameters correctly. Besides, for all<BR>
>practical purposes a 5,000-dton ship /is/ huge! Our perceptions and our<BR>
>expectations are inflated.<BR>
<BR>
That's 3 years without big ships.<BR>
<BR>
And then HG1 (1979) was published. I've not got my copy handy to <BR>
check max ship sizes there, but in Traveller's fourth year of <BR>
existence HG2 (1980) came out and had 1 million dT ships as an <BR>
option. And in Traveller's fifth year (1981) Supplement 9 - Fighting <BR>
Ships was published with Imperial Navy ships up to 500kdT.<BR>
<BR>
Then we have another 19 years with such size ships being around. I <BR>
think the time with big ships vastly outweighs the time with little <BR>
ships. Although, as I responded to Nick separately, the IN ships <BR>
shown top out at 500 kDT. HCs are 75kDT, and carriers are 100kDT. <BR>
Dreadnaughts are 200kdT. So they aren't as big as possible. Indeed, <BR>
CT/HG2 encouraged smaller ships with spinal mount rules - the smaller <BR>
package the mount is in, the more effective it is as a weapon <BR>
platform.<BR>
<BR>
The smallest PA spinal is 500 dT. The smallest meson spinal is 1000 <BR>
dT. The ships need to be big to fight with these weapons, because <BR>
they are so much more effective.<BR>
<BR>
>Fighters are canon. We need to make sure our final result adequately<BR>
>answers, "Why?"<BR>
<BR>
Anti-piracy weapons as described in M0.<BR>
<BR>
Screening vessels in CT - your task force jumps in, with a small <BR>
number of escorts (eg 5000 dT Lisanis). Immediately, you launch <BR>
fighters (40 per turn per launch tube). Your capital ships sit behind <BR>
the fighter and escort screen in the reserve and continue to deploy <BR>
Battle Riders. Until the screen is incapable of offensive fire, the <BR>
reserve is protected. So you can deploy your main force en mass once <BR>
ready, avoiding them being killed piecemeal. Admittedly, this is an <BR>
expensive way to protect your forces, but it saves the big spinal <BR>
mount platforms.<BR>
<BR>
These are the reasons they exist in Traveller's background. This is <BR>
what the TTA needs to address.<BR>
<BR>
>"What changes, if Traveller: The Roleplaying Game is not synonymous with<BR>
>Traveller: The Imperial Space Setting?" That is, what parts of the<BR>
>technical architecture are required by the nature of Traveller (jump<BR>
>drives, nuclear dampers, fusion power, and gravitics), and which are simply<BR>
>chrome created to support the Official Traveller Universe?<BR>
>Ideally, the Technical Architecture should never mention "The Imperium"<BR>
>except as one examplar campaign.<BR>
<BR>
This I agree with. It's what FFS1 threatened to be but wasn't. The <BR>
guidance on how to set the steps in the architecture for the game. I <BR>
was waiting for the 2300 stuff :-/<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2862<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (rly-zd04.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.228]) by air-zd03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:11:36 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:10:40 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id UAA28210;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 20:10:38 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 20:10:34 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id UAA28160<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 20:10:34 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 20:10:34 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008020010.UAA28160@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2862<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2863</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 7:43:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2863<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Montana Class?<BR>
FAQ question<BR>
Palm Software for Trav<BR>
Roc: Fighters<BR>
[Fwd: MONTANA-class Battleship (T4/FF&S2) (longish)]<BR>
Fwd: MONTANA-class Battleship (T4/FF&S2) (longish)<BR>
Re: FAQ question<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:14:43 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Montana Class?<BR>
<BR>
Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Via electronic medium on 8/1/00 9:13 PM, nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk<BR>
> issued forth:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Incidentally, what is a _Montana_? I don't believe I've ever heard of that<BR>
> > ship/class.<BR>
> <BR>
> I believe it was posted to this list a couple months ago or so while folks<BR>
> were talking about honking big ships, by either FS or X-TEK or somesuch. I<BR>
> believe there was some debate at the time considering multiple sonic booms,<BR>
> and this monster was made to demonstrate such.<BR>
<BR>
I'm proud to say that the _Montana_-class is an AuricTech design.  In<BR>
fact, since we have so many new TMLers, I think that it's about time I<BR>
reposted it.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 17:13:33 -0700<BR>
From: "Koji Suzuki" <kzuke@compuserve.com><BR>
Subject: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
I recently returned to gaming, pen and paper style, and dusted off my old<BR>
Traveller books, supplements, etc. and started a campaign c.1107.  I just<BR>
subscribed to the list, and been reading a lot of the posts, but I'm not<BR>
familiar with the information that's come out in the last ten or fifteen<BR>
years.<BR>
<BR>
I don't know what the abbreviations are, i.e. FFS 1, 2, or 3.  I've figured<BR>
out CT-Classic Traveller, MT- MegaTraveller, but the other stuff, 3rd<BR>
edition rules, GURPs Traveller, I'm not at all familiar with.<BR>
<BR>
Is there someplace that has the info that I'm looking for, a net-Traveller<BR>
FAQ?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks a lot.<BR>
<BR>
Koji<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 01:20:58 +0100<BR>
From: "Peter  Scarrott" <peter@myhelliconia.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Palm Software for Trav<BR>
<BR>
I have just become the proud and confused owner of a Palm III, I seem to<BR>
recall several mentions on these lists to Palm Traveller Software, if anyone<BR>
can let me have an URL or has some software I may be interested please<BR>
contact me off list.<BR>
<BR>
Sorry for the interruption.<BR>
<BR>
Peter<BR>
http://www.myhelliconia.freeserve.co.uk<BR>
peter@myhelliconia.freeserve.co.uk<BR>
<BR>
The conquest of space is facing two major problems: gravity and red tape.<BR>
We could have managed gravity<BR>
        Werner von Braun<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:35:46 +1000<BR>
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au><BR>
Subject: Roc: Fighters<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Nick Bradbeer <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 4:49:pm<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > 2) Deliberately designing the system to (a) screw big ships and (b)<BR>
> > make fighters deadly is not the Traveller background I enjoy and<BR>
> > risks the same level of alienation that TNE's changes with HePLAR<BR>
> > resulted in. Big ships exist. Fighters are lousy in any Traveller<BR>
> > combat system against warships.<BR>
><BR>
> That's rather more extreme than I was hoping for.<BR>
><BR>
> I'd like to make fighters better, if not actually combatants. I'd like a<BR>
> result where you can throw six squadrons of fighters at a light cruiser,<BR>
> take some (maybe a lot of) casualties, and have a good chance of sending<BR>
it<BR>
> partway to dead. Main sensor antennae, radiators et al are all tools to<BR>
> this end. I don't think fighters will ever be a ship killer, but it would<BR>
> be nice if they were a handy adjunct to cruisers.<BR>
<BR>
I actually pictured, and this is just me remember, so it won't work for<BR>
everyone, but I pictured fleet actions as the capital ships directing most<BR>
of their firepower at other capital ships or large warships, while the<BR>
fighter screens would launch while the enemies fire is directed at the<BR>
bigger stuff.  The attacking fighters would actually be armed with something<BR>
kind-a hurtie to their target, like a torpedo or three?  The defending ship<BR>
would launch their own fighters (interceptors) when the torpedo<BR>
fighter/bombers were detected... and perhaps the torpedo bombers had<BR>
dedicated fighters as their defence against the interceptors?<BR>
<BR>
Then you would have epic starship combat between the larger ships and small<BR>
fighter dogfights taking place about/inbetween them.  Point defence lasers<BR>
that can zap targets the size mossies out of the sky (that most folk seem to<BR>
love) can be buggered off (I never used them) as they defeat such grandeur<BR>
and usefulness of fighters that inspire so much player imagination... and<BR>
that's one of the things I encourage - player imagination!<BR>
<BR>
- -- The Roc<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:34:27 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: [Fwd: MONTANA-class Battleship (T4/FF&S2) (longish)]<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
- --------------FB1B75AA74ABCA61A264BC2C<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
<BR>
Here's a repost of the _Montana_-class battleship.  Enjoy!<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
- --------------FB1B75AA74ABCA61A264BC2C<BR>
Content-Type: message/rfc822<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
Content-Disposition: inline<BR>
<BR>
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000<BR>
Message-ID: <38CDCE25.58705E47@premier.net><BR>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 23:29:09 -0600<BR>
From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Organization: Lemurian Ministry of Foreign Affairs<BR>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; U)<BR>
X-Accept-Language: en<BR>
MIME-Version: 1.0<BR>
To: TML <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Subject: MONTANA-class Battleship (T4/FF&S2) (longish)<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
<BR>
As I continue to work on the AuricTech Shipyards Web site upgrade, I<BR>
find that I just _have_ to post a design or two to the TML (to tide you<BR>
[and me!] over until things are ready).<BR>
<BR>
In that spirit, here's the MONTANA-class battleship, designed for<BR>
service in the M:1100 setting (i.e., TL-15):<BR>
<BR>
**begin transmission**<BR>
<BR>
AuricTech Shipyards MONTANA-class Battleship<BR>
<BR>
Tons: 500,000 std (SL Medium Rounded Cylinder Hypersonic) <BR>
Dimensions: 486.5 m x 140 m x 140 m<BR>
Volume: 7000000 m3<BR>
Cargo: 1600 std (32 hatches, Hdl: 32 x 100 t, Armor: 20 [90]) <BR>
Mass (L/C): 7583971 t / 73555155 t <BR>
Maintenance Points: 204256<BR>
Passengers High/Med: 0 <BR>
Crew: 8245 / 10791 <BR>
Frozen Watch: 324 (5 groups)<BR>
Cost: 746387 MCr   (Cost Multiplier 1)<BR>
Tech Level: 15<BR>
Size: 11 <BR>
<BR>
Electronics:<BR>
Controls (Armor: 20 [90]): Holographic, Standard automation. 32 x<BR>
FltComp (CM: .2 CP: 5.0). 16 x FibComp (CM: .2 CP: 5.0). Terrain<BR>
following sensors (TF: 570, NOE: 190). Bridge (Armor: 20 [90]).<BR>
Communications (Armor: 20 [90]): 2 x Radio (1,000 AU, 0.2 MW). 8 x Laser<BR>
(1,000 AU, 0 MW). 1 x Meson (1,000 AU, 5 MW).<BR>
Sensors (Armor: 20 [90]): 1 x PEMS (15 [500 mkm], 5 MW). 1xAEMS (13 [16<BR>
mkm], 1000 MW). 8 x LIDAR (15.5 [5 mkm], 4 MW).<BR>
Survey/Science (Armor: 20 [90]): 1 x Densiometer (9.5 [1600 km]). 1 x<BR>
Neutrino (9.5 [1600 km] Sci, 2000 MW).<BR>
ECM (Armor: 20 [90]): 1 x Radio Jammer (1,000 AU, 0.4 MW). 1 x Area<BR>
Jammer (12, 625 MW). 1 x Deceptive Jammer (13, 12.5 MW). 1 x Passive<BR>
Jammer (16, 6.25 MW).<BR>
Signatures: Vis: -0.5, IR: 1 (1 at 1184204 MW, 0.5 at 139000 MW), Act:<BR>
0.5, Neu: 1, Grav: 2<BR>
<BR>
Performance <BR>
4 Jump (50000 std/pc fuel) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
6 / 6.1 Maneuver (Thruster: 1128225 MW) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
No Contra-grav<BR>
5000 kph/5000 kph Atmosphere Maximum <BR>
3750 kph/3750 kph Atmosphere Cruise <BR>
6 Power (Fusion: 1390000 MW, 1 yr) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
0 Battery<BR>
209978.6 Fuel (Scoop:11 / Purif: 36, 2450 MW) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
10900/100/350/2750 Accommodations (SmStRoom/LargeStRoom/Low Berth/Emgy<BR>
Low Berth) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
286000 Life Sup. (Type:Extended, Good Food/Storage) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
6 G-Comp (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
100 x Sandcaster (AV: 79, 50 x canister ea., arranged in 20 x bty)<BR>
(Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
24 x Nuclear Damper Turret (5 MW, Range: 50000 km, arranged in 6 x bty)<BR>
(Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
715 Damper Screen (338 MW) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
715 Meson Screen (639.04 MW) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
160 [2860] Armor, 59 Structure <BR>
<BR>
Weapons:<BR>
[All batteries include MFDs]<BR>
<BR>
44 x 250 MJ Laser Turret Battery (+6) 1 /5-5-5-5 [2, 200/40-40-40-40]<BR>
(LR) (2 x turret/bty). PD ROF: 800<BR>
4 x 568 MJ Laser Bay (+6) 1/8-8-8-8 [2, 800/60-60-60-60] (LR) (2 x<BR>
laser/bay).<BR>
32 x Missile Bay Auto 4/4 (Mag: 76, MFD Range: 500000 km) with 80 x Cmd<BR>
DL 1d6/2 6.0 G12 1000 AU.<BR>
8 x 19044 MJ Parallel PAW (+6) 2/13-13-13-13 [1, 200/980-980-980-980]<BR>
(LR) (Armor: 20 [90]).<BR>
1 x 87358 MJ Spinal PAW (+6) 2/19-19-19-19 [1, 400/2099-2099-2099-2099]<BR>
(LR). (Armor: 20 [90]).<BR>
<BR>
Features:<BR>
5000 x Airlock<BR>
140 x Decon Airlock<BR>
1 x Docking Umbilical<BR>
2 x Electronic Shop (6 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
106 x Machine Shop (8 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
100 x Sickbay (8 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
12 x Prisoner Capacity (6 x MedSec brig, 6 x HiSec brig) (Armor: 20<BR>
[90])<BR>
1 x Ship's locker (250 std) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
100 x Armory (8 std ea., Cap: 110) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
110 x Gym (2.5 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
16 x Lounge (100 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
1 x Combat Information Center (265 std) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
16 x Ordinary Galley (Cap: 100) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
100 x Full Galley (Cap: 110 ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
<BR>
Small Craft:<BR>
4 x Minimal Hangar (400 std ea, 4 x hatch) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
16 x Minimal Hangar (200 std ea, 2 x hatch) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
24 x Spacious Hangar (50 std ea, 2 x hatch) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
1 x Launch Tube (200 std) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
2 x Launch Tube (50 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
<BR>
Backups <BR>
Drives: None <BR>
Screens: 1 x Meson Screen (PV: 143). 1 x Damper Screen (PV: 160).<BR>
Communications:  2 x Radio (500,000 km)<BR>
Sensors: 2 x PEMS (14.5 [160 mkm]). 2 x AEMS (13 [16 mkm]). 12 x LIDAR<BR>
(14.5 [500 kkm]).<BR>
ECM: None<BR>
Power & Fuel: 1 x Fusion (100000 MW). <BR>
<BR>
Crew Details: 11 x Maneuver. 1 x Electronics. 6373 x Engineer. 385 x<BR>
Maintenance. 665 x Gunner. 37 x Screen. 180 x Flight. 1200 x Troops.<BR>
1475 x Command. 104 x Medical.  360 x Steward.<BR>
<BR>
Designer's Notes (brief):  This ship is my equivalent, in some ways, to<BR>
the TIGRESS-class of battleship.  While the "Happy Fun Ball" is a more<BR>
efficient configuration, I found that I could not fit a long enough PAW<BR>
tunnel in a Sphere.  Hence, the Medium Rounded Cylinder configuration. <BR>
I chose the Medium Rounded Cylinder over the Short Rounded because I<BR>
thought that MRC ships look better thna SRC shipa.<BR>
<BR>
I am especially fond of the eight parallel-mount PAWs.  They serve the<BR>
same secondary battery function as bay weapons, but are _much_ larger<BR>
(each one is nearly as powerful as the main spinal mount of my<BR>
TUSCALOOSA-class heavy cruiser).  The spreadsheet (the equivalent to<BR>
Akins 3.3) includes a parallel-mounted meson gun of very similar volume,<BR>
mass, power, and crew requirements, thus allowing customers to order<BR>
variants, with meson guns replacing secondary PAWs at a 1:1 ratio, with<BR>
virtually no redesign work.  (You'll have a few extra crew stations;<BR>
removing them will entail a bit more work than leaving them there.)<BR>
<BR>
Nearly all facilities on the MONTANA-class battleship have supplementary<BR>
armor of rating 20 [90].  This is due to the way that the Akins<BR>
spreadsheet handles combat sheets for Bruce Macintosh's Military Combat<BR>
System (MCS).  Under MCS, hull armor on the MONTANA class is rated as a<BR>
value of 18.  By adding armor to various facilities, those facilities<BR>
have an effective armor rating under MCS of 19, thus making them more<BR>
difficult to damage with penetrating PAW hits.<BR>
<BR>
As with nearly all AuricTech designs, the MONTANA class includes such<BR>
amenities as crew lounges (each equipped with an Ordinary galley, as a<BR>
snack bar), individual Small staterooms for _all_ crewbeings (senior<BR>
officers and petty officers receive individual Large staterooms),<BR>
physical fitness centers, and a Combat Information Center.  These<BR>
facilities are included to maintain crew efficiency during extended<BR>
cruises.  Those hardy souls who create deck plans should note that crew<BR>
lounges are located close to sickbays, thus enabling the medical staff<BR>
to use the lounges as casualty collection points/triage centers during<BR>
battles.<BR>
<BR>
The MONTANA class continues the AuricTech tradition of equipping<BR>
warships with the most powerful sensor suite possible, while working to<BR>
stealth the ship as much as possible.  After all, "if you can see it,<BR>
you can kill it", so our designers work to ensure that the AuricTech<BR>
ship can see its foe first.<BR>
<BR>
Bear in mind that this ship has only _half_ the tonnage of AuricTech's<BR>
SHIVA-class battleship (soon to be posted to the AuricTech site).  Be<BR>
afraid.  Be very afraid.  (Not just of the ship itself, but also of its<BR>
nearly unprecedented Cheddar factor!)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
- --------------FB1B75AA74ABCA61A264BC2C--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:40:34 -0500<BR>
From: Richard Wilson <rtwilson@rollanet.org><BR>
Subject: Fwd: MONTANA-class Battleship (T4/FF&S2) (longish)<BR>
<BR>
 From the files: Stats for a MONTANA class Battleship<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Delivered-To: rtwilson@rollanet.org<BR>
>Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 23:29:09 -0600<BR>
>From: Black ICE <wombat@premier.net><BR>
>Organization: Lemurian Ministry of Foreign Affairs<BR>
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; U)<BR>
>X-Accept-Language: en<BR>
>To: TML <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
>Subject: MONTANA-class Battleship (T4/FF&S2) (longish)<BR>
>Sender: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
>Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
><BR>
>As I continue to work on the AuricTech Shipyards Web site upgrade, I<BR>
>find that I just _have_ to post a design or two to the TML (to tide you<BR>
>[and me!] over until things are ready).<BR>
><BR>
>In that spirit, here's the MONTANA-class battleship, designed for<BR>
>service in the M:1100 setting (i.e., TL-15):<BR>
><BR>
>**begin transmission**<BR>
><BR>
>AuricTech Shipyards MONTANA-class Battleship<BR>
><BR>
>Tons: 500,000 std (SL Medium Rounded Cylinder Hypersonic)<BR>
>Dimensions: 486.5 m x 140 m x 140 m<BR>
>Volume: 7000000 m3<BR>
>Cargo: 1600 std (32 hatches, Hdl: 32 x 100 t, Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>Mass (L/C): 7583971 t / 73555155 t<BR>
>Maintenance Points: 204256<BR>
>Passengers High/Med: 0<BR>
>Crew: 8245 / 10791<BR>
>Frozen Watch: 324 (5 groups)<BR>
>Cost: 746387 MCr   (Cost Multiplier 1)<BR>
>Tech Level: 15<BR>
>Size: 11<BR>
><BR>
>Electronics:<BR>
>Controls (Armor: 20 [90]): Holographic, Standard automation. 32 x<BR>
>FltComp (CM: .2 CP: 5.0). 16 x FibComp (CM: .2 CP: 5.0). Terrain<BR>
>following sensors (TF: 570, NOE: 190). Bridge (Armor: 20 [90]).<BR>
>Communications (Armor: 20 [90]): 2 x Radio (1,000 AU, 0.2 MW). 8 x Laser<BR>
>(1,000 AU, 0 MW). 1 x Meson (1,000 AU, 5 MW).<BR>
>Sensors (Armor: 20 [90]): 1 x PEMS (15 [500 mkm], 5 MW). 1xAEMS (13 [16<BR>
>mkm], 1000 MW). 8 x LIDAR (15.5 [5 mkm], 4 MW).<BR>
>Survey/Science (Armor: 20 [90]): 1 x Densiometer (9.5 [1600 km]). 1 x<BR>
>Neutrino (9.5 [1600 km] Sci, 2000 MW).<BR>
>ECM (Armor: 20 [90]): 1 x Radio Jammer (1,000 AU, 0.4 MW). 1 x Area<BR>
>Jammer (12, 625 MW). 1 x Deceptive Jammer (13, 12.5 MW). 1 x Passive<BR>
>Jammer (16, 6.25 MW).<BR>
>Signatures: Vis: -0.5, IR: 1 (1 at 1184204 MW, 0.5 at 139000 MW), Act:<BR>
>0.5, Neu: 1, Grav: 2<BR>
><BR>
>Performance<BR>
>4 Jump (50000 std/pc fuel) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>6 / 6.1 Maneuver (Thruster: 1128225 MW) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>No Contra-grav<BR>
>5000 kph/5000 kph Atmosphere Maximum<BR>
>3750 kph/3750 kph Atmosphere Cruise<BR>
>6 Power (Fusion: 1390000 MW, 1 yr) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>0 Battery<BR>
>209978.6 Fuel (Scoop:11 / Purif: 36, 2450 MW) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>10900/100/350/2750 Accommodations (SmStRoom/LargeStRoom/Low Berth/Emgy<BR>
>Low Berth) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>286000 Life Sup. (Type:Extended, Good Food/Storage) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>6 G-Comp (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>100 x Sandcaster (AV: 79, 50 x canister ea., arranged in 20 x bty)<BR>
>(Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>24 x Nuclear Damper Turret (5 MW, Range: 50000 km, arranged in 6 x bty)<BR>
>(Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>715 Damper Screen (338 MW) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>715 Meson Screen (639.04 MW) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>160 [2860] Armor, 59 Structure<BR>
><BR>
>Weapons:<BR>
>[All batteries include MFDs]<BR>
><BR>
>44 x 250 MJ Laser Turret Battery (+6) 1 /5-5-5-5 [2, 200/40-40-40-40]<BR>
>(LR) (2 x turret/bty). PD ROF: 800<BR>
>4 x 568 MJ Laser Bay (+6) 1/8-8-8-8 [2, 800/60-60-60-60] (LR) (2 x<BR>
>laser/bay).<BR>
>32 x Missile Bay Auto 4/4 (Mag: 76, MFD Range: 500000 km) with 80 x Cmd<BR>
>DL 1d6/2 6.0 G12 1000 AU.<BR>
>8 x 19044 MJ Parallel PAW (+6) 2/13-13-13-13 [1, 200/980-980-980-980]<BR>
>(LR) (Armor: 20 [90]).<BR>
>1 x 87358 MJ Spinal PAW (+6) 2/19-19-19-19 [1, 400/2099-2099-2099-2099]<BR>
>(LR). (Armor: 20 [90]).<BR>
><BR>
>Features:<BR>
>5000 x Airlock<BR>
>140 x Decon Airlock<BR>
>1 x Docking Umbilical<BR>
>2 x Electronic Shop (6 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>106 x Machine Shop (8 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>100 x Sickbay (8 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>12 x Prisoner Capacity (6 x MedSec brig, 6 x HiSec brig) (Armor: 20<BR>
>[90])<BR>
>1 x Ship's locker (250 std) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>100 x Armory (8 std ea., Cap: 110) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>110 x Gym (2.5 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>16 x Lounge (100 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>1 x Combat Information Center (265 std) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>16 x Ordinary Galley (Cap: 100) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>100 x Full Galley (Cap: 110 ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
><BR>
>Small Craft:<BR>
>4 x Minimal Hangar (400 std ea, 4 x hatch) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>16 x Minimal Hangar (200 std ea, 2 x hatch) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>24 x Spacious Hangar (50 std ea, 2 x hatch) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>1 x Launch Tube (200 std) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
>2 x Launch Tube (50 std ea.) (Armor: 20 [90])<BR>
><BR>
>Backups<BR>
>Drives: None<BR>
>Screens: 1 x Meson Screen (PV: 143). 1 x Damper Screen (PV: 160).<BR>
>Communications:  2 x Radio (500,000 km)<BR>
>Sensors: 2 x PEMS (14.5 [160 mkm]). 2 x AEMS (13 [16 mkm]). 12 x LIDAR<BR>
>(14.5 [500 kkm]).<BR>
>ECM: None<BR>
>Power & Fuel: 1 x Fusion (100000 MW).<BR>
><BR>
>Crew Details: 11 x Maneuver. 1 x Electronics. 6373 x Engineer. 385 x<BR>
>Maintenance. 665 x Gunner. 37 x Screen. 180 x Flight. 1200 x Troops.<BR>
>1475 x Command. 104 x Medical.  360 x Steward.<BR>
><BR>
>Designer's Notes (brief):  This ship is my equivalent, in some ways, to<BR>
>the TIGRESS-class of battleship.  While the "Happy Fun Ball" is a more<BR>
>efficient configuration, I found that I could not fit a long enough PAW<BR>
>tunnel in a Sphere.  Hence, the Medium Rounded Cylinder configuration.<BR>
>I chose the Medium Rounded Cylinder over the Short Rounded because I<BR>
>thought that MRC ships look better thna SRC shipa.<BR>
><BR>
>I am especially fond of the eight parallel-mount PAWs.  They serve the<BR>
>same secondary battery function as bay weapons, but are _much_ larger<BR>
>(each one is nearly as powerful as the main spinal mount of my<BR>
>TUSCALOOSA-class heavy cruiser).  The spreadsheet (the equivalent to<BR>
>Akins 3.3) includes a parallel-mounted meson gun of very similar volume,<BR>
>mass, power, and crew requirements, thus allowing customers to order<BR>
>variants, with meson guns replacing secondary PAWs at a 1:1 ratio, with<BR>
>virtually no redesign work.  (You'll have a few extra crew stations;<BR>
>removing them will entail a bit more work than leaving them there.)<BR>
><BR>
>Nearly all facilities on the MONTANA-class battleship have supplementary<BR>
>armor of rating 20 [90].  This is due to the way that the Akins<BR>
>spreadsheet handles combat sheets for Bruce Macintosh's Military Combat<BR>
>System (MCS).  Under MCS, hull armor on the MONTANA class is rated as a<BR>
>value of 18.  By adding armor to various facilities, those facilities<BR>
>have an effective armor rating under MCS of 19, thus making them more<BR>
>difficult to damage with penetrating PAW hits.<BR>
><BR>
>As with nearly all AuricTech designs, the MONTANA class includes such<BR>
>amenities as crew lounges (each equipped with an Ordinary galley, as a<BR>
>snack bar), individual Small staterooms for _all_ crewbeings (senior<BR>
>officers and petty officers receive individual Large staterooms),<BR>
>physical fitness centers, and a Combat Information Center.  These<BR>
>facilities are included to maintain crew efficiency during extended<BR>
>cruises.  Those hardy souls who create deck plans should note that crew<BR>
>lounges are located close to sickbays, thus enabling the medical staff<BR>
>to use the lounges as casualty collection points/triage centers during<BR>
>battles.<BR>
><BR>
>The MONTANA class continues the AuricTech tradition of equipping<BR>
>warships with the most powerful sensor suite possible, while working to<BR>
>stealth the ship as much as possible.  After all, "if you can see it,<BR>
>you can kill it", so our designers work to ensure that the AuricTech<BR>
>ship can see its foe first.<BR>
><BR>
>Bear in mind that this ship has only _half_ the tonnage of AuricTech's<BR>
>SHIVA-class battleship (soon to be posted to the AuricTech site).  Be<BR>
>afraid.  Be very afraid.  (Not just of the ship itself, but also of its<BR>
>nearly unprecedented Cheddar factor!)<BR>
><BR>
>--<BR>
>AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
>"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
>Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
><BR>
>http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Richard Wilson<BR>
<BR>
rtwilson@rollanet.org<BR>
<BR>
========================================================================<BR>
Humanity is not something we should aspire to. It is something we should<BR>
strive to overcome.<BR>
========================================================================<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:07:15 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
Koji Suzuki wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> I recently returned to gaming, pen and paper style, and dusted off my old<BR>
> Traveller books, supplements, etc. and started a campaign c.1107.  I just<BR>
> subscribed to the list, and been reading a lot of the posts, but I'm not<BR>
> familiar with the information that's come out in the last ten or fifteen<BR>
> years.<BR>
> <BR>
> I don't know what the abbreviations are, i.e. FFS 1, 2, or 3.  I've figured<BR>
> out CT-Classic Traveller, MT- MegaTraveller, but the other stuff, 3rd<BR>
> edition rules, GURPs Traveller, I'm not at all familiar with.<BR>
> <BR>
> Is there someplace that has the info that I'm looking for, a net-Traveller<BR>
> FAQ?<BR>
<BR>
There is one but I don't know how often it's updated:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.vectis.demon.co.uk/traveller/faq/tml-faq.html<BR>
<BR>
Here's the short version...<BR>
<BR>
FFS1 = Fire, Fusion and Steel, which was GDW's 'everything' design<BR>
supplement. It was released as a supplement for TNE, aka Traveller:The<BR>
New Era, the last release of Traveller that GDW put out. TNE was a<BR>
departure from the previous Traveller editions in that it used different<BR>
rules and a radically altered background, set after the Imperium fell,<BR>
hard.<BR>
<BR>
FFS2 = Fire Fusion and Steel, 2nd edition. This was part of the Imperium<BR>
Games era.<BR>
<BR>
After GDW closed it's doors, Traveller languished a short while, then a<BR>
new company called Imperium Games took over the official Traveller line.<BR>
This was also known as T4 for Traveller version 4 (after Classic,<BR>
MegaTraveller, and TNE) It was based on the Classic ruleset, and set,<BR>
not in the Imperium of late CT and MT, but at the beginnings of the<BR>
Third Imperium, Milieu 0. At one point several Miliues were envisioned,<BR>
M200 (or the Consolidation Wars era) M400 (Or the Civil War Era), along<BR>
with M1100 (Classic-Mega Traveller) and M1200 (TNE). <BR>
<BR>
Sadly IG the company rather savagely mismanaged the entire thing, and<BR>
they soon lost their licence for Traveller stuff.<BR>
<BR>
However in their short lifetime they produced about 10 or so supplements<BR>
of varying quality including FFS2.<BR>
<BR>
Meanwhile Steve Jackson (Of Steve Jackson Games and GURPS fame) finally<BR>
wangled a license to produce a GURPS line built around Traveller.<BR>
Sensibly, he hired Loren Wiseman to be the Line Editor, and it has been<BR>
a huge hit.<BR>
<BR>
This is set in a sort of alternate Traveller universe...a Third Imperium<BR>
where the rebellion of Mega Traveller never happened. See<BR>
http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/traveller/<BR>
<BR>
Since they put the original GURPS Traveller supplement out (abbreviated<BR>
GT) they have produced a string of very well produced supplements: three<BR>
aliens supplements (Alien Races 1,2 and 3, AR1,2,3), A Spinward Marches<BR>
sourcebook (Behind the Claw, BtC), and many more.<BR>
<BR>
Any book referred to as GT:xxx is one of these.<BR>
<BR>
FFS3 is a rather recent (this week) list-based effort to update and fix<BR>
FFS2, with an eye towards using it to produce a simpler module-based<BR>
design system.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:15:10 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: pengebos@nmsu.edu<BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> > I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
> > carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval vessel.Can<BR>
> > anyone think of an example?<BR>
<BR>
John Paul Jones, Amaerican Revolutionary War<BR>
<BR>
Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu><BR>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<degaalth@prodigy.net><BR>
		http://www.geocities.com/degaalth/<BR>
<BR>
  "Here at Ortillery Command we have at our diposal hundred megawatt laser<BR>
beams, mach 20 titanium rods and guided thermonuclear bombs. Some people say<BR>
 we think that we're God. We're not God. We just borrowed his SMITE button<BR>
                        for our fire control system"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:23:38 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: pengebos@nmsu.edu<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
<BR>
The largest ship that ever apperared n any of my games was 10Kdt<BR>
(Excepting the STL Generation Ships). And it<BR>
could swat 200-800dt privateers like flies.<BR>
<BR>
> Tim, I suspect that a lot of the Huge Ship Contingent aren't<BR>
> interested in deckplans, or in using their monsters in roleplaying<BR>
> gmaes.  I'm thinking they are mostly wargamers and pure gearhead<BR>
> designers.  Neither clouds of tiny fighters or hulding monster ships<BR>
> are a problem for wargames and pure gearheads are only concerned<BR>
> about the design process, not the use of that design, anyway.<BR>
<BR>
OK - repeat the ani-gearhead mantra:<BR>
"Traveller is a roll-playing game;<BR>
Traveller is a roll-playing game..."<BR>
<BR>
:><BR>
<BR>
Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu><BR>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<degaalth@prodigy.net><BR>
		http://www.geocities.com/degaalth/<BR>
<BR>
  "Here at Ortillery Command we have at our diposal hundred megawatt laser<BR>
beams, mach 20 titanium rods and guided thermonuclear bombs. Some people say<BR>
 we think that we're God. We're not God. We just borrowed his SMITE button<BR>
                        for our fire control system"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:25:02 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: pengebos@nmsu.edu<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
oops - thats "role-playing".  I slipped into gearhead mode myself there.<BR>
I must purge myself in the nearest star  :><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 pengebos@NMSU.Edu wrote:<BR>
> OK - repeat the ani-gearhead mantra:<BR>
> "Traveller is a roll-playing game;<BR>
> Traveller is a roll-playing game..."<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu><BR>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<degaalth@prodigy.net><BR>
		http://www.geocities.com/degaalth/<BR>
<BR>
  "Here at Ortillery Command we have at our diposal hundred megawatt laser<BR>
beams, mach 20 titanium rods and guided thermonuclear bombs. Some people say<BR>
 we think that we're God. We're not God. We just borrowed his SMITE button<BR>
                        for our fire control system"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:10:10 EDT<BR>
From: OMENSIGIL@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: FF&S2 question<BR>
<BR>
mine was missing 1/2 of a page...but "they" put a copy of the page in there <BR>
for me (a not-bound copy)...I cant remember which section though....and im <BR>
too lazy to look.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Dan<BR>
OmenSigil<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:30:24 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 08:51 PM,  "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Maybe your bridge  positions  aren't  set  out  right?  When  the<BR>
>computer is used in starship combat it is to identify the  target vessal<BR>
>from the sensor readings ... which  can  provide  a  small bonus DM to<BR>
>damage rolls  once  the  target's  achilles  heal  is known.<BR>
<BR>
Peter, the positions of bridge positions isn't at issue.  Its making<BR>
sure the design sequences we are talking about producing give<BR>
results that *allow* for characters at each of the "stations" you<BR>
referred to have an effect on the situation.  If the sensors<BR>
automatically detect targets and the computer automatically<BR>
processes and identifies those targets, then what is Sensor skill<BR>
good for?  If the computer calculates and executes the evasion<BR>
patterns, then what does the pilot do except hit a button?  If<BR>
gunnery programs receive targeting data from the sensor programs and<BR>
plot a firing pattern what does the Gunner do? <BR>
<BR>
Whether it is realistic or not, I want PC skills to have an<BR>
important role in ship operations, combat and routine.  In the games<BR>
I run, that's the way it works now.  What I'm saying is that any<BR>
design sequences developed here should accommodate rules that allow<BR>
the use of PC skills.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:06:44 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 03:06 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>> Therefore,<BR>
>> the rule of thumb will be that heat production is (40-TL*2)% of the<BR>
>> total energy consumption of the ship (it will be higher for very low<BR>
>> tech ships).  You must then get heat control to deal with that heat.<BR>
<BR>
>That means that TL 20 ships have no heat production. And TL 20 *is*<BR>
>possible. Just unlikely.<BR>
<BR>
Use a divisor, something like this.<BR>
<BR>
At TL0 through TL4,  90%<BR>
At TL6+,  400/TL<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2863<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (rly-zd02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.226]) by air-zd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:43:14 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:42:37 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA34024;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:42:31 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:42:11 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA33854<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:42:11 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:42:11 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008020242.WAA33854@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2863<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2864</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 8:36:05 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 1 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2864<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
FFS3: Other<BR>
Re: sensors<BR>
Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
RE: FFS3: Other<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
Re: FFS3 Poll<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Other<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Navy Convention/Custom in Referring to Ships<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:22:07 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 02:16 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>> Well, radar isn't going to be terribly accurate (it's got a long wavelength <BR>
>> and has the same resolution limits as anything else) but it should be able <BR>
>> to give you range within a couple of meters and relative velocity forward <BR>
>> and backwards, which in combination with a passive sensor allows targeting.<BR>
<BR>
>You don't get ranges accurate to within meters at 10,000 to 100,000 km<BR>
>ranges. At 10,000 km, that'd require pulse timing accuracy to 1 part in<BR>
>10 million. Heck, the pulse duration is likely to be more than that!<BR>
<BR>
>Since a hex is 30,000 km, accuracy is going to be a lot rougher than<BR>
>"meters". <BR>
<BR>
Okay, here's the sort of questions I get asked by players, <BR>
<BR>
"The bogy is at 1.41 million km. How long is it and how high?"<BR>
<BR>
"Okay, we've detected the ship on that asteroid 330,000 km away, now<BR>
can we see whether the airlock is open or closed?"<BR>
<BR>
"I want to shoot at just the engineering section of that ship with a<BR>
range of 630,000 km, what do I have to roll?"<BR>
<BR>
What I need during play is a mechanic that allows me to answer those<BR>
questions quickly and easily.  What I need during design is a<BR>
sequence that will give me numbers that mechanic uses.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:08:16 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 05:48 PM,  Viktor Haag <vhaag@rim.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>What are 'register tons' and where is this measurement used?<BR>
<BR>
Hum, unless my memory is playing up...100 cubic feet and they are<BR>
used as a measure of volume for freight (and I think the vehicles<BR>
that carry them).  I think a lot of shipping is listed this way.<BR>
<BR>
>And how does one convert from displacement tons to cubic meters<BR>
>(incredibly ignorant question, I know...)?<BR>
<BR>
Depending on version of Traveller, I dton = 14 cubic meters, or 13.5<BR>
cubic meters.  I'm not really sure what the exact number is, and it<BR>
probably depends on the temperture of the liquid hydrogen used for<BR>
the standard measure anyway, but it should be somewhere between 13.5<BR>
and 14.<BR>
<BR>
As a cross-system check, in GURPS, 1 space = 500 cubic ft = 1 dton.<BR>
There are 35.31 cf per cubic meter, and 500 / 35.31 = 14.16 m.  On<BR>
the other hand, GURPS uses 2.5 cm per inch, so they are using 40<BR>
inches to a meter or 3.333 feet to a meter and 3.333^3 = 37.03<BR>
and 500/37.03 = 13.5.  Using GURPS we get both 13.5 and ~14. <g><BR>
<BR>
If you use 1.5 m squares for deckplans then 13.5 works best, as<BR>
1.5x1.5x3m high is be 1/2 dton. Most CT era deckplans used this.<BR>
<BR>
If you use 1 m squares for deckplans then use 14, as 1x1x3.5m high<BR>
is 1/4 dton.  TNE uses this and it's very close to the GURPS 1 yard<BR>
hexes.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:38:33 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: FFS3: Other<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 11:56 PM,  "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> I'd personally like to see more non military style fittings for<BR>
>starships.<BR>
>> Sure FFS2 has the Yet Other Facilities component (basically an<BR>
>> instruction to make it up yourself) but why cant we have more of the<BR>
>> civillian bits detailed.<BR>
<BR>
>Yeah, this is the section I was hemming and hawing about volounteering<BR>
>for, simply because very little has ever been done for it (and as the<BR>
>stateroom/sickbay power comment said) a fair bit of what has been made<BR>
>seems to have been ballparked.<BR>
<BR>
>Why not - I'll volounteer for 'Miscellanious Other Facilities', if you've<BR>
>no objections. Anybody else want to do this too? There's plenty of<BR>
>potential work.<BR>
<BR>
This should get you started:<BR>
<BR>
  Galley<BR>
  Dining hall<BR>
  Lounge<BR>
  Reading room<BR>
  Entertainment center<BR>
  Conference room<BR>
  Bar<BR>
  Workout room<BR>
  Gymnasium<BR>
  Court (grav/hand ball, tennis/squash/racquetball)<BR>
  Library<BR>
  Information Kiosk<BR>
  Reservation center<BR>
  Business office<BR>
  Waiting Room<BR>
  Learning Center (or console)<BR>
  Game room<BR>
  Greenhouse (arborarium)  <BR>
<BR>
Mixing, match and combining the above ought to be enough for starters. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:49:04 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: sensors<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 08:47 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>>> Since a hex is 30,000 km, accuracy is going to be a lot rougher than<BR>
>>> "meters".<BR>
<BR>
>> Hhhmmm, .1 microseconds or less is a pretty standard pulse duration<BR>
>> for most fire control RADARs today.....<BR>
<BR>
>Which means that at 1 hex, you can't determine distance closer than +/-<BR>
>3 meters. At 10 hexes, it's up to 30 meters.<BR>
<BR>
Well, if we want more reasonable weapons and targeting ranges we<BR>
*could* go to much shorter hexes with shorter turns, say 10 minutes<BR>
and 3,000 km.  The problem then shifts to the multi-million km PEMS<BR>
detection ranges of DSR.  ;-< <BR>
<BR>
Hey!  Here's a GURPS Traveller question.  What are the normal sensor<BR>
ranges for ships in GT? <BR>
<BR>
We'll shoot for a target of 12 (74%).  Basic Bridge is 38, we'll use<BR>
a skill of 16, and we're looking for a Size +8 ship (200 dton).  So,<BR>
at what range will we have a 12 for our roll?<BR>
<BR>
    38 + 16 + 8 - 12 = 50<BR>
    <BR>
And 50 is 21 to 30 hexes, and that is 330 kkm to 480 kkm.  That's a<BR>
*lot* shorter than DSR isn't it?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:41:37 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
<BR>
SD Mooney must have used some form of telepathy, virtually reflecting every<BR>
one of my thoughts on the matter, when he wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> 1) If you do all this radiator stuff etc and invalidate CT/MT<BR>
> starships then I'm not interested in FFS3 at all for Traveller the<BR>
> background.<BR>
><BR>
> 2) Deliberately designing the system to (a) screw big ships and (b)<BR>
> make fighters deadly is not the Traveller background I enjoy and<BR>
> risks the same level of alienation that TNE's changes with HePLAR<BR>
> resulted in. Big ships exist. Fighters are lousy in any Traveller<BR>
> combat system against warships. You undermine the background of the<BR>
> game the same way that GURPS vehicles is (ie GV2e says you can do<BR>
> this, so it must be so....)<BR>
><BR>
> 3) If you're going to go this far and create a new game technonology<BR>
> architecture that just happens to use say T5's system (maybe we<BR>
> should call it 'Wanderer') then I want to see Hamilton style bio and<BR>
> nano tech in, Adamist and Viodhawk warships etc.<BR>
><BR>
> 4) As to complexity. FFS2.5/FFS3 can be as complex as it likes but<BR>
> (1) the more complex it is the less use it will be to most people and<BR>
> (2) you need a modular, abstract and quick system designed from the<BR>
> core tech architecture no more complex than HG. QSDS1.5, although a<BR>
> laudable attempt at this, is *too* complex. I can design a decent HG<BR>
> ship in 10-15 minutes (30 tops). QSDS needed more than an hour. Make<BR>
> the surface area abstract (eg a hull has x points of surface, bays<BR>
> take y points). These could be rounded up approximations so you can<BR>
> optimise with FFS2.5/3...<BR>
><BR>
> 5) Traveller is a game, a background to play in. That is why it is<BR>
> still with us after 23 years. The sales of GT support this (it is a<BR>
> background not the rules) argument. The Technology Architecture<BR>
> underlies and underpins the background. Change it without thought and<BR>
> the whole thing comes crashing down. I can handle magitech in<BR>
> Traveller. If I want hard SF I play 2300 ; Traveller's core is a<BR>
> space opera background...<BR>
<BR>
What we have here is a group of people (that's us) with an understanding of<BR>
TL 7, maybe TL 8 technology, who are trying to *accurately* predict what<BR>
technology will be like about 8 TLs into the future! That's like asking a<BR>
stone-age person to accurately predict the technology which we have today.<BR>
He couldn't do it, and neither can we. This is why I'm not a big fan  of<BR>
these attempts at ultra-precise prediction of future technology.<BR>
<BR>
For me, the bottom line is that I really don't believe that tinkering with<BR>
the ship design system will make the game any better, and has some potential<BR>
to make it worse.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:52:52 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
on 8/1/00 6:15 PM, pengebos@nmsu.edu at pengebos@nmsu.edu wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
>> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
>>> I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
>>> carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval vessel.Can<BR>
>>> anyone think of an example?<BR>
> <BR>
> John Paul Jones, Amaerican Revolutionary War<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
The Bonhomme Richard (formerly the Duc de Duras) was a 40-gun frigate.<BR>
Crewed and rigged naval fashion.  Hardly a merchant.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 20:00:13 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: Other<BR>
<BR>
Add:<BR>
<BR>
	Shooting Range<BR>
		(note need for armored backstop.)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
This should get you started:<BR>
<BR>
  Galley<BR>
  Dining hall<BR>
  Lounge<BR>
  Reading room<BR>
  Entertainment center<BR>
  Conference room<BR>
  Bar<BR>
  Workout room<BR>
  Gymnasium<BR>
  Court (grav/hand ball, tennis/squash/racquetball)<BR>
  Library<BR>
  Information Kiosk<BR>
  Reservation center<BR>
  Business office<BR>
  Waiting Room<BR>
  Learning Center (or console)<BR>
  Game room<BR>
  Greenhouse (arborarium)  <BR>
<BR>
Mixing, match and combining the above ought to be enough for starters. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:39:46 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:56:05 -0700<BR>
>From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
><BR>
>> I'd personally like to see more non military style fittings for<BR>
>starships.<BR>
>> Sure FFS2 has the Yet Other Facilities component (basically an<BR>
>> instruction to make it up yourself) but why cant we have more of the<BR>
>> civillian bits detailed.<BR>
><BR>
>Yeah, this is the section I was hemming and hawing about volounteering for,<BR>
>simply because very little has ever been done for it (and as the<BR>
>stateroom/sickbay power comment said) a fair bit of what has been made<BR>
>seems to have been ballparked.<BR>
><BR>
>Why not - I'll volounteer for 'Miscellanious Other Facilities', if you've<BR>
>no objections. Anybody else want to do this too? There's plenty of<BR>
>potential work.<BR>
><BR>
>Nick<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Well I've already received my draft notice on this but your right there is<BR>
quite a lot to do. My initial thoughts on this are relating to two distinct<BR>
areas.<BR>
1st off we have staterooms. 4 DTons allocated but only 2 are for the actuall<BR>
stateroom the other 2 tons are declared as "common areas" in supplement 7.<BR>
Lots of room to flesh this out I think. 2nd is cargo handling etc. I don't<BR>
really<BR>
have a direction to go in for this one perhaps it requires more thought.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:02:16 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:33:44 +1000<BR>
>From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
>Hotmail??  I don't know, but on this subject for any Aussies on the list,<BR>
>you may be interested to know that Austar (a cable TV company now offereing<BR>
>Internet connections for approx. $1/hour) has an automated censoring sweep<BR>
>of personal/private e-mails.  They search out, shall we say, "dirty words"<BR>
>and send the post back telling you to clean it up as follows!<BR>
><BR>
>"This message has been found to contain words, that are deemed to be<BR>
>profane and unsuitable for business correspondence, by Austar Entertainment<BR>
>Pty Ltd.<BR>
><BR>
>Please remove any words that may be deemed offensive and resend the<BR>
message.<BR>
><BR>
>=========================================================<BR>
>This message was automatically generated by MailSweeper.<BR>
>========================================================="<BR>
<BR>
Well you can tell them from me that I think they are being a bunch<BR>
of fornicating excretory oriffices. (I always use big words when I<BR>
want to insult somebody it annoys them more when they finally figure<BR>
it out.)<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
>ObTrav:  This is thin, but I don't see an X-mail coming back to a sender<BR>
>with such a message!<BR>
<BR>
If they screen X-mail it's more likely to be for phrases like Norris is a<BR>
shnook<BR>
or somesuch than to attempt to regulate use of words describing bodily<BR>
functions. To begin with out of 11000 worlds some folks will find some<BR>
words (semprini) and phrases offensive while just a few planets over you<BR>
could be commiting a major faux pas in not using said words (semprini) or<BR>
phrases.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:46:54 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 Poll<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:15:55 +1000<BR>
>From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
><BR>
>> From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
>> Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
>> I'd personally like to see more non military style fittings for<BR>
starships.<BR>
>> Sure FFS2 has the Yet Other Facilities component (basically an<BR>
>> instruction to make it up yourself) but why cant we have more of the<BR>
>> civillian bits detailed.<BR>
>><BR>
><BR>
>Congratulations, Dave. You just won the contract as Chief Fitting Supplier.<BR>
<BR>
It never fails open your mouth to make a general statement and the<BR>
sergeant-major thinks you've volunteered.<BR>
<BR>
Okay I'll do it but next time it's somebody elses turn.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Ditzie would like a spa, and a sound system (thats small-s sound system,<BR>
not<BR>
>the riot control device from Famile Spofulam).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
And what kinds of sounds would Ma'm be most interested in reproducing?<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:03:48 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 07:23 PM,  pengebos@nmsu.edu said:<BR>
<BR>
>OK - repeat the ani-gearhead mantra:<BR>
>"Traveller is a roll-playing game;<BR>
>Traveller is a roll-playing game..."<BR>
<BR>
>:><BR>
<BR>
I'm usually more interested in roles than rolls. Make that *role*-playing and I'll agree with you. <g>  <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:04:33 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 07:25 PM,  pengebos@nmsu.edu said:<BR>
<BR>
>oops - thats "role-playing".  I slipped into gearhead mode myself there.<BR>
>I must purge myself in the nearest star  :><BR>
<BR>
LOL!  I just gave you a jab about your gaff too. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 03:09:07 -0700<BR>
From: "Delos" <delos@superior.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Other<BR>
<BR>
Hmmm...not sure what is covered by other headings, but I'm dumping my<BR>
add-ons here. Use at own risk. =)<BR>
<BR>
How about a vehicle repair bay (car sized) or Engineering shop?<BR>
Electonics Lab<BR>
Research Lab<BR>
VIP Suite/Captain's Quarters<BR>
Observation Deck<BR>
Brig/Prison<BR>
Secondary Command<BR>
Medical Trauma Bay<BR>
A.I. Damage Control (like the little DRDs on Farscape)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>   Galley<BR>
>   Dining hall<BR>
>   Lounge<BR>
>   Reading room<BR>
>   Entertainment center<BR>
>   Conference room<BR>
>   Bar<BR>
>   Workout room<BR>
>   Gymnasium<BR>
>   Court (grav/hand ball, tennis/squash/racquetball)<BR>
>   Library<BR>
>   Information Kiosk<BR>
>   Reservation center<BR>
>   Business office<BR>
>   Waiting Room<BR>
>   Learning Center (or console)<BR>
>   Game room<BR>
>   Greenhouse (arborarium)<BR>
><BR>
> Mixing, match and combining the above ought to be enough for starters. <g><BR>
><BR>
> Eris<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:14:09 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
> In<BR>
>  the 18/19th centuries, you had privateers, essentially armed,<BR>
>  privately-owned merchant ships (the sort of thing a group of PCs might<BR>
>  command), that could threaten naval vessels<BR>
<BR>
I must have missed that in my reading -- how many privateers could trade <BR>
broadsides with HMS Victory? Or even a 74? <BR>
<BR>
I suspect you are correct if you are contending that there were privateers <BR>
that could outrun anything they couldn't outshoot. <BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:16:15 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 09:06 PM,  eris@pcola.gulf.net said:<BR>
<BR>
Darn it!  Let me fix this...<BR>
<BR>
Use a divisor, something like this.<BR>
<BR>
At TL0 through TL4,  90%<BR>
At TL5+,  400/TL<BR>
<BR>
...and for the table minded...<BR>
<BR>
       Heat<BR>
 TL    Loss  <BR>
 0-4    90%<BR>
  5     80%<BR>
  6     67%<BR>
  7     57%<BR>
  8     50%<BR>
  9     44%<BR>
 10     40%<BR>
 11     36%<BR>
 12     33%<BR>
 13     31%<BR>
 14     29%<BR>
 15     27%<BR>
 16     25%<BR>
<BR>
Eris <BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:26:25 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 01:08:59 +0100<BR>
>From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
><BR>
>That's 3 years without big ships.<BR>
<BR>
Three years is still "years." I choose my words very carefully.<BR>
<BR>
>Then we have another 19 years with such [large] size ships being around.<BR>
<BR>
We also have Adventure 6: Expedition to Zhodane in 1981, The Traveller Book<BR>
and Adventure 7: Broadsword in 1982, The Traveller Adventure in 1983,<BR>
Beltstrike in 1984, all the Alien Modules (1984-1986), and Marc Miller's<BR>
Traveller (QSDS) and T4's Starships (SSDS) in 1996, all without any mention<BR>
of ships larger than 5,000 dtons*. Bulk Carriers are 1,000-3,000 dtons;<BR>
cruisers are consistently 1,000-2,000 dtons. <BR>
<BR>
There seems to be plenty of evidence that someone at GDW/Far Futures<BR>
considered ships larger than 5,000 dtons optional, to the point of<BR>
specifically excluding them from basic source material even after the<BR>
publication of HG (HG1 does have 1 Mdton ships, by the way).<BR>
<BR>
I accept the label of "heretic" because I know I won't win this argument.<BR>
There are too many people for whom the wargame aspects of the OTU are more<BR>
important than maintaining a broad stage for roleplaying -- and I include<BR>
everyone who ever thought the Rebellion was a good idea in this category,<BR>
by default.<BR>
<BR>
I prefer a Traveller where the character's actions matter, where heroic<BR>
stands and desperate measures might just succeed once in a while, and where<BR>
there is a "remote central government (referred to ... as the Imperium),<BR>
possed of great industrial and technological might, but *unable*, due to<BR>
the sheer distances and travel times involved, to exert total control<BR>
everywhere within its star-spanning realm." (Book 4, p. 1. Emphasis mine.)<BR>
<BR>
*Actually, AM2 (1984) does permit ships up to 6,000 dtons to the K'kree.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:27:07 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Navy Convention/Custom in Referring to Ships<BR>
<BR>
> worse yet *the* USS _Nimitz_ instantly marks you as a civilian ignorant of<BR>
> naval custom.  Don't ask me why they do this, but they do.<BR>
<BR>
This is true.  I have been chewed out, er, corrected, by a past CO for<BR>
making this error in a report.  Errors do slip through however.  I believe<BR>
that there are two reasons:<BR>
<BR>
As explained to me, a US Navy ship is regarded as having a distinct<BR>
personality.<BR>
<BR>
Ships are more than metal and equipment, they are very much personifications<BR>
of their crew.  When  referring t a ship, its name becomes a collective<BR>
expression of the crew's identity, both those aboard and those that came<BR>
before.  I believe that it is thus a form of respect, referring to the<BR>
ship's heritage.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 22:27:49 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 11:14 PM,  GDWGAMES@aol.com said:<BR>
<BR>
>> In<BR>
>>  the 18/19th centuries, you had privateers, essentially armed,<BR>
>>  privately-owned merchant ships (the sort of thing a group of PCs might<BR>
>>  command), that could threaten naval vessels<BR>
<BR>
>I must have missed that in my reading -- how many privateers could trade <BR>
>broadsides with HMS Victory? Or even a 74? <BR>
<BR>
>I suspect you are correct if you are contending that there were<BR>
>privateers  that could outrun anything they couldn't outshoot. <BR>
<BR>
Y'all might notice I didn't agree with the 18/19th century armed<BR>
merchants that could whip navy idea.  <g> OTOH, if you make it<BR>
16th/17th century, you *might* be able to make a case.<BR>
<BR>
I don't expect a situation where player class ships (100 to 400<BR>
dtons) could match up favorably with 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd rate<BR>
warships.  You don't need 500,000 dton warships to make that true,<BR>
though, a 40,000 dton ship is 100 times the size of PC ships!<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:33:37 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
USS MONTANA was a battleship class designed to kill YAMATO batleships.  The<BR>
class was never built, but would have had full displacement loads of 70,965<BR>
register tons (60,500 unloaded) and been the largest battleships ever built<BR>
at 921feet, 115 beam.  Units of the class were to have been named MONTANA<BR>
(BB-67)OHIO (BB-68), MAINE (BB-69), NEW HAMPSHIRE (BB-70), and LOUISIANA<BR>
(BB-71). max speed was to have been 28 knots and they would have mounted 12<BR>
16" 50's on 4 turrets of 3 each.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: <eris@pcola.gulf.net><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 5:28 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> On 08/01/00 at 04:59 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
><BR>
> >Ah. I suspect that he (like I) had forgotten that there *was* a ship<BR>
> >class of that name.<BR>
><BR>
> >Also, "ships the size of _Montana_" is *not* the same thing as "ships the<BR>
> >size of the _Montana_". The extra "the" changes it from a reference to<BR>
> >the *state* to a reference to something named *for* the state.<BR>
><BR>
> Well, if he had used quotes or underlines around Montana, then it<BR>
> would have been clear to me that he didn't mean the state.  OTOH, he<BR>
> *did* say he wanted ships that put small continents into shadow so I<BR>
> thought he meant something the size of the state.<BR>
><BR>
> Now about the ship, "Montana"...are you sure it is 500,000 *dtons*<BR>
> in volume?  That would be a 2,000,000 register ton ship, 7,000,000<BR>
> cubic meters...probably over 2 kilometers long.  Wow!  That's one<BR>
> BIG ship!<BR>
><BR>
> Eris<BR>
> --<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
> http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2864<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc05.mx.aol.com (rly-zc05.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.5]) by air-zc01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:36:05 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 01 Aug 2000 23:35:39 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id XAA36233;<BR>
	Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:35:35 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:35:32 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id XAA36195<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:35:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:35:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008020335.XAA36195@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2864<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2865</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/1/00 11:17:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2865<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
RE: navy<BR>
RE: Sensors<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
Re: FFS3 (was(unnecessarily long)now significantly shorter)<BR>
Re: Other<BR>
FFS3 thruster plates, magic and otherwise<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:51:51 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
on 8/1/00 8:27 PM, eris@pcola.gulf.net at eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Y'all might notice I didn't agree with the 18/19th century armed<BR>
> merchants that could whip navy idea.  <g> OTOH, if you make it<BR>
> 16th/17th century, you *might* be able to make a case.<BR>
> <BR>
> I don't expect a situation where player class ships (100 to 400<BR>
> dtons) could match up favorably with 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd rate<BR>
> warships.  You don't need 500,000 dton warships to make that true,<BR>
> though, a 40,000 dton ship is 100 times the size of PC ships!<BR>
> <BR>
> Eris<BR>
<BR>
One needn't even go that big with naval vessels.  Eliminate the need for<BR>
cargo, and remove the ceiling on cost and you can build a naval vessel of<BR>
relatively modest size that will out-class any merchant ship.  Say book 5<BR>
with heavy armor and lots of maneuver.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does one<BR>
need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The whole<BR>
idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid hydrogen,<BR>
when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:06:57 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >Then we have another 19 years with such [large] size ships being around.<BR>
><BR>
> We also have Adventure 6: Expedition to Zhodane in 1981, The<BR>
> Traveller Book<BR>
> and Adventure 7: Broadsword in 1982, The Traveller Adventure in 1983,<BR>
> Beltstrike in 1984, all the Alien Modules (1984-1986), and Marc Miller's<BR>
> Traveller (QSDS) and T4's Starships (SSDS) in 1996, all without<BR>
> any mention<BR>
> of ships larger than 5,000 dtons*. Bulk Carriers are 1,000-3,000 dtons;<BR>
> cruisers are consistently 1,000-2,000 dtons.<BR>
><BR>
> There seems to be plenty of evidence that someone at GDW/Far Futures<BR>
> considered ships larger than 5,000 dtons optional, to the point of<BR>
> specifically excluding them from basic source material even after the<BR>
> publication of HG (HG1 does have 1 Mdton ships, by the way).<BR>
<BR>
Since none of these sources are really of a military nature, it should be no<BR>
surprise that small ships are used. On the other hand, High Guard, which is<BR>
totally military in nature, is where all of the really big ships come from.<BR>
I would guess that the big ships are exculded from the basic source material<BR>
since it does not deal much with military operations, but rather with much<BR>
smaller operations.<BR>
<BR>
> I accept the label of "heretic" because I know I won't win this argument.<BR>
<BR>
In this context (i.e. the TML), a heretic appears to be someone whose<BR>
opinion differs from yours.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 21:22:31 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: navy<BR>
<BR>
IIRC that it popped up in CT (a scout courier was '100 tons') and when MT<BR>
came out it used Dton as a handwave to allow them to get things that massed<BR>
correctly (a Type-S is not going to mass in at 100 metric tons!) :)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Tod Glenn<BR>
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 8:52 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
on 8/1/00 8:27 PM, eris@pcola.gulf.net at eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> Y'all might notice I didn't agree with the 18/19th century armed<BR>
> merchants that could whip navy idea.  <g> OTOH, if you make it<BR>
> 16th/17th century, you *might* be able to make a case.<BR>
><BR>
> I don't expect a situation where player class ships (100 to 400<BR>
> dtons) could match up favorably with 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd rate<BR>
> warships.  You don't need 500,000 dton warships to make that true,<BR>
> though, a 40,000 dton ship is 100 times the size of PC ships!<BR>
><BR>
> Eris<BR>
<BR>
One needn't even go that big with naval vessels.  Eliminate the need for<BR>
cargo, and remove the ceiling on cost and you can build a naval vessel of<BR>
relatively modest size that will out-class any merchant ship.  Say book 5<BR>
with heavy armor and lots of maneuver.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does one<BR>
need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The whole<BR>
idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid hydrogen,<BR>
when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- --<BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 21:23:33 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
I have a really really quick awnser for you:<BR>
<BR>
No.<BR>
<BR>
It works wonders :)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 6:22 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 02:16 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>> Well, radar isn't going to be terribly accurate (it's got a long<BR>
wavelength<BR>
>> and has the same resolution limits as anything else) but it should be<BR>
able<BR>
>> to give you range within a couple of meters and relative velocity forward<BR>
>> and backwards, which in combination with a passive sensor allows<BR>
targeting.<BR>
<BR>
>You don't get ranges accurate to within meters at 10,000 to 100,000 km<BR>
>ranges. At 10,000 km, that'd require pulse timing accuracy to 1 part in<BR>
>10 million. Heck, the pulse duration is likely to be more than that!<BR>
<BR>
>Since a hex is 30,000 km, accuracy is going to be a lot rougher than<BR>
>"meters".<BR>
<BR>
Okay, here's the sort of questions I get asked by players,<BR>
<BR>
"The bogy is at 1.41 million km. How long is it and how high?"<BR>
<BR>
"Okay, we've detected the ship on that asteroid 330,000 km away, now<BR>
can we see whether the airlock is open or closed?"<BR>
<BR>
"I want to shoot at just the engineering section of that ship with a<BR>
range of 630,000 km, what do I have to roll?"<BR>
<BR>
What I need during play is a mechanic that allows me to answer those<BR>
questions quickly and easily.  What I need during design is a<BR>
sequence that will give me numbers that mechanic uses.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- --<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 21:03:29 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment and <BR>
> consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
><BR>
> Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?<BR>
<BR>
They should be possible, but a pain to design. At any given TL there<BR>
really should be an absolute max size, and it shouldn't be an arbitrary<BR>
figure, but rather a result of limits on structural strength or size of<BR>
systems.<BR>
<BR>
As an example, CT never said you couldn't have a Jump 6, 6 g ship.<BR>
Instead, when you tried to put one together, you found out you could<BR>
have 6g or J6, but not both, because the required components won't<BR>
*fit* into a hull. :-)<BR>
<BR>
> Possible arguments against large ships could include<BR>
>    *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
<BR>
Possible.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
<BR>
I like this one.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
<BR>
This one has it's merits too.<BR>
<BR>
>    *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
>         defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
<BR>
This could get *real* ugly in terms of "unintended consequences". I'd<BR>
say it's an absolute last resort.<BR>
<BR>
> Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how? <BR>
<BR>
Radiators can make fighters more viable, as they can heat a ship up<BR>
nicely. <BR>
<BR>
> Basically as above, plus<BR>
>    *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
<BR>
I don't see the need. Just point out that due to differences in the way<BR>
spacecraft and aircraft manuever, pilots of space fighters can handle<BR>
more gees (see Robert's post).<BR>
<BR>
As I recall the figures for *uncompensated* accelleration are:<BR>
<BR>
4 g indefinitely.<BR>
18 g is the limit for being able to work the controls<BR>
80+ g for emergency dodges (a second or less, not repeated often).<BR>
<BR>
So with 3 g of compensation that's 7 g, 21 g, and 83 g respectively.<BR>
<BR>
I'd make that last one the result of a "fry the drive" overload. And<BR>
the middle one is likely only doable in bursts. <BR>
<BR>
> How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  DSR-style sensors are<BR>
>    sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
>    system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a bit<BR>
>    less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either one<BR>
>    can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>    there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved pretty<BR>
>    easily too).<BR>
<BR>
I think stealth being hard doesn't really hurt playability, and helps<BR>
get across that space is *different*. That this isn't like air warfare<BR>
or any sort of naval warfare. <BR>
<BR>
> What is the relative importance of <BR>
<BR>
>    *Technical accuracy.<BR>
>    *Quickness of use.<BR>
>    *Completeness.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, I'm willing to sacrifice some accuracy, as long as we keep things<BR>
*consistent*. And as others have noted, we *don't* need to be ble to<BR>
design toasters, so completeness is relative. :-)<BR>
<BR>
And as to quickness of use, FF&S2 was intended to be a *detailed*<BR>
design system, with QSDS using modules designed using FF&S2 to build<BR>
things *fast*. At a penalty of being less optimized.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 21:36:11 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I have to say that I find cat-and-mouse electronic warfare a bit tedious.<BR>
> I prefer to believe that hiding starships (particularly large ones with<BR>
> big engines, powerful reactors, and lots of weapons) is *so* difficult<BR>
> that nobody really bothers trying very hard, except in very special cases.  <BR>
> It *should* be possible to build a "stealthy" starship, but it's going to<BR>
> be small, fragile, and probably pretty sluggish, too (at least when it's<BR>
> "in sneaky mode").  Ideal for scouting (and smuggling), but *not*<BR>
> combat-worthy.  Anything remotely resembling a battleship, however, should<BR>
> stick out like a sore thumb, and will be designed accordingly...<BR>
<BR>
Well, as I've pointed out many times, it's perfectly possible to jump<BR>
into the system at some random location out of weapons range of the<BR>
mainworld, and days away at max accel. <BR>
<BR>
That means you can make observations for a few days and jump out again<BR>
before they can get a ship anywhere near you. <BR>
<BR>
So I expect that there will be a lot of small, not at all stealthy<BR>
ships that can do two jumps without refueling and have *enormous*<BR>
folding sensor arrays. <BR>
<BR>
They'll be accompanied by a tender to within one parsec of the target,<BR>
and jump in, ready to jump out if they are unlucky enough to be close<BR>
to a picket ship (*real* unlikely, but fatal if it happens). Then they<BR>
deploy the array, gather data, then jump back to the tender. <BR>
<BR>
This will annoy the hell out of the system defenders, but there won't<BR>
be anything they can do about it. Sort of like observation balloons in<BR>
the late 1800s.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:08:27 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 14:51 -0400 1/8/00, Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
>>Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible <BR>
> arguments<BR>
>>against large ships could include<BR>
> <snip><BR>
>>Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
>>   *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
>>What is the relative importance of<BR>
>>   *Completeness.<BR>
>>   *Technical accuracy.<BR>
>>   *Quickness of use.<BR>
>>What other questions should we answer?<BR>
><BR>
> Okay some thoughts:<BR>
><BR>
> 1) If you do all this radiator stuff etc and invalidate CT/MT <BR>
> starships then I'm not interested in FFS3 at all for Traveller the <BR>
> background.<BR>
<BR>
Just keep in mind that most CT/MT ships are *already* invalid under<BR>
*all* design systems. Too many were thrown together without checking<BR>
the design rules in effect at the time.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:15:10 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Dumping Heat (was: Various Radiator Threads)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 11:47 PM -0800 7/31/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>> Why do yo have to stop there?  Why can't you use gravitic<BR>
>>> technology to create superheated plasmas?  Heck, you might<BR>
>>> be able to get all the way up just short of neuclear fusion.<BR>
>>> (In fact, if you choose Fe, it won't fuse and you can start<BR>
>>> storing energy in neuclear dissociations).<BR>
><BR>
>>Because the temp at which you dump the coolant is the max temp you can<BR>
>>use it to cool you to (well, close enough, their are tricks when<BR>
>>dealing with state changes). So the higher the temp of the coolant when<BR>
>>dumped, the higher the temp if whatever you are cooling.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Yes, you can pump heat into it (like a refrigerator does). But that<BR>
>>increases the amount of heat you need to get rid of drastically. You<BR>
>>rapidly hit the point of diminishing returns. And since there are<BR>
>>pretty hard limits on how much coolant you have, "pumping" heat into it<BR>
>>is a waste of scarce resources.<BR>
><BR>
> I don't follow.  You can use a heat pump.  Sure it get less<BR>
> efficient, but it does let you go beyond the number you mentioned.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, but I bet you a cookie that if you work through the numbers,<BR>
you'll find that extra *power* used by the heat pump (which winds up as<BR>
more waste heat to dispose of) is going to reach the point of<BR>
diminishing returns *fast*.<BR>
<BR>
Remember, all the non-weapons systems are dumping their waste heat at<BR>
less than 400 K. So pumping it up to several thousand is going to take<BR>
a lot of pumping.<BR>
<BR>
> If you can contain a high enough temperature, you can store<BR>
> more heat.<BR>
<BR>
But we aren't trying to *store* heat for later use. We are trying to<BR>
*get rid* of it. Which means that every bit of extra heat generated by<BR>
the pumping is adding to the problem.<BR>
<BR>
> Is it significant?  The drop in inefficiency is<BR>
> linear with temperature so I would say, that if you can get<BR>
> lot hotter than the limits you discuss, then the difference<BR>
> will be significant, but I haven't run through the numbers.<BR>
<BR>
Please do. And remember that all the energy used by the heat pump has<BR>
to be disposed of too.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:23:44 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> By the time of Traveller, they'll have had computers for as almost as<BR>
>> long as we've had *writing*. I think that they'll have licked most of<BR>
>> the "stupid design" type security problems. <BR>
><BR>
> Actually, due to scaling factors, I suspect that there will be stupid design<BR>
> errors in just about every bit of software.  However, finding those errors <BR>
> will be plenty difficult (if the OS for your computer is ten billion lines<BR>
> of code, there's going to be some unfound errors.  OTOH, searching through<BR>
> ten billion lines of code seeking security flaws isn't trivial either).<BR>
<BR>
Now you know why it takes centuries to go up a TL. The code review for<BR>
the software has to be finished... :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:25:06 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Montana & sensor computers.<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:33:44 +1000<BR>
>>From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> <snip><BR>
><BR>
>>Hotmail??  I don't know, but on this subject for any Aussies on the list,<BR>
>>you may be interested to know that Austar (a cable TV company now offereing<BR>
>>Internet connections for approx. $1/hour) has an automated censoring sweep<BR>
>>of personal/private e-mails.  They search out, shall we say, "dirty words"<BR>
>>and send the post back telling you to clean it up as follows!<BR>
>><BR>
>>"This message has been found to contain words, that are deemed to be<BR>
>>profane and unsuitable for business correspondence, by Austar Entertainment<BR>
>>Pty Ltd.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Please remove any words that may be deemed offensive and resend the<BR>
> message.<BR>
>><BR>
>>=========================================================<BR>
>>This message was automatically generated by MailSweeper.<BR>
>>========================================================="<BR>
><BR>
> Well you can tell them from me that I think they are being a bunch<BR>
> of fornicating excretory oriffices. (I always use big words when I<BR>
> want to insult somebody it annoys them more when they finally figure<BR>
> it out.)<BR>
<BR>
I wonder if their software is dumb enough to trigger on "Scunthorpe" (a<BR>
village in England) the way AOL's automated filters did?<BR>
<BR>
> <snip><BR>
><BR>
>>ObTrav:  This is thin, but I don't see an X-mail coming back to a sender<BR>
>>with such a message!<BR>
><BR>
> If they screen X-mail it's more likely to be for phrases like Norris is a<BR>
> shnook<BR>
> or somesuch than to attempt to regulate use of words describing bodily<BR>
> functions. To begin with out of 11000 worlds some folks will find some<BR>
> words (semprini) and phrases offensive while just a few planets over you<BR>
> could be commiting a major faux pas in not using said words (semprini) or<BR>
> phrases.<BR>
<BR>
Also, screening private email this way is a transient phenomenon.<BR>
Unless the "censor everything" folks win out, people are going to start<BR>
complaining *loudly* about having their private mail read.<BR>
<BR>
Matter of fact, in the US, I could make a damn good case for anyone<BR>
doing this sort of thing being in violation of the Electronic<BR>
Communications Privacy Act (as co-sysop of a BBS, I'm *real* familiar<BR>
with this law). <BR>
<BR>
And in damn near *all* jurisdictions, this sort of monitoring *will*<BR>
backfire on the ISP. You see, by doing *any* monitoring, they make<BR>
themselves responsible for the content of *everything* that goes thru<BR>
them. The law doesn't care that it's impossible to monitor everything.<BR>
Making an attempt to monitor makes you legally responsible for *all*<BR>
the trafiic. Failure of an automated filter to catch something doesn't<BR>
absolve you. If you monitor at all, you are 100% responsible for<BR>
anything you fail to catch. <BR>
<BR>
But if you don't monitor stuff, then you are only liable for things<BR>
once your attention is called to them. Or if you stumble over them in<BR>
the course of doing maintenance (say a damaged message gets routed to<BR>
you by the software for manual processing). <BR>
<BR>
Guess which approach *we* use? <g><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:36:18 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 2:23 AM -0800 8/1/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>  > The energy of a state doesn't depend on the path you take to<BR>
>>  > get to that state.  If you emit x photons of a certain energy,<BR>
>>  > the result is the same regardless of how you emit them....<BR>
>><BR>
>>Nope! Very much *un*-true. Emitting low entropy radiation requires<BR>
>>creation of a *lot* of *high* entropy heat in the system doing the<BR>
>>emitting. Far more than the amount of low-entropy energy emitted.<BR>
>><BR>
>>In other words, the lower the entropy of the emitted radiation, the<BR>
>>hotter the *system* doing the emitting gets.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Allowing emission of *thermal* spectrum *doesn't* generate more<BR>
>>internal heat than is carried away (as long as your radiator isn't<BR>
>>hotter than the rest of the system).<BR>
>><BR>
>>Remember, you are dealing with a system that is *closed* except for<BR>
>>the emitted radiation.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Emitting a non-thermal spectrum requires converting heat to "useful"<BR>
>>energy. Useful in the sense that energy can be extracted by turning it<BR>
>>back into heat.<BR>
><BR>
> OK, lets step back. I'm trying to take these points one at<BR>
> a time.  The point I was addressing in my previous post<BR>
> is whether essentially you have to use black body emission.<BR>
> If you emit the same radiation as a black body, but you<BR>
> use another process, are the thermodynamics the same?<BR>
<BR>
No. Which is my point. The *energy* emitted is the same. the *entropy*<BR>
isn't. <BR>
<BR>
> Now it _is_ a law of thermodynamics any state is the same,<BR>
> no matter how you got there.  So if you can emit radiation,<BR>
> of any entropy, it doesn't matter how you emit it.  Whether<BR>
> it is by radiator fins or by some currently unknown higher<BR>
> TL technology.<BR>
<BR>
You keep overlooking the fact that to emit that low entropy radiation,<BR>
you have to *raise* the entropy of the system more than if you emitted<BR>
it at high entropy. <BR>
<BR>
You are *assuming* that the states are the same to "prove" that they<BR>
are the same. <BR>
<BR>
They may be emitting the same amount of energy, but the entropy of<BR>
the emitting system is *very* different.<BR>
<BR>
If you were right, then you've got a perpetual motion machine, because<BR>
the low entropy radiation could be used to do work inside the system. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:44:15 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
>> Also, dampers can allow "burning" of non-fissionables. Accelerated beta<BR>
>> or alpha decay can produce heat, or, possibly even be used for direct<BR>
>> electric generation.<BR>
><BR>
> I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that nuclear dampers had no effect on<BR>
> stable isotopes (e.g. lead 208, carbon 12).<BR>
<BR>
In "reality" they would. But that's a can of worms *nobody* wants to<BR>
open. <BR>
<BR>
> For convenience, I'd lump non-fissionable radioisotopes in the<BR>
> 'radioactives' basket at 75Cr/kg.<BR>
<BR>
> RTGs rely on alpha/beta decay for power generation.<BR>
<BR>
Yep, and a damper can accelerate this (that's how they get used to<BR>
decontaminate areas).<BR>
<BR>
> Using decay products to produce DC current via travelling wave<BR>
> conversion to microwaves is eminently reasonable. The technology is well<BR>
> described in the accelerator literature, and is being suggested for use<BR>
> in fusion plants.<BR>
<BR>
Great. And being able to use a damper to accelerate decay means that<BR>
(up to the limit of the damper) you can maintain a *steady* power<BR>
output. <BR>
<BR>
Also, since its not *too* difficult to seperate isotopes from fission<BR>
waste products (and from old fission and fusion reactors), especially<BR>
at higher TLs, I expect that reprocessing spent fuel from fission<BR>
reactors will produce lots of isotopes for use in RTGs and damper<BR>
assisted RTGs. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:05:05 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 (was(unnecessarily long)now significantly shorter)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 19:41:37 -0700<BR>
>From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>For me, the bottom line is that I really don't believe that tinkering with<BR>
>the ship design system will make the game any better, and has some<BR>
potential<BR>
>to make it worse.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
From my point of view working out some of the kinks in the tech details<BR>
can be very usefull. I do agree to a certain extent that I feel the results<BR>
should<BR>
back check to High Guard to a reasonable extent. Not in everything, mind<BR>
you,<BR>
but an FFS3 AHL should aproximate to an HG AHL.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:10:20 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Other<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 03:09:07 -0700<BR>
>From: "Delos" <delos@superior.net><BR>
><BR>
>Hmmm...not sure what is covered by other headings, but I'm dumping my<BR>
>add-ons here. Use at own risk. =)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
Both lists noted.<BR>
Some of this stuff is already figured in FFS2<BR>
But I'll get crackin on the rest.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:16:49 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 thruster plates, magic and otherwise<BR>
<BR>
OK, this is all playing around with numbers at the moment.<BR>
<BR>
These are our current FFS2 thruster plates ...<BR>
<BR>
400 kN per m3, 2 t/m3, KCr 250/m3, 0.04 m2/m3 and 1 MW per m3.<BR>
<BR>
To re-state it in terms of mega-newtons rather than m3 ...<BR>
<BR>
2.5 m3 per MN, MCr 1 per MN, 0.1 m2 per MN and 2.5 MW per MN.<BR>
<BR>
Hey, they arent particularily plate-like (40cm surface area per cubic<BR>
meter). More like 'thruster boxes' really.<BR>
<BR>
Version One "Plate Thrusters". Built to be more surface-area intensive ...<BR>
just multiply the surface area requirement by 10.<BR>
<BR>
2.5 m3 per MN, MCr 1 per MN, 1.0 m2 per MN and 2.5 MW per MN.<BR>
<BR>
A 60 kton Wedge (about the size of an AHL) has 65 440 m2 surface area, and<BR>
is probably around 600 000 tons mass.<BR>
<BR>
To pull 5 gees, we need 30 giganewtons, or 3 000 m3 of thruster plates, or<BR>
30 000 m2 of plate thrusters.<BR>
<BR>
The power requirements for either are 75 gigawatts (pretty similar to the<BR>
62.5-odd gigawatts you need to keep a jump-4 60 kton ship in jumpspace).<BR>
<BR>
If we have non-magic thrusters, radiators that get rid of 1 MW per m2, and<BR>
power generation == radiator capacity then pass the pizza, because the ship<BR>
bakes once it cranks the power plant up to full bore, whether it's using<BR>
thruster plates or plate thrusters.<BR>
<BR>
If we have magic thrusters and radiators that get rid of 1 MW per m2, then<BR>
the ship can get rid of up to 62 GW with thruster plates, or 35 GW with<BR>
plate thrusters.<BR>
<BR>
For reference, under FFS2, a 30 GW TL 12 fusion plant is roughly 15 000 m3<BR>
(1100 dtons).<BR>
<BR>
If we have non-magic thrusters but only have to deal with the heat from the<BR>
power plant, and the power plant is 80% efficient, then for a 100 GW<BR>
(roughly 5% of ship size at about 3000 dtons) power plant we need to get rid<BR>
of 20 GW of heat, which will need about a third of the ship's surface area.<BR>
This means with plate thrusters we are running out of surface area, but<BR>
still have some left.<BR>
<BR>
Side note at this point ... do we make FFS3 meson screens are surface-area<BR>
intensive ?<BR>
<BR>
Version 2 "High Performance Plate Thrusters" (HPPTs)<BR>
<BR>
4000 kN/m3, 1t/m3, MCr1/m3, 16 m2/m3, 6 MW/m3, or<BR>
<BR>
0.25 m3/MN, 0.25 t/MN, 0.25 MCR/MN, 4 m2/MN, 1.5 MW/MN<BR>
<BR>
Note these are smaller, lighter, cheaper and less power-intensive than<BR>
either Thruster Plates or Plate Thrusters. However, they do have a greater<BR>
area requirement.<BR>
<BR>
Now, an AHL-sized Wedge cant use HPPTs, as they would use 120 000 m2 for the<BR>
required 30 giganewtons.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, lets look at a 5 gee 1000 dton Wedge (4270 m2, assumed<BR>
mass 10 000t, so it's 500 MN).<BR>
<BR>
50 m2 thruster plates, 500 m2 plate thrusters (MCr 500, 1.25 GW) or 2000 m2<BR>
plate thrusters (MCr 125, 0.75 GW).<BR>
<BR>
Allowing HPPTs and Plate Thrusters (magic or otherwise) is a better<BR>
solution, I think.<BR>
<BR>
I would also imagine that plate thrusters and HPPTs would improve as TLs go<BR>
up. If you make them magic, then they can be worthwhile when less effective<BR>
than other thrust systems.<BR>
<BR>
I also think I prefer magic thrusters to heat only coming waste heat from<BR>
the power plant. It seems to give roughly similar results, and as I've said,<BR>
I prefer having a physics-friendly general rule ("You have to get rid of all<BR>
the energy you produce") with an exception ("Thruster plates and jump drives<BR>
get rid of all the energy you pour into them").<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2865<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (rly-zd02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.226]) by air-zd02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 02:17:33 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 02:17:16 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id CAA42271;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:17:13 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:17:05 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id CAA42227<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:17:05 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:17:05 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008020617.CAA42227@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2865<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2866</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 3:05:25 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2866<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Radical Radiator Idea<BR>
Soliton-pulse lasers<BR>
Re: dtons<BR>
Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
FFS3 rules request<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
RE: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
RE: [TNFPLAYERS] Re: Modern Mercury...<BR>
FFS3 More thinking about thrusters<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Recall: FFS3: POLL<BR>
RE:Enormous folding sensor arrays(was FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Big Ship Questions<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Montana Class<BR>
Re: Tons and tons (was Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:14:50 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Grant <neo@total.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Radical Radiator Idea<BR>
<BR>
"Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au> sez,<BR>
<BR>
>An interesting idea from rec.arts.sf.science :-<BR>
>>  Lance Purple and Geoffrey Landis have a much more plausible sounding<BR>
>  > idea for an advanced radiator technology: an axion/neutrino radiator.<BR>
>  > http://deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=644037638<BR>
>  >  > If you had technology to efficiently create weakly-interacting particles<BR>
>>   > (neutrinos, axions, whatever) that carried away heat energy, could your<BR>
>>   > ship be refrigerated that way?<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  >  Yes.  Essentially, you're suggesting a radiator that's "black" <BR>
>in some different radiation, and<BR>
>  >  then radiating in that spectrum in addition to the <BR>
>electromagnetic.  Ordinary matter interacts<BR>
>  >  only weakly with weakly interacting particles, so matter is <BR>
>"transparent" as far as using<BR>
>>   weak radiation goes, but if you could make something black to <BR>
>>weak nuclear force<BR>
>>   particles, it could radiate.  In this case, if you're black to <BR>
>>one type of particle, it would<BR>
>>   radiate twice as much energy as a<BR>
>   (electromagnetic) "black" radiator.<BR>
<BR>
Robert -- thanks for posting this, it's just the sort of handwave I <BR>
was looking for.  I'll definitely put axion radiators into my game, <BR>
because they sound like the sort of technology that should be <BR>
available at TTL11+, and seem fairly plausible.  If Geoff Landis <BR>
thinks it's kosher, that's good enough for me!<BR>
<BR>
I'll use axion radiators and not neutrinos, because of course there <BR>
are neutrino detectors in Traveller -- I want to make my ships *less* <BR>
detectable, not *more* -- and as far as I'm aware there's no mention <BR>
of axion detectors anywhere in canon ;)<BR>
<BR>
Although I have to chuckle at this statement of Geoff's:  "Ordinary <BR>
matter interacts only weakly with weakly interacting particles" -- <BR>
gee, no guff?<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
<BR>
  +GMG+<BR>
- -- <BR>
    ------------------------Glenn Grant------------------------<BR>
                          <neo@total.net><BR>
         "That which does not kill us makes us stranger."<BR>
                       -- Trevor Goodchild <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:24:19 -0400<BR>
From: Glenn Grant <neo@total.net><BR>
Subject: Soliton-pulse lasers<BR>
<BR>
A while back, somebody posted an idea that could make grav-focussing <BR>
of lasers obsolete: soliton-pulse lasers.  I should have saved the <BR>
post.  Who thought this up?<BR>
<BR>
The idea, as I understand it, was that, if a laser could emit a <BR>
soliton wave-pulse, it would resist spreading and remain focussed <BR>
over indefinite distances.<BR>
<BR>
I didn't notice any responses to this idea -- which sounds intriguing <BR>
to me, and infinitely more plausible than the rather lame gravitic <BR>
focussing handwave.  Did anyone have an informed opinions on it?<BR>
<BR>
Best,<BR>
<BR>
  + GMG +<BR>
- -- <BR>
    ------------------------Glenn Grant------------------------<BR>
                          <neo@total.net><BR>
       "I never travel without my diary. One should always<BR>
       have something sensational to read." -- Oscar Wilde<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:28:56 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: dtons<BR>
<BR>
> Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 20:51:51 -0700<BR>
> From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: navy<BR>
> BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does<BR>
one<BR>
> need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
> calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The<BR>
whole<BR>
> idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid hydrogen,<BR>
> when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
<BR>
It's actually cubic meters that's a TNE invention *grin* Book 2, High Guard<BR>
and MT all worked in dtons, and kinda assumed mass to be about 10 tons to<BR>
the dton.<BR>
<BR>
I find dtons to be easier to think in ... 'about 150 dtons worth of particle<BR>
accelerator' means more to me than 'about a 2000 m3 particle accelerator'.<BR>
<BR>
But thats just me ...<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:42:11 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
- --- Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > Your route, while shorter, takes longer to get there. 8 jumps as <BR>
> > opposed to seven. That is also a factor. Time is money. Taking <BR>
> > the jump three would have made them the same, still. Both your<BR>
> route <BR>
> > and mine there are viable, if one accepts that trade though zones <BR>
> > listed as dangerous like Amber zones, would have any real through <BR>
> > traffic. I tend to agree with Ian that insurance and factors along <BR>
> > that route would be high enough to keep a good portion of the <BR>
> > corps from "trading through". <BR>
> <BR>
> Well, the main reason I route through Porozlo is that its probably a<BR>
> very cheap<BR>
> route, because the two worlds are on a super route with each other,<BR>
> and Porozlo probably has significant trade of its own going to Efate.<BR>
>  If you want maximum speed, go with<BR>
> Rhylanor-Fulacin-Keanou-Yori-Roup-Alell-Efate in 6 weeks (this has<BR>
> the advantage that all but the Alell-Efate jump is J3, minimizing<BR>
> transshipping).<BR>
<BR>
While true, it does add a jump to Rhylanor traffic. I agree about <BR>
the shortest route but that violates my understanding of the use on <BR>
Amber zones. I realize your understanding is different.<BR>
 <BR>
> > Also, a difference of 19 to 16 makes no difference in an economic<BR>
> > sense.<BR>
><BR>
> Actually, it does make a difference (of about 15%), the difference<BR>
> just falls below the resolution of the economic system.<BR>
<BR>
I see what you are saying and in principle agree. However, as I am <BR>
making the routes based on the economic system that makes my comment <BR>
a valid one. <BR>
 <BR>
>  To make a difference would require an alternate route the <BR>
> > is 9 pc or shorter. So, the route I chose would count as a viable<BR>
> > bypass to the "dangerous Amber zone". It would almost make more <BR>
> > sense if instead of distance, it were the number of jumps that <BR>
> > mattered more.<BR>
> <BR>
> Number of jumps matters more if its impractical to shift cargo to a<BR>
> lower-jump ship for that leg (which might be a problem with the<BR>
> Mourghes-Enope link on your route).  In general, minor differences in<BR>
> speed are not particularly important for tasks which take months<BR>
> anyway.<BR>
<BR>
I think you are wrong on that one. With factors being roughly equal, <BR>
saving a week in a two month run means a company gets in an extra <BR>
run and a half. That is why cargo skippers have tight schedules. I <BR>
agree that the j-2 in my path is a kink but I doubt you will find <BR>
many perfect setups. Sometimes the reality of planitary layout <BR>
messes with our desires to have things be perfect. Even with the <BR>
flaws mentioned, I still stick by the choices there.<BR>
<BR>
Terry <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:37:40 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 rules request<BR>
<BR>
The response so far has been great.<BR>
<BR>
But I would like people to send email seperatly to me of any actual rules<BR>
they are proposing.<BR>
<BR>
I do digest emails, and it would be easier for me if I got ccs of suggested<BR>
rules, or rules-as-amended. Please use FFS3 in the title. Thanks.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:48:59 +0400<BR>
From: "Andrew Long" <dyrnwynn@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 at 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT), Anthony Jackson<BR>
<ajackson@molly.iii.com> posted:-<BR>
><BR>
> Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment<BR>
and consider<BR>
> what we want from FFS3. So, some questions:<BR>
><BR>
On the whole, what I would LIKE to see from FFS3 and what I would ACCEPT are<BR>
not necessarily the same thing. What I want is for it to be MORE than the<BR>
Imperial architecture. For example, I'd like to be able to build ships for<BR>
David Weber's Napole^h^h^h^h^h^hHonor Harrington universe, or the Lady<BR>
Macbeth from Peter Hamilton's Night's Dawn universe (or even 2300's<BR>
Talleyrand class BBs.) Not at the same time, but in different TU's. This,<BR>
IIRC, is what the original FF&S claimed to be.<BR>
<BR>
I want it to be accessible to both wargamers and role-players. Gearheads can<BR>
build the specialised modules that Role-players can munge into standard<BR>
ships, or the HBBs that the wargamers can munge into fleets.<BR>
<BR>
However, let's be realistic. Both previous versions of FF&S were limited in<BR>
scope by financial constraints. The proposed new version will be limited not<BR>
by money, (after all, the people who have been<BR>
dragooned^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hvolunteered to help are doing this out<BR>
of love, aren't they), but by timescales (how long are we prepared to wait<BR>
for a new version?)<BR>
<BR>
So what would I ACCEPT?<BR>
<BR>
A self-consistent, realistic technology for the OTU, as a FIRST STEP, with<BR>
provision for ATUs* as expansion modules. And let's not throw the baby out<BR>
with the bathwater. A lot of people have already posted SC-R techs to the<BR>
list. Let's hold on to them if we can.<BR>
><BR>
> Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible<BR>
arguments<BR>
> against large ships could include<BR>
>    *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
>    *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
>    *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
>    *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
>     defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
><BR>
I think the easiest way to discourage HBBs** is financial. Make them too<BR>
expensive for anything but a large, strong, (semi-)centralised Imperium to<BR>
build. However, I don't want to discourage them. I'm both a wargamer AND a<BR>
role-player. I like to be able to play as (say) sector Admiral, moving large<BR>
fleets of large ships around. I also like to play on a smaller stage, moving<BR>
cargoes from world to world in my (heavily modified) Beowulf-class<BR>
free-trader.<BR>
><BR>
> Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
>    *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
><BR>
What do we want fighters to do? If we want them to act like a modern day<BR>
Carrier Air Wing (alpha strikes at a distance), then we need to change the<BR>
propulsion rules (out of all recognition?) Such fighters need to be able to<BR>
travel long distances from their carriers in relatively short spaces of<BR>
time. To do this they need humongous accelerations.<BR>
<BR>
If we don't want to change the propulsion rules, they have to much shorter<BR>
ranged objects, essentially very small battle riders (or customs boats or<BR>
pickets or...)<BR>
><BR>
> How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  DSR-style sensors are<BR>
>    sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
>    system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a<BR>
bit<BR>
>    less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either<BR>
one<BR>
>    can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>    there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved<BR>
pretty<BR>
>    easily too).<BR>
><BR>
Keep the DSR Keep the DSR. Keep the DSR. (SC-R)<BR>
<BR>
Andy<BR>
<BR>
========<BR>
* ATU's Alternate Traveller Universes<BR>
** HBBs Honking Big Battleships<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 02:50:07 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 09:06 PM,  Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> I accept the label of "heretic" because I know I won't win this argument.<BR>
<BR>
>In this context (i.e. the TML), a heretic appears to be someone whose<BR>
>opinion differs from yours.<BR>
<BR>
Yep, I've often said that, and because very few of us agree on<BR>
everything Traveller we're all heretics. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:26:37 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin wrote :<BR>
> Knowing that many of us are SF fen, I would have trouble believing that<BR>
> listmembers - especially the active ones - would not have read at least<BR>
> some of Dr. Linebarger's writings.  How well do you feel they fit into<BR>
> Traveller?  Would the Scanners and Habermen (from 'Scanners Live In Vain')<BR>
> be a possible development somewhere in Charted Space?  What about the<BR>
> beastmen (catmen, dogmen, bullmen - some examples in 'The Ballad of Lost<BR>
> C'mell' and 'Alpha Ralpha Boulevard')?  A government that looks like the<BR>
> Instrumentality of Mankind?  Thoughts?  Comments?  Flames (keep 'em<BR>
> polite!)?  Am I totally off my nut?<BR>
<BR>
I think the Instrumentality would be another possible take on SolSec.<BR>
After all, they did uplift dolphins and chimps.<BR>
<BR>
I happen to really like "C'mell" and "The Crime & Glory of Commander<BR>
Suzdal", but the tech involved is a bit high in the bio sciences to fit into<BR>
the classic Traveller milieu.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:36:18 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: [TNFPLAYERS] Re: Modern Mercury...<BR>
<BR>
> Robert Houghton wrote :<BR>
> when I say off the shelf...i mean readily available aerospace tech<BR>
> stuff...not "we need a seat...here's a couple of million dollars, build<BR>
> *one*"...but "the pilots seat in the F-16 looks okay, we'll take it"...<BR>
><BR>
> I was also thinking of booster...what is available in a compact<BR>
> (semi-)portable LF rocket that would get a one-man capsule into orbit?<BR>
><BR>
> The thing is I want to build and ride the sucker....<BR>
<BR>
There is a Sean McMullen story (published in Interzone, I think) where a<BR>
commercial group launches a Mars expedition based on "off-the shelf"<BR>
compnents. The story is based around the extremely embarrassed science and<BR>
tech advisor to the US president explaining how they did it.<BR>
<BR>
Very plausible.<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:19:00 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 More thinking about thrusters<BR>
<BR>
Thought number one : Thrusters are directional, but you can build extra<BR>
thrust axes (axisies ? axii ? whatever) into a ship, for the price of the<BR>
structural factor being squared per extra direction.<BR>
<BR>
Example : Our theoretical 60 000 dton AHL size ship wants three sets of 4<BR>
gee thrusters, one for each of x, y and z.<BR>
<BR>
This means their structural factor is actually 3*(4*4), or 48. For a 60 000t<BR>
ship made of superdense, this is 3420*48/15, or 781 dtons.<BR>
<BR>
To make this viable we would need to radically cut the cost and<BR>
effectiveness of thrusters. What I'm thinking of is a ship with a 4g main<BR>
thruster, but that can go 2g in other directions.<BR>
<BR>
Thought number two : Thrusters are completely omni-directional at TL11, and<BR>
get the ability to 'turn' at higher TLs. Maybe 10 degrees per TL.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:30:53 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Andrew Long [mailto:dyrnwynn@hotmail.com]<BR>
Sent: 02 August 2000 08:49<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 at 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT), Anthony Jackson<BR>
<ajackson@molly.iii.com> posted:-<BR>
><BR>
> Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment<BR>
and consider<BR>
> what we want from FFS3. So, some questions:<BR>
><BR>
On the whole, what I would LIKE to see from FFS3 and what I would ACCEPT are<BR>
not necessarily the same thing. What I want is for it to be MORE than the<BR>
Imperial architecture. For example, I'd like to be able to build ships for<BR>
David Weber's Napole^h^h^h^h^h^hHonor Harrington universe, or the Lady<BR>
Macbeth from Peter Hamilton's Night's Dawn universe (or even 2300's<BR>
Talleyrand class BBs.) Not at the same time, but in different TU's. This,<BR>
IIRC, is what the original FF&S claimed to be.<BR>
<BR>
I want it to be accessible to both wargamers and role-players. Gearheads can<BR>
build the specialised modules that Role-players can munge into standard<BR>
ships, or the HBBs that the wargamers can munge into fleets.<BR>
<BR>
However, let's be realistic. Both previous versions of FF&S were limited in<BR>
scope by financial constraints. The proposed new version will be limited not<BR>
by money, (after all, the people who have been<BR>
dragooned^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^hvolunteered to help are doing this out<BR>
of love, aren't they), but by timescales (how long are we prepared to wait<BR>
for a new version?)<BR>
<BR>
So what would I ACCEPT?<BR>
<BR>
A self-consistent, realistic technology for the OTU, as a FIRST STEP, with<BR>
provision for ATUs* as expansion modules. And let's not throw the baby out<BR>
with the bathwater. A lot of people have already posted SC-R techs to the<BR>
list. Let's hold on to them if we can.<BR>
><BR>
> Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible<BR>
arguments<BR>
> against large ships could include<BR>
>    *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
>    *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
>    *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
>    *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
>     defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
><BR>
I think the easiest way to discourage HBBs** is financial. Make them too<BR>
expensive for anything but a large, strong, (semi-)centralised Imperium to<BR>
build. However, I don't want to discourage them. I'm both a wargamer AND a<BR>
role-player. I like to be able to play as (say) sector Admiral, moving large<BR>
fleets of large ships around. I also like to play on a smaller stage, moving<BR>
cargoes from world to world in my (heavily modified) Beowulf-class<BR>
free-trader.<BR>
><BR>
> Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
>    *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
><BR>
What do we want fighters to do? If we want them to act like a modern day<BR>
Carrier Air Wing (alpha strikes at a distance), then we need to change the<BR>
propulsion rules (out of all recognition?) Such fighters need to be able to<BR>
travel long distances from their carriers in relatively short spaces of<BR>
time. To do this they need humongous accelerations.<BR>
<BR>
If we don't want to change the propulsion rules, they have to much shorter<BR>
ranged objects, essentially very small battle riders (or customs boats or<BR>
pickets or...)<BR>
><BR>
> How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  DSR-style sensors are<BR>
>    sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
>    system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a<BR>
bit<BR>
>    less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either<BR>
one<BR>
>    can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>    there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved<BR>
pretty<BR>
>    easily too).<BR>
><BR>
Keep the DSR Keep the DSR. Keep the DSR. (SC-R)<BR>
<BR>
Andy<BR>
<BR>
========<BR>
* ATU's Alternate Traveller Universes<BR>
** HBBs Honking Big Battleships<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:31:31 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: Recall: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Jones, Dean would like to recall the message, "FFS3: POLL".<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:40:47 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE:Enormous folding sensor arrays(was FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
<<<So I expect that there will be a lot of small, not at all stealthy<BR>
ships that can do two jumps without refueling and have *enormous*<BR>
folding sensor arrays. <BR>
<BR>
They'll be accompanied by a tender to within one parsec of the target,<BR>
and jump in, ready to jump out if they are unlucky enough to be close<BR>
to a picket ship (*real* unlikely, but fatal if it happens). Then they<BR>
deploy the array, gather data, then jump back to the tender. >>><BR>
<BR>
I you've got a whole lot of little ships with big folding arrays, you could<BR>
even network them together and make a great big synthetic aperture sensor.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 02:45:30 -0700<BR>
From: sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
OK-<BR>
<BR>
The biggest RW ship anyone has mentioned is the Montana, which <BR>
weighs in at around 8,000 dtons.  How big (in dtons) is the largest <BR>
aircraft carrier anyone has ever built?  <BR>
<BR>
On possible suggestion.  How about we take that figure, up it by <BR>
maybe a factor of 5 and say that is the largest normal ship anyone <BR>
is ever likely to see in the Imperium.  Sure, there may be a few <BR>
100,000+ dton monsters out there, but they are likely only used for <BR>
really serious full scale war, which means that few folks outside of <BR>
the fringes of the Spinward Marches (and their crews) have ever <BR>
seen one in anything other than a holo or holovid.  <BR>
<BR>
For the vast majority of planetary uprisings, pirates, and similar <BR>
problems 1-5,000 dtons is likely to do just fine.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
<BR>
  <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:42:25 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
<<Why not - I'll volounteer for 'Miscellanious Other Facilities', if you've<BR>
no objections. Anybody else want to do this too? There's plenty of<BR>
potential work.<BR>
<BR>
Nick>><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'm game<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:46:01 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
<<Do we want to discourage huge ships?>><BR>
<BR>
Nope!<BR>
<BR>
   *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
Use the Square-cube ratio. <BR>
Big ships move slowly, little ones quickly. Good reason for fighter carriers<BR>
<BR>
   *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
Would add realism...heat becomes a major concern for captains/ship designers<BR>
and adds to the effectiveness of Laser and Plasma weaponry. OTOH, might be a<BR>
bit too much work for some folks. GH, it does tend to disrupt the 'space<BR>
opera' part of Travellers 'realistic space opera' feel.<BR>
<BR>
   *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
Agree. 'No! You'll tear the ship apart, you maniac!'<BR>
<BR>
   *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
	defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
No. Fighters are no match for destroyers, unless maybe there are _swarms_ of<BR>
them. <BR>
   *Do we want to encourage fighters?  <BR>
I don't want to discorage them. I figure smaller ships are better for<BR>
stealthy jobs and fighters can probably accelerate better than<BR>
megafreighters :). <BR>
<BR>
   *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
I kinda like the idea of G-tanks full of water.<BR>
<BR>
   *How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  <BR>
I recently saw Das Boot again. I'd like to recreate the claustrophobic feel<BR>
in space, so maybe stealth is compromised by high-g maneuvering.<BR>
<BR>
   *What is the relative importance of: (1 highest)<BR>
   *Completeness.		3<BR>
   *Technical accuracy. 2<BR>
   *Quickness of use.	1<BR>
   *What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
Alternate tech: I really like some of the stuff in previous FFS editions,<BR>
particularly stutterwarp and the 'grav displacement' lifter. The latter<BR>
stops major cities on hich-tech worlds looking too much like New York in The<BR>
Fifth Element<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:55:09 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Montana Class<BR>
<BR>
On 2 Aug 00, at 8:59, pbroeder@wave.co.nz wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Jeff Rowse wrote:<BR>
> > Montana: so how many non-Americans on the list knew there was a<BR>
> > boat called 'Montana'?  How many Americans, come to think of it?<BR>
> > Please remember that not everybody has exactly the same spheres of<BR>
> > reference here!  Likewise for describing warships as BI, BB etc - to<BR>
> > me, BI (normally) means British Isles and BB is a pellet of about 6mm<BR>
> > radius.<BR>
<BR>
> USS Montana (BB67) was a battleship, lead ship of the last class<BR>
> designed for the US navy.<BR>
> The Links below will tell you probably more than you want to know about<BR>
> these ships.<BR>
> The short version is that 'Montana' was designed as a heavy Battleship<BR>
> to 'Iowa's' fast Battleship design, with a top speed of 27 knots (to<BR>
> Iowa's 32) and 4 triple turrets (Against Iowa's 3)<BR>
> All were cancelled.<BR>
> http://www.hazegray.org/navhist/battleships/us_wwii.htm#mon-cl<BR>
> http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/usnshtp/bb/bb67.htm<BR>
<BR>
There have been two Montana's in USN. The first was one of a class of six <BR>
(BB49 - BB54) planned after the 1st WW, they were cancelled as a result <BR>
of the Washington Treaty. What has this to do with Traveller, not a darn <BR>
thing I can see, but it interesting that both the USN "monster" BB classes <BR>
included a ship called Montana and neither of them was ever built.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 22:58:49 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Tons and tons (was Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Viktor Haag wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> I have a most probably ignorant question. When you say 'dtons'<BR>
>> you mean 'displacement tons' correct? This *is* the 'tons'<BR>
>> measurement used in CT LBB2 and HG, correct?<BR>
><BR>
> Correct. <BR>
<BR>
Just don't confuse it with "tons displacement" which is based on the<BR>
amount of water an ocean-going ship displaces.<BR>
<BR>
>> What are 'register tons' and where is this measurement used?<BR>
<BR>
Also used on ocean-going ships, and based on volume or mass, I forget which.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:04:26 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>Changing the orientation of the space craft requires much smaller<BR>
>>forces. And since changing *course* occurs very solely [sic], you don't need<BR>
>>to be able to change orientation all that fast. A few seconds will do<BR>
>>just fine.<BR>
><BR>
> I've never seen an adequate discussion of rotational moment, and its effect<BR>
> on maneuverability and movement control systems in Traveller, so I couldn't<BR>
> say how large the forces are.<BR>
<BR>
Well, it's like this, to change the direction the ship is *moving*, you<BR>
rotate the ship about its center of mass (aka "center of gravity", or<BR>
CG), and then fire up the main drive. The acceleration perceived from<BR>
the main drive will *always* be in the same direction relative to the<BR>
ship. <BR>
<BR>
You can just turn the ship while the drive is active, but the stresses<BR>
can just as easily be treated seperately unless you want *insanely*<BR>
fast rotation rates.<BR>
<BR>
From the sci.space faq:<BR>
<BR>
	Acceleration on a cylinder (space colony, etc.) of radius r and<BR>
	    rotation period t:<BR>
<BR>
	    a = 4 pi**2 r / t^2<BR>
<BR>
Let's try some figures:<BR>
<BR>
t = 60 seconds (30 seconds to turn 180 degrees)<BR>
r = 100 meters (a 200 meter long ship)<BR>
<BR>
a = 4*pi^2 * 100 / 60^2<BR>
a = 9.86 * 100 / 3600<BR>
a = 1.1 m/s^2<BR>
<BR>
So that gives an acceleration of .11 g.  <BR>
<BR>
In reality the accel would build until halfway thru the turn, where it<BR>
would reach a higher peak (call it .2 g) and then it'd drop to zero as<BR>
you slowed the spin to a stop.<BR>
<BR>
I think 30 seconds to turn a 200 meter ship completely around isn't all<BR>
that bad. Also note that this is the acceleration at the *ends* of the<BR>
ship. It drops smoothly to zero as you approach the center.<BR>
<BR>
So without g-comp, if you turned while the drive was providing 1 g of<BR>
accel, you'd feel the floor "tilt" a little. <BR>
 <BR>
Just for the heck of it, let's see how fast you'd have to turn to get 1<BR>
g. <BR>
<BR>
10 = 9.86*100/t^2<BR>
10 * t^2 = 986<BR>
t^2 = 98.6<BR>
t = 9.9 sec. <BR>
<BR>
So that means 5 seconds to spin 180 dgrees. I think that's insanely<BR>
fast for a ship that size. Especially when you consider just how *long*<BR>
it takes for the main drive to move the ship a significant distance<BR>
from the point it'd have occupied if it just coasted along. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:28:25 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> gunnery programs receive targeting data from the sensor programs and<BR>
> plot a firing pattern what does the Gunner do? <BR>
<BR>
Check the ship to ship combat sequences in Heinlein's "Citizen of the<BR>
Galaxy". <BR>
<BR>
In essence, the gunner suggests "what if the target does *this*?" or<BR>
"What if we do *that?" to the computer, adding human intuition to the<BR>
compute's ability to calculate things fast. The result will be better<BR>
than either alone.<BR>
<BR>
For that matter, I suggest picking up a copy of the book and xeroxing<BR>
that section as a player handout regarding combat. Even though the tech<BR>
is different than Traveller (multi-hundred gee drives!) the *feel*<BR>
seems right.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2866<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (rly-yg01.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.1]) by air-yg03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 06:05:25 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 06:04:56 2000<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id GAA50844;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 06:04:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 06:04:38 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id GAA50743<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 06:04:38 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 06:04:38 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008021004.GAA50743@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2866<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2867</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 7:54:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2867<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Sickbay Power Requirements<BR>
Re: radiators in space<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Sickbays, preliminary thoughts<BR>
Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
Re : Soliton-pulse lasers<BR>
Re : Soliton pulse lasers<BR>
Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
Re: FFS3: Pool<BR>
RE: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: Re : Radiators in Space<BR>
Re: Dumping Heat<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 00:14:23 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Sickbay Power Requirements<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
>> For sickbay, I say we inquire and find out how much power an individual<BR>
>> "bed" in a modern ICU requires. And if it seems a bit low, double it. <BR>
><BR>
> Your upper bound here is going to be a kilowatt :-<BR>
> (looks around 'the office') :-<BR>
> ventilator 200W<BR>
<BR>
Funny, that's what *my* "ventilator" (a CPAP unit) draws... :-)<BR>
<BR>
> dialysis 100W<BR>
> cooling/warming blankets 200W<BR>
> intra-aortic balloon pump 200W<BR>
> monitoring equipment 100W<BR>
> lighting, airconditioning, etc.<BR>
><BR>
> Note that not everyone is on all the gadgets listed above. For long,<BR>
> anyway...<BR>
<BR>
Yeah. Oddly enough, my off the top of my head guess last night would<BR>
have been a kW...<BR>
<BR>
I say we adopt that figure. 1 kW per "bed", plus another for each<BR>
"workstation". <BR>
<BR>
Because of the "special needs" (stuff like pure O2, special air<BR>
filtering for surgery, etc), I'd say that each bed in sickbay costs<BR>
*two* people worth of life support costs for the ship. With the "bonus"<BR>
that in an emergency, two people *can* use that life support. That<BR>
refers to ambulatory patients, not folks who need the "bed's" life<BR>
support. <BR>
<BR>
And the lifesupport/power for the sick bay is at least *partially*<BR>
independent of the rest of the ship.<BR>
<BR>
Sound good?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 00:25:49 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>>> From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>>>> Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
>><BR>
>> You just need to rotate the ship in the same plane as the radiators. Or<BR>
>> just kill the stream for a few seconds (it'll take only a second or two<BR>
>> for all the drops to get to the collector. D=.5*a*t^2...)<BR>
><BR>
> I should have been clearer. By 'maneuvering' I meant jinking so as to take<BR>
> advantage of the speed-of-light lag. Lots of changes in direction and<BR>
> thrust.<BR>
<BR>
Do the math. It takes *time* (multiple seconds) for a direction or<BR>
thrust change to move the ship enough to matter. Likewise, it takes<BR>
a second or two for a batch of droplets to move the length of the<BR>
ship unless it's a *big* ship at low accel. D=.5*A*T^2.<BR>
<BR>
>> > It could work as a civilian technology, though.<BR>
>><BR>
>> I think the "electron cloud" bit (if anybody can dig up details and<BR>
>> figures) would work better for civilian use. It's not suitable for<BR>
>> military use because you can't use it and IR masking.<BR>
><BR>
> I'm thinking that IR masking would be used before you cranked the power<BR>
> plant up all the way for combat. Basically, once you are shooting at things,<BR>
> I dont think you'll be stealthy, so at that point, you might as well go all<BR>
> the way.<BR>
<BR>
Most traders aren't going to be *trying* to be stealthy anyway. After<BR>
all, in any sort of remotely civilized system, they'll be contacting<BR>
STC (Space Traffic Control) and getting a trajectory assignment if they<BR>
are incoming, and they'll have filed a flight plan if they are<BR>
outgoing. <BR>
<BR>
>> With liquid drop radiators, you just run one "fin" on the side away<BR>
>> from the enemy.<BR>
>><BR>
>>> The reason I put the droplets in a tail is to allow you to dodge in<BR>
>>> combat.<BR>
>><BR>
>> And as I noted above, it's not a problem.<BR>
><BR>
> I think it's still a problem, it just may not be a show-stopper.<BR>
><BR>
> Could you toss some numbers together ? Maybe with a 'agility efficiency<BR>
> penalty', with the efficiency loss being related to how many gees<BR>
> acceleration you are using for agility purposes.<BR>
<BR>
Well, the more gees you are using the quicker the drops move. This cuts<BR>
down on heat radiated a bit, but at the same time, it means that you<BR>
can switch between "fins" faster, allowing you to dodge in different<BR>
planes.<BR>
<BR>
> I'd like them to be in the ballpark of Anthony Jackson's radiator numbers.<BR>
<BR>
I'll probably just steal his numbers, and move them to lower TLs. After<BR>
all, we could build these *now*. But they'd reject heat as well as his<BR>
TL14 or so radiators. <BR>
<BR>
Note that they are automatically "folding", but without the usual<BR>
penalties. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 23:36:35 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Okay, here's the sort of questions I get asked by players, <BR>
><BR>
> "The bogy is at 1.41 million km. How long is it and how high?"<BR>
<BR>
The "bogey" is gonna have to be *really* big. Say it's 100 meters long.<BR>
That gives a size/range figure of 100/1,410,000,000. <BR>
<BR>
So determining how long it is is the same sort of difficulty as telling<BR>
that a dust mote sparkling in the sunlight a meter away is .07 mm long.<BR>
<BR>
See below for how to calculate the angular resolution required.<BR>
<BR>
> "Okay, we've detected the ship on that asteroid 330,000 km away, now<BR>
> can we see whether the airlock is open or closed?"<BR>
<BR>
Nope. Figure the width of the airlock (in meters) and divide that by<BR>
the distance (also in meters). use a calculator with an arctan function<BR>
to convert that to degrees. That's the angular resolution your sensor<BR>
would need to have a *chance* at "seeing" that. <BR>
<BR>
If you want to "resolve" a 2 meter object (ie tell if it is or isn't<BR>
there) at 330,000 km, it works out to .45 arcseconds as the minimum<BR>
resolution. <BR>
<BR>
I'll let Bruce say what sort of sensor that takes. <BR>
<BR>
But it does sound like we could use a "resolves X meters at 100,000 km"<BR>
entry on the sensor tables to answer questions like the above two.<BR>
<BR>
> "I want to shoot at just the engineering section of that ship with a<BR>
> range of 630,000 km, what do I have to roll?"<BR>
<BR>
Targeting *part* of a ship is *absolutely* impossible at any range over<BR>
a few hexes. In the example above, a laser will take 2.1 seconds to<BR>
reach the postion you see the ship at (630,000 km divived by the speed<BR>
of light, which is 300,000 km/sec). And that position is where the ship<BR>
was 2.1 seconds before you fired (it took 2.1 seconds for light or<BR>
radar to get from it to you). So that means that you are aiming at a<BR>
point where the ship was 4.2 seconds ago.<BR>
<BR>
In 4.2 seconds, at *1* g, the ship will have been able to move 88<BR>
meters (D = .5*a*t^2) from the position it'd have had if it just<BR>
coasted.<BR>
<BR>
So you'll be lucky to hit the *ship* much less a specific section of<BR>
it. <BR>
<BR>
> What I need during play is a mechanic that allows me to answer those<BR>
> questions quickly and easily.  What I need during design is a<BR>
> sequence that will give me numbers that mechanic uses.<BR>
<BR>
As you can see above *design* has nothing to do with those questions,<BR>
especially the last one.<BR>
<BR>
But thanks for pointing out that the sensor rules could use that extra<BR>
column.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 06:48:15 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:06:57 -0700<BR>
>From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
>Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
><BR>
>> There seems to be plenty of evidence that someone at GDW/Far Futures<BR>
>> considered ships larger than 5,000 dtons optional, to the point of<BR>
>> specifically excluding them from basic source material even after the<BR>
>> publication of HG (HG1 does have 1 Mdton ships, by the way).<BR>
><BR>
>Since none of these sources are really of a military nature, it should be no<BR>
>surprise that small ships are used. <BR>
<BR>
I disagree: it is a surprise that small ships are used *exclusively*.<BR>
<BR>
(1) The Alien Modules are the only sources in CT for the Imperium's<BR>
principle military adversaries and allies. There are no canonical warships<BR>
for these groups larger than 5,000 dtons until The Rebellion Sourcebook<BR>
(1988) -- none. That seems a strange omission, eh?<BR>
<BR>
(2) Both _Expedition to Zhodane_ and _Broadsword_ have a decidedly military<BR>
bent, yet there are no large naval vessels mentioned, even offstage. (The<BR>
fundamental premise of _Broadsword_ -- that a major government would hire<BR>
an 800-dton privateer to conduct their counterinsurgency campaign -- has<BR>
been discussed too often to mention except in passing.)<BR>
<BR>
(3) Does it really make sense that 1,000- and 3,000-dton ships are<BR>
"typical" of Tukera's merchant fleet? Or that Oberlindes lines "maintains a<BR>
fleet ranging in tonnage from 100-ton couriers to 5000-ton transports"? Yet<BR>
that is how they are described in The Traveller Adventure, pp. 138-140.<BR>
Where are the 20,000-50,000 dton merchant liners?<BR>
<BR>
I'm not saying GDW intended that big ships didn't exist in these contexts<BR>
- -- clearly, they did. But they very carefully constructed their products to<BR>
avoid using them: to keep the vessels "PC-scale", which in Traveller<BR>
generally means 5,000 dtons or less.<BR>
<BR>
We lost a lot of role-playing flavor when High Guard (demonstrably a<BR>
wargame in a RPG setting) came out: contrary to the big ship space opera<BR>
fans, it is very hard to organize a campaign around independents<BR>
(non-government, non-official military) in a setting where naval vessels<BR>
can brush off anything the PC's can afford without blinking. Look at the<BR>
subsequent attempts to recapture that flavor: the Rebellion and Hard Times,<BR>
Virus, Milieu: 0. All would have been unnecessary, if GDW had resisted the<BR>
temptation to go "one bigger, one better" in the first place, and stuck<BR>
with ships (and therefore government) on a scale where PC's and their<BR>
efforts matter.<BR>
<BR>
The initial descriptions of the Imperium -- remote, decentralized,<BR>
laissez-faire -- are very different from what came later _specifically_to<BR>
justify the big ships in _High_Guard_. Every major change that came after<BR>
was an attempt to recapture that weak, decentralized Imperium. <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:56:13 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Sickbays, preliminary thoughts<BR>
<BR>
The sickbay module as described - 8 displacement tons (112m^3),<BR>
effective floor area 33m^2 (assume base of 6 X 6m and remove portion for<BR>
accessways, walls, etc.) is a little small.<BR>
<BR>
Typical floor areas for various hospital fittings :-<BR>
- - Operating theatre (includes anaesthetic and scrub bay) or MR scanning<BR>
room (includes control booth and waiting area) : 30m^2<BR>
- - CT Scanning/angiography room : 20m^2<BR>
- - Intensive care (organ system support) bed : 10m^2, 12m^2 if isolation<BR>
required<BR>
- - High dependency (continuous telemetry) bed : 10m^2<BR>
- - General ward bed (emergency outpatients/primary care cube < TTL 9) :<BR>
8m^2<BR>
<BR>
Access space is included.<BR>
<BR>
5-10% of bed space area should be dedicated to equipment storage.<BR>
There should be 10m^2 per operating theatre assigned to recovery bed<BR>
space.<BR>
<BR>
10-20m^2 should be allocated for central nursing stations/ward desks,<BR>
etc.<BR>
<BR>
Suggested maximal power loads (over and above life support -<BR>
heat/air/water) :-<BR>
theatre 1kW<BR>
ICU bed 1kW<BR>
high dependency bed 200W<BR>
general ward bed 100W<BR>
MR scanner 3kW<BR>
CT scanner 1kW<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:57:27 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Fission Power Plants, Preliminary Notes (longish)<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote :-<BR>
> At least as importantly, they can also be used for safety purposes, since a<BR>
> subcritical reactor will shut off if you turn off the damper.<BR>
Agreed.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
> then use various<BR>
> photoelectric converters to get power out of the system.<BR>
Efficiency of thermo/photoelectric conversion isn't that great.<BR>
<BR>
Propose :-<BR>
TTL     Thermo effy(%)   Photocell effy (%)<BR>
6       5                6<BR>
7       7.5              10<BR>
8       10               20<BR>
9       20               30<BR>
10      40               50<BR>
11+     50               60<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> Also, since its not *too* difficult to seperate isotopes from fission<BR>
> waste products (and from old fission and fusion reactors), especially<BR>
> at higher TLs, I expect that reprocessing spent fuel from fission<BR>
> reactors will produce lots of isotopes for use in RTGs and damper<BR>
> assisted RTGs. <BR>
<BR>
I think damper assisted RTGs are a viable 'battery' technology (as are<BR>
nuke isomer power sources) at the relevant TTLs.<BR>
<BR>
We have a small problem.<BR>
Consider the general purpose heat source, and another interesting<BR>
isotope :-<BR>
Pu 238 73.53W/kg = 6.353MJ/day ; half-life 87 years.<BR>
Cu 244 534.76W/kg = 48.795MJ/day ; half-life 18 years.<BR>
<BR>
We need to be able to cap the acceleration rate, otherwise power outputs<BR>
get quite unreasonable, fast - and bombs get easy to build.<BR>
<BR>
Now catalysing proton-proton fusion is going to take a lot of doing (a<BR>
billion fold increase in reaction rate at a minimum). Perhaps there's a<BR>
gravitic component involved - but this needs to be limited, like<BR>
grav-laser focussing. Solitons again? <BR>
<BR>
Preventing fission chain reactions is going to be as difficult. <BR>
<BR>
But both (well, the latter, anyway) are non-negotiable abilities.<BR>
<BR>
High-tech nukes probably have integral dampers - in combat, the target's<BR>
projector tries to jam that of the warhead...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:13:15 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Soliton-pulse lasers<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Grant wrote :-<BR>
> A while back, somebody posted an idea that could make grav-focussing <BR>
> of lasers obsolete: soliton-pulse lasers.  I should have saved the <BR>
> post.  Who thought this up?<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh proposed grav-soliton focussing for lasers (a few G<BR>
required) in order to avoid massive gravitational lensing (millions of<BR>
Gs) capability at average Traveller TLs.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:18:16 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Soliton pulse lasers<BR>
<BR>
I wonder if light bullets or light strings could behave similarly.<BR>
This might be one for Luther Martin, previous comments<BR>
<BR>
> What we have here is a group of people (that's us) with an understanding of<BR>
> TL 7, maybe TL 8 technology, who are trying to *accurately* predict what<BR>
> technology will be like about 8 TLs into the future! That's like asking a<BR>
> stone-age person to accurately predict the technology which we have today.<BR>
> He couldn't do it, and neither can we. This is why I'm not a big fan  of<BR>
> these attempts at ultra-precise prediction of future technology.<BR>
<BR>
notwithstanding.<BR>
<BR>
We know enough at TTL 8 about various broad limits that the universe<BR>
imposes. Classical physics ; relativity ; quantum mechanics.<BR>
The next 8 TLs will be about exploring loopholes, and making real some<BR>
of today's (and the day after tomorrow's) wilder speculations.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:12:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Well, as I've pointed out many times, it's perfectly possible to jump<BR>
> into the system at some random location out of weapons range of the<BR>
> mainworld, and days away at max accel. <BR>
> <BR>
> That means you can make observations for a few days and jump out again<BR>
> before they can get a ship anywhere near you. <BR>
> <BR>
> So I expect that there will be a lot of small, not at all stealthy<BR>
> ships that can do two jumps without refueling and have *enormous*<BR>
> folding sensor arrays. <BR>
<BR>
This is quite true, but there's one serious problem with "peek-and-scoot"<BR>
spy vessels: the enemy knows that he's under observation, and will<BR>
respond accordingly.  "Peek-and-scoot" vessels would, furthermore, be<BR>
unsuitable for other espionage tasks, like dropping off and picking up<BR>
agents in unfriendly star systems.<BR>
                                                            - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:21:44 -0300<BR>
From: Ronaldo Fernandes <ron.fernandes@ig.com.br><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: Pool<BR>
<BR>
 >Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment <BR>
and consider what we want >from FFS3. So, some questions:<BR>
 >Do we want to discourage huge ships? If so, how heavily? Possible arguments<BR>
 >against large ships could include<BR>
 >*Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
 >*Harsher radiator rules<BR>
 >*Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
 >*Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
 >defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
<BR>
Huge ships are cannon, but I think they should not be cost/efficient. <BR>
Anyway, this is much more a wargame problem, as their details should not be <BR>
important to a roleplaying situation. Or anybody in a small free trader <BR>
would challenge a battleship?<BR>
<BR>
 >Do we want to encourage fighters? If so, how? Basically as above, plus<BR>
 >*Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
<BR>
I like fighters, perhaps doing them really faster than main ships and <BR>
adding some useful missile of sorts.<BR>
<BR>
 >How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be? DSR-style sensors are<BR>
 >sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
 >system. This could be changed by either making sensors in general a bit<BR>
 >less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either one<BR>
 >can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
 >there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved pretty<BR>
 >easily too).<BR>
 >What is the relative importance of<BR>
 >*Completeness.<BR>
 >*Technical accuracy.<BR>
 >*Quickness of use.<BR>
<BR>
Quickness, please, I just dont have time to work with complex design <BR>
systems. Quite frankly, Im still in B2 and HG and very satisfied. Ive <BR>
never found use for Striker in a Traveller game, although I would play it <BR>
as a wargame. I was very disappointed with MT. Although the extensive <BR>
listing was easy to work with, they gave excessive useless detail. What is <BR>
the point of purchasing separate communication or sensor systems? I would <BR>
rather prefer QSDS approach with normal, advanced, and military <BR>
configurations. The main text could explain what kind of systems would be <BR>
found in each tech level and what kind of data they could transmit/find. I <BR>
never read any editions of FFS because they would not be useful to me.<BR>
<BR>
As a matter of fact, as both as a roleplayer and a wargamer, I prefer <BR>
simple rules, such are CT, MT, T4, Imperium, or GDW 120 series. I just <BR>
dont have time anymore to read and learn complex rules. As such, FSS is <BR>
irrelevant to me, Im only concerned about its spread in other books. Ive <BR>
never brought any of the other T4 starship books afraid of FFS rules <BR>
contamination. I would be concerned about the feasibility of the project. <BR>
Im not sure those detailed books would find a niche in the market. In <BR>
fact, I remember that GURPS Vehicles was fundamental in my decision to <BR>
abandon this game forever.<BR>
<BR>
 >What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
I would like to see real alien technology. What about nanos developed by <BR>
the Hivers or something like it.<BR>
<BR>
Ronaldo<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 06:41:31 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
IIRC that many of the modern CV's are a might bit larger then the Montana<BR>
was supposed to be. Also IIRC that there was a container ship from Japan<BR>
that was a even larger might bit larger then the CV's.<BR>
<BR>
In other words - there are larger ships then the planned Montana.<BR>
<BR>
IMTU: The biggies travel in Rons to hot spots to 'wave the flag'. The<BR>
Imperium does not have a 'crust' defense, but rather the biggie rons exist<BR>
through out the Imperium (so that they can be shifted about when needs be -<BR>
Al la Lucan). However, they are usually at port, or in war games some where<BR>
out in deep space, or at listing posts near trouble spots. The PC's only<BR>
have run into the biggies once in my GMing career (when they emerged from<BR>
jump in the middle of a high guard action during the rebellion. The first<BR>
thing their sensors picked up was 10,000 missiles cruising past at about<BR>
15,000 km. The bridge crew freaked) _The_ most common ship class is the<BR>
destroyer (1kdt to about 5 or 10 kdt - think midu's and Kinuirs - Yes the<BR>
Kinuir is a Destroyer Cruiser IMTU -hehehe never mid the midget behind the<BR>
curtain)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of<BR>
sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 2:46 AM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
OK-<BR>
<BR>
The biggest RW ship anyone has mentioned is the Montana, which<BR>
weighs in at around 8,000 dtons.  How big (in dtons) is the largest<BR>
aircraft carrier anyone has ever built?<BR>
<BR>
On possible suggestion.  How about we take that figure, up it by<BR>
maybe a factor of 5 and say that is the largest normal ship anyone<BR>
is ever likely to see in the Imperium.  Sure, there may be a few<BR>
100,000+ dton monsters out there, but they are likely only used for<BR>
really serious full scale war, which means that few folks outside of<BR>
the fringes of the Spinward Marches (and their crews) have ever<BR>
seen one in anything other than a holo or holovid.<BR>
<BR>
For the vast majority of planetary uprisings, pirates, and similar<BR>
problems 1-5,000 dtons is likely to do just fine.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:55:00 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: A Navy the PCs Can Beat (was Re: Seriously Magic Thruster Plates)<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Bruce Johnson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> There were 11 ships captured per US naval vessel, while only 2 per<BR>
> privateer were captured. Naval vessels mounted an average of 24 guns,<BR>
> the privateers mounted an average of 5.5. That tells. Purpose-built<BR>
> warships are far more effective at the task than armed merchants.<BR>
<BR>
If it sounds like I'm saying a privateer should be a match for a naval<BR>
vessel then I'm not making myself clear.  Of course the odds are still<BR>
going to be in the navy's favor.  However, 5 to 1 odds are still far<BR>
better than I'd give to a PC ship taking on, say, an AHL-class ship.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 02:03:04 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
On 1 Aug 00, at 22:08, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Just keep in mind that most CT/MT ships are *already* invalid under<BR>
> *all* design systems. Too many were thrown together without checking<BR>
> the design rules in effect at the time.<BR>
<BR>
Its actually worse than that. Most of the published High Guard ships are <BR>
invalid under High Guard! I discovered this when I wrote my High Guard <BR>
design program. None of the ships I reversed engineered from Fighting <BR>
Ships, Trader and Gunboats or the adventures were legal designs.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 02:03:04 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
On 1 Aug 00, at 10:24, Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment and<BR>
> consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
<BR>
> Do we want to discourage huge ships?<BR>
<BR>
No. Huge ships have been a part of Traveller since High Guard. According <BR>
to Supp 9, the standard Imperial Battleship is 200Kton, with some reaching <BR>
up to 500Kton.<BR>
<BR>
> Do we want to encourage fighters?<BR>
<BR>
Not really. Again, since High Guard, fighters have been fairly useless <BR>
outside specialist roles They are good at these specialist roles (screening, <BR>
recon, interface work, patrol duties etc) and those roles provide legitimate <BR>
reasons for their existance; but lets leave starfighters for Star Wars and <BR>
Battlestar Galatica.<BR>
<BR>
> What is the relative importance of <BR>
>    *Completeness.<BR>
>    *Technical accuracy.<BR>
>    *Quickness of use.<BR>
<BR>
Lets face it, Traveller is a roleplaying game first and a wargame second. <BR>
The average player is not a gearhead and is not terribly interested in the <BR>
precise muzzle velocity of their handgun, how many megajoules their <BR>
popup toaster requires, or how many cm of bonded superdense their laser <BR>
can drill through. They are concerned with will my gun stop the onrushing <BR>
Zhodani/Vargr/Imperial/Solomani stormtrooper, can my airraft outrun that <BR>
battlecruiser, can my radio transmit my distress call to the planet etc.<BR>
<BR>
FFS3 needs to pass some pretty tough tests (in order). Does it produce <BR>
equipment which increases the fun of the game? Are the capacitities of the <BR>
equipment it produces understandable to a gearhead illiterate? Can a <BR>
device's characteristics be summed up in a few lines? Is the equipment it <BR>
produces within an acceptable margin (10-15%) of real world examples? <BR>
Can a moderate gearhead start designing after about an hour or two with <BR>
only a scientific calculator and pencil and paper? If it can do this, then its <BR>
worked.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 02:14:32 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
On 2 Aug 00, at 2:45, sneadj@mindspring.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> OK-<BR>
> <BR>
> The biggest RW ship anyone has mentioned is the Montana, which <BR>
> weighs in at around 8,000 dtons.  How big (in dtons) is the largest <BR>
> aircraft carrier anyone has ever built?  <BR>
<BR>
The biggest movable structure yet built was the oil tanker Jahre Viking at <BR>
564,763 tons deadweight, 458.45m length, 68.8m beam, 24.61m draught. <BR>
Using 1:2 freeboard to draught, she comes out at (roughly) 11,643,350 cu <BR>
m or 83,167 Td.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:30:06 +0100<BR>
From: Martin Hardgrave <martin@deira.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Re : Radiators in Space<BR>
<BR>
In message <3986B0CE.5EA7254@ozemail.com.au>, Robert O'Connor<BR>
<robocon@ozemail.com.au> writes<BR>
><BR>
>A colourful 'exhaust plume' is then possible (??molten alkali metals -<BR>
>sodium, lithium, potassium??).<BR>
><BR>
They have too high a vapour pressure and lithium will form an alloy with<BR>
practically everything.<BR>
- -- <BR>
Martin Hardgrave<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:41:15 +0100<BR>
From: Martin Hardgrave <martin@deira.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Dumping Heat<BR>
<BR>
In message <3.0.5.32.20000731103835.008b8d60@vax2.concordia.ca>, Ian<BR>
Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca> writes<BR>
><BR>
>       "Lieutenant, I want all dead crewmen cooked and ejected from the<BR>
>       ship immediately!"<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Yeah - but what do the *non*Vilani ships do?<BR>
- -- <BR>
Martin Hardgrave<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 02:31:54 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 1 Aug 00, at 23:26, Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> We also have Adventure 6: Expedition to Zhodane in 1981, The Traveller Book<BR>
> and Adventure 7: Broadsword in 1982, The Traveller Adventure in 1983,<BR>
> Beltstrike in 1984, all the Alien Modules (1984-1986), and Marc Miller's<BR>
> Traveller (QSDS) and T4's Starships (SSDS) in 1996, all without any mention of<BR>
> ships larger than 5,000 dtons*. Bulk Carriers are 1,000-3,000 dtons; cruisers<BR>
> are consistently 1,000-2,000 dtons. <BR>
<BR>
I hate to disagree with you here Chris (especially since I see and agree <BR>
with the validity of the point you are making), but Adv 6 makes it fairly clear <BR>
that the ships mentioned are only the escorts for much larger ships (p36, <BR>
para 3).<BR>
<BR>
> There seems to be plenty of evidence that someone at GDW/Far Futures<BR>
> considered ships larger than 5,000 dtons optional, to the point of<BR>
> specifically excluding them from basic source material even after the<BR>
> publication of HG (HG1 does have 1 Mdton ships, by the way).<BR>
<BR>
I think GDW et al intention was to keep the focus on ships that could <BR>
reasonably fit into a roleplaying construct. I think this approach should be <BR>
continued, but with allowance for those gearheads/wargamers who want to <BR>
design the monsters to do so. What I want to see is a detailed (and by <BR>
neccessity complex) system for designing ships; then to have this system <BR>
used to create "plug and play" modules for a HG like quick system for <BR>
smaller ships (FFS for detail and QSDS for game ships).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 07:59:39 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
>Why not? In the 17th and 18th centuries, most warships were the same size<BR>
>as merchantmen; the largest ships-of-the-line carried only ~10-20x as many<BR>
>guns as the smallest fighting sloop. The largest modern aircraft are only<BR>
>~100x the size of the smallest, and couldn't carry nearly that much more<BR>
>ordnance if they wanted to.<BR>
<BR>
This is an overgeneralization. The ships that were the same size as<BR>
warships were the big merchant ships that were major investments for<BR>
large corportations - these are not the sort of ships players will ever<BR>
own, unless they are a large corportation. The ships that a rich individual<BR>
or group with a bank loan could buy were tiny things, a hundredth the size<BR>
of a warship.<BR>
<BR>
Also, although a SOL carried "only" 10 times as many guns as a sloop,<BR>
those guns were 6-8 times bigger on an individual basis, for 60 times<BR>
as much weight of metal...<BR>
<BR>
Investment levels are one reason there have to be big ships. PC ships<BR>
are, by definition, within the purchasing range of a few individuals supported<BR>
by a bank. Even granted that these are exceptional individuals - one in a<BR>
thousand, say - a planet<BR>
with a population of even 100 million people will have enough resources<BR>
to buy a hundred thousand such ships. This is pretty unmanageable.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2867<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (rly-zc03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.3]) by air-zc04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:36 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 10:54:03 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA61080;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:53:26 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:53:09 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id KAA61033<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:53:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:53:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008021453.KAA61033@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2867<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2868</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 11:42:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2868<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: DSR and landed ships<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
RE: Re : Soliton pulse lasers<BR>
Warships & Privateers<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
RE: FAQ question<BR>
Re: ship sizes<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: DSR and landed ships<BR>
RE: FAQ question<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Small Ships/Big Ships/Fleets<BR>
Re: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: sensors<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 08:07:36 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: DSR and landed ships<BR>
<BR>
>On looking at the DSR, the penalties for detecting a landed ship in<BR>
>atmosphere-6 with vision is -0.5.  Assuming that we have a bare hull,<BR>
>a 100 m^2 ship has a visual signature of 0.<BR>
>Thus, a 1 meter PEMS-12.5 can detect the ship at 5 million kilometers.<BR>
<BR>
>Assuming 4,000 angstrom light and diffraction-limited sensors, the resolution<BR>
>of this sensor is 4 x 10^-7 radians.<BR>
What diameter did you use for the sensor?<BR>
<BR>
>At 5 million kilometers that's 2 kilometers, and unless the<BR>
>object is considerably brighter than its background<BR>
>(which is true in space, but not on the ground) detecting an object smaller<BR>
>than about a kilometer should be impossible.  Given this, it seems like the<BR>
>modifier for 'ship landed' for visual spotting should be around -2.5 (and<BR>
>shadow probably doesn't actually have much effect).<BR>
Hmm. Does need some thinking about; probably you're correct (the<BR>
numbers for situations like "landed" were basically just quickly made up -<BR>
the real modelling was only done for space.)<BR>
<BR>
>Now, with this same sensor in IR, if we assume the ship is using 100 MW<BR>
>(signature-0) it can be detected at 1,500 km.  As IR has longer wavelength,<BR>
>our resolution is probably similar to the above.  However, two square<BR>
>kilometers of land are going to be emitting around a gigawatt of IR (vs<BR>
>around 10 MW for the ship), which once again will completely wash out the<BR>
>ship.  Given this, the 'ship landed' modifier for IR spotting should probably<BR>
>be around -2 (maybe only -1.5 at night).<BR>
The situation is a little different in that the ship's waste heat comes out<BR>
much hotter than the blackbody radiation from the ground, at much shorter<BR>
wavelengths, so the contrast is better - the ship is bright at 2 microns,<BR>
the ground is bright at 10 microns. However, a ship on the ground<BR>
could run its radiators cooler and take advantage of convection, perhaps...<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 10:49:07 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Dom commented:<BR>
<BR>
> Dreadnaughts are 200kdT. So they aren't as big as possible. Indeed,<BR>
> CT/HG2 encouraged smaller ships with spinal mount rules - the smaller<BR>
> package the mount is in, the more effective it is as a weapon<BR>
> platform.<BR>
<BR>
For instance, at tech-15 it's possible to build a top-of-the-line battle<BR>
rider in 30 ktons of space (agility-6, armor-F, meson-T, other weapons).<BR>
There's a *lot* of incentive to make it as small (and therefore as *cheap*<BR>
and easy to carry) as possible without compromising armor, agility, or the<BR>
spinal mount and secondaries.<BR>
<BR>
There's not much incentive to make it BIG; in fact, there's a lot of<BR>
disincentive (only one spinal mount, bigger expense, harder to carry,<BR>
easier to hit, and so on).  Big ships tend to be lower-tech, because<BR>
they need the room to fit bulkier equipment, particularly the spinal<BR>
mounts and power plants to support them.<BR>
<BR>
In that sense, spinal mounts encouraged ships to be big, too -- just big<BR>
*enough*.  :)  <BR>
<BR>
  -- Steve Bonneville<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 08:41:47 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Re : Soliton pulse lasers<BR>
<BR>
My understanding of solitons is that they are the result of non-linear<BR>
effects of the medium through which the wave is propagating. If laser<BR>
weapons will be used in space, where the non-linear effects are *really*<BR>
minimized, I doubt that solitons can be used.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:55:29 GMT<BR>
From: "Jeff Rowse" <jeffrowse@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Warships & Privateers<BR>
<BR>
All this talk of which Merchies could hammer which Man-o'-War reminds me - <BR>
what about the 'Q'-ships?  Bog-standard Merchant hulls with concealed <BR>
weaponry; the 'bad guys' in their warship would come close in to board and <BR>
plunder, then find themselves looking down the business end of more weaponry <BR>
than they carried themselves.  How do you cover things like this IYTU?  <BR>
(IMTU, the Q-ship has a few dozen AFV-sized weapons hiding behind cutouts in <BR>
the hull...)<BR>
<BR>
Personally, I prefer a 'choose a hull size and stick the modules together' <BR>
approach; I cannot remember who suggested it (sorry), but I disagree with <BR>
the idea that those of us who are more interested in just 'sticking the bits <BR>
together' should be penalised with less-than-optimal ships whereas someone <BR>
who wants to spend hours juggling every last cubic cm and mW can have <BR>
something that will knock the stuffing out of us...  By all means give us <BR>
the ability to create our own ships to the nth degree of precision if we <BR>
want to, but how about a supply of 'prefab modules' as well?<BR>
<BR>
Another .02Cr for the swear box...<BR>
Jeff (aka Captain Chicken, Leg-end in his own Lunchbox).<BR>
<BR>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:06:39 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Luther Martin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> (1) The Alien Modules are the only sources in CT for the Imperium's<BR>
> principle military adversaries and allies. There are no canonical warships<BR>
> for these groups larger than 5,000 dtons until The Rebellion Sourcebook<BR>
> (1988) -- none. That seems a strange omission, eh?<BR>
<BR>
Not true.  _K'kree_ has some very large ships, and some odd rules to <BR>
integrate bits of HG with bits of Book 2 to build them.  There's a ship<BR>
predesigned in the 10000-ton class, as I recall.  The "frigate" is <BR>
supposedly a *light* K'kree warship in the 6000-ton class.  Obviously,<BR>
they're a special case.  :)  <BR>
<BR>
> The initial descriptions of the Imperium -- remote, decentralized,<BR>
> laissez-faire -- are very different from what came later _specifically_to<BR>
> justify the big ships in _High_Guard_. Every major change that came after<BR>
> was an attempt to recapture that weak, decentralized Imperium. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, the big ships help -- they capture a lot of Naval funding in<BR>
a few places.  To some extent, capital ship size in High Guard is driven <BR>
by spinal mounts.  Abolish spinal mounts.  Now it probably makes sense<BR>
to optimize for massive numbers of escort-scaled ships built around things<BR>
like missile-9 bays.  (It's not a question of "an AHL or a Kinunir", it's<BR>
a question of "an AHL or fifty Kinunirs".)  This has the disadvantage that<BR>
the Navy now has more ships to patrol with and harass players and so on.<BR>
Rather than the "AHL in the wrong system" you have "twenty Kinunirs here<BR>
and thirty in the wrong systems".<BR>
<BR>
  -- Steve Bonneville<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:28:36 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> That means that TL 20 ships have no heat production. And TL 20 *is*<BR>
> possible. Just unlikely.<BR>
<BR>
Either limit it to 1%, or simply let TL 20+ ships have no heat production.  I'm<BR>
not terribly bothered, some reasonable extrapolation of black globe generators<BR>
should allow near-zero heat production at TL 15-17, since black globe <BR>
generators can apparently turn high-entropy energy into low-entropy energy.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:29:44 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
Koji Suzuki writes:<BR>
>I recently returned to gaming, pen and paper style, and dusted off my old<BR>
>Traveller books, supplements, etc. and started a campaign c.1107.  I just<BR>
>subscribed to the list, and been reading a lot of the posts, but I'm not<BR>
>familiar with the information that's come out in the last ten or fifteen<BR>
>years.<BR>
>I don't know what the abbreviations are, i.e. FFS 1, 2, or 3.  I've figured<BR>
>out CT-Classic Traveller, MT- MegaTraveller, but the other stuff, 3rd<BR>
>edition rules, GURPs Traveller, I'm not at all familiar with.<BR>
>Is there someplace that has the info that I'm looking for, a net-Traveller<BR>
>FAQ?<BR>
<BR>
	Don't worry about that other stuff.  Just repeat after me:<BR>
<BR>
	"There is only one Traveller, and High Guard is it's Product."<BR>
<BR>
:)<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:37:39 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Investment levels are one reason there have to be big ships. PC ships<BR>
> are, by definition, within the purchasing range of a few individuals<BR>
> supported by a bank. Even granted that these are exceptional individuals -<BR>
> one in a thousand, say - a planet<BR>
> with a population of even 100 million people will have enough resources<BR>
> to buy a hundred thousand such ships. This is pretty unmanageable.<BR>
<BR>
Other than by simply chopping the population of the imperium ;).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:36:12 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Luther Martin writes:<BR>
>>There seems to be plenty of evidence that someone at GDW/Far Futures<BR>
>>considered ships larger than 5,000 dtons optional, to the point of<BR>
>>specifically excluding them from basic source material even after the<BR>
>>publication of HG (HG1 does have 1 Mdton ships, by the way).<BR>
>Since none of these sources are really of a military nature, it should be no<BR>
>surprise that small ships are used. On the other hand, High Guard, which is<BR>
>totally military in nature, is where all of the really big ships come from.<BR>
>I would guess that the big ships are exculded from the basic source material<BR>
>since it does not deal much with military operations, but rather with much<BR>
>smaller operations.<BR>
<BR>
	Even though HG2 allows for vessels up to 1,000,000 tons, I get the<BR>
	impression that ships over 100,000 tons are pretty rare.  It is<BR>
	noteworthy that the largest "spinal mounts" are less than 10,000<BR>
	tons (IIRC).  I'm not sure that I would refer to a weapon that<BR>
	makes up 5% or less of a ship's tonnage as "spinal."<BR>
<BR>
>>I accept the label of "heretic" because I know I won't win this argument.<BR>
>In this context (i.e. the TML), a heretic appears to be someone whose<BR>
>opinion differs from yours.<BR>
<BR>
	There's another definition?  :)<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:39:17 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 8/2/00 12:48 AM, dyrnwynn@hotmail.com issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> On the whole, what I would LIKE to see from FFS3 and what I would ACCEPT are<BR>
> not necessarily the same thing. What I want is for it to be MORE than the<BR>
> Imperial architecture.<BR>
<BR>
I've been thinking, what if the quick and easy module designs were set aside<BR>
for other books, which could be based on regional/genre design standards,<BR>
like "Vessels of the 3I" and "Vessels of the Zhodani Consulate". That way<BR>
those who really don't want to get into the nitty-gritty could just get the<BR>
appropriate book (or books) for their campaign. I (and I think others) would<BR>
probably buy both.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:46:10 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: DSR and landed ships<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh writes:<BR>
> >On looking at the DSR, the penalties for detecting a landed ship in<BR>
> >atmosphere-6 with vision is -0.5.  Assuming that we have a bare hull,<BR>
> >a 100 m^2 ship has a visual signature of 0.<BR>
> >Thus, a 1 meter PEMS-12.5 can detect the ship at 5 million kilometers.<BR>
> <BR>
> >Assuming 4,000 angstrom light and diffraction-limited sensors, the<BR>
> >resolution of this sensor is 4 x 10^-7 radians.<BR>
> What diameter did you use for the sensor?<BR>
<BR>
1 meter.<BR>
<BR>
> The situation is a little different in that the ship's waste heat comes out<BR>
> much hotter than the blackbody radiation from the ground, at much shorter<BR>
> wavelengths, so the contrast is better - the ship is bright at 2 microns,<BR>
> the ground is bright at 10 microns. However, a ship on the ground<BR>
> could run its radiators cooler and take advantage of convection, perhaps...<BR>
<BR>
Actually, the net result of this is that stealth on the ground depends on how<BR>
hot the object is relative to its size; cool objects will be very hard to <BR>
detect.  Hm...-0.5 if emitted signature == reflected signature, -1.0 if<BR>
emitted < reflected, -0.5 if located on the sunward side (due to glare)?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:45:26 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Kiri Aradia Morgan <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Ian Ferguson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Koji Suzuki writes:<BR>
><BR>
> >I recently returned to gaming, pen and paper style, and dusted off my old<BR>
> >Traveller books, supplements, etc. and started a campaign c.1107.  I just<BR>
> >subscribed to the list, and been reading a lot of the posts, but I'm not<BR>
> >familiar with the information that's come out in the last ten or fifteen<BR>
> >years.<BR>
<BR>
Suzuki-san shimpai shinai de kudasai!  (don't worry!  and I apologize if<BR>
you speak only English, but it just got the better of me!)<BR>
<BR>
I joined the list last fall and was amazed to discover that not only did<BR>
people other than me still REMEMBER Traveller they were still playing it!<BR>
<BR>
Can you say "Ya-tta!"  (I thought you could.)<BR>
<BR>
> >I don't know what the abbreviations are, i.e. FFS 1, 2, or 3.  I've figured<BR>
> >out CT-Classic Traveller, MT- MegaTraveller, but the other stuff, 3rd<BR>
> >edition rules, GURPs Traveller, I'm not at all familiar with.<BR>
> >Is there someplace that has the info that I'm looking for, a net-Traveller<BR>
> >FAQ?<BR>
> <BR>
> 	Don't worry about that other stuff.  Just repeat after me:<BR>
> <BR>
> 	"There is only one Traveller, and High Guard is it's Product."<BR>
> <BR>
I understand exactly where you are coming from Peez.<BR>
<BR>
But I must admit that there is one really cool thing about Gurps<BR>
Traveller.  (Other than the fact that my referee writes for them and I<BR>
must praise them openly and buy him lots of Coke, which he drinks like...<BR>
well, a penguin.  ^_-)<BR>
<BR>
Instead of rolling for hours and hours to get characters that would live,<BR>
fill the needed spot in the party, and suit my style of play, I just build<BR>
them.<BR>
<BR>
My first CT character ever was perfect-- beginner's luck, I guess.  The<BR>
rest of them took a while to create.<BR>
<BR>
Kiri-chan  ^_^<BR>
<BR>
"...where I come from, Penguin Boy, a palm tree in the dumpster is<BR>
regarded as a BAD sign... no matter what the Ambassador from Mongo says...<BR>
what sector is that in anyways?"<BR>
				--Lady Mitsuko Kisaragi haut-Rensselaer<BR>
<BR>
******************************************************************************<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan                                  93!  Thou Art God<BR>
tiamat@tsoft.com<BR>
<BR>
"If time passes, everything turns into beauty<BR>
If the rains stop, tears clean the scars of memory away<BR>
Everything starts wearing fresh colors<BR>
Every sound begins playing a heartfelt melody<BR>
Jealousy embellishes a page of the epic<BR>
Desire is embraced in a dream..."              -- X-JAPAN<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 09:50:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Ian Ferguson writes:<BR>
<BR>
>      Even though HG2 allows for vessels up to 1,000,000 tons, I get the<BR>
>      impression that ships over 100,000 tons are pretty rare.  It is<BR>
>      noteworthy that the largest "spinal mounts" are less than 10,000<BR>
>      tons (IIRC).  I'm not sure that I would refer to a weapon that<BR>
>      makes up 5% or less of a ship's tonnage as "spinal."<BR>
<BR>
Well, that's about as much as a spinal mount in a spherical hull can take up.<BR>
If you look at ship construction budgets, somewhere like Mora might support<BR>
a fleet with a total displacement on the order of a hundred million tons.  It<BR>
probably has a few large ships in there..<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:02:22 +0100 <BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Peez wrote:<BR>
> Even though HG2 allows for vessels up to 1,000,000 tons, I get<BR>
> the impression that ships over 100,000 tons are pretty rare.<BR>
> It is noteworthy that the largest "spinal mounts" are less than<BR>
> 10,000 tons (IIRC).  I'm not sure that I would refer to a weapon<BR>
> that makes up 5% or less of a ship's tonnage as "spinal."<BR>
<BR>
IIRC (its been a long time since I last read HG)  for  every  USP<BR>
factor over 9 of a spinal mount meson gun you  get  an  automatic<BR>
critical if you hit.  That ment that for a factor L meson gun  (I<BR>
think) you had a statistically probable mission  kill  with  each<BR>
shot that hit regardless of the size of  the  target.  Therefore,<BR>
when designing squadrons you wanted to make your ships  as  cheap<BR>
as possible while carrying such a weapon  ...  'cos  the  cheaper<BR>
they were the more you had, and the more you had the more  combat<BR>
effective your squadron  would  be.  For  *military*  ships  this<BR>
*discouraged* the 1M dton monstrosities and *encouraged*  cruiser<BR>
sized battleriders.  When looking at HG you need to  include  TCS<BR>
practicalities.  You can design a 1M dton warship (using  HG)  if<BR>
you want, but the 3I wouldn't be interested.<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 09:17:25 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote<BR>
<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Okay, here's the sort of questions I get asked by players, <BR>
<BR>
> But it does sound like we could use a "resolves X meters at 100,000 km"<BR>
> entry on the sensor tables to answer questions like the above two.<BR>
<BR>
Doesn't the ability of a sensor, or at least a visual sensor, <BR>
to resolve an object depend on more than just its angular size?<BR>
Isn't it easier to determine where the edges of an object are<BR>
(and thus determine its size) if that object is bright and<BR>
shiny (or the equivalent for the spectrum in question) rather <BR>
than dark and dull? Would this chart assume a base reflectivity <BR>
and give a modifier based on these factors?<BR>
<BR>
> > "I want to shoot at just the engineering section of that ship with a<BR>
> > range of 630,000 km, what do I have to roll?"<BR>
> <BR>
> Targeting *part* of a ship is *absolutely* impossible at any range over<BR>
> a few hexes. <BR>
<BR>
Unless of course it can  not alter its course, or you are<BR>
flying a GM's Special Ancient ship with FTL sensors or you<BR>
have a crew person with Precognition (which is canon). :)<BR>
<BR>
If it is altering its course than is it doing so randomly as <BR>
directed by the computer or in response to a course set by the <BR>
ships master? Logic says the random walk is better because it<BR>
is inherently less predictable. Drama and fun of play suggest<BR>
the ships master should give broad orders and the pilot<BR>
should execute them.<BR>
<BR>
If the ships crew is partially selecting its course than won't <BR>
use of Ship Tactics (and/or Fleet Tactics) enable you to guess <BR>
this strategy on a sufficiently good roll and use then use this <BR>
knowledge to increase the chances of a hit? Naturally in reality <BR>
this would be a hit to a random part of the ship but possibly <BR>
for the sake of the game it would sometimes be more dramaturgically<BR>
appropriate if players could in fact try to target part of<BR>
the ship (at a higher difficulty of course).<BR>
<BR>
Example:<BR>
<BR>
Scene opens. Our heroes, the crew of a heavy Cruiser, have <BR>
just come out of jump and are attacked by an unknown at<BR>
close range.<BR>
<BR>
Sensor Officer [rolls a crit. success]: "Captain the ship<BR>
attacking us is the privateer Freya."<BR>
<BR>
Captain [rolls a crit. success] "The Freya is Captained by<BR>
the Dread Ethically Challenged Merchant Roberts. He always<BR>
tries to take Naval intact so he can use them as Privatteers.<BR>
Given the arc of fire on the Freyas main bay when he is ready<BR>
to fire at us his ships main bridge will be oriented towards us. <BR>
If we fire a full laser spread we should be able to take out<BR>
his bridge without dammaging the rest of the ship. Engineering <BR>
Officer give me all the power you can to the weapons."<BR>
<BR>
Chief Engineeer: "Captain if I give them any more they'll <BR>
blow!"<BR>
<BR>
Captain: "Give them everything you can.<BR>
<BR>
[Engineer rolls a crit success and hot rods the main power plant<BR>
up enough to increase weapons firing power.]<BR>
<BR>
Captain: "Fire!"<BR>
<BR>
Weapons Officer: [fires and rolls a sucsess] "Got him Sir!"<BR>
<BR>
Sensor Offcer: [rolls a success] ""I am picking up faint<BR>
life signs aboard the Freya."<BR>
<BR>
Captain: "Helm bring us in to boarding range." [Captain<BR>
flips a switch on the arm of his command chair] "Doctor<BR>
report to the shuttle bay, I'll need a Medical Officer<BR>
on the boarding team, they may have had prisoners."<BR>
<BR>
Med Officer [Fails a Determination check and must act cranky<BR>
per general Space Opera guidelines on Doctors comma behavior<BR>
of] "I'm a Doctor not a Marine, dammit."<BR>
<BR>
Isn't this sort of thing more fun than the alternative.<BR>
<BR>
Sure Traveller is less of a space opera than the popular<BR>
TV show I just parodied but isn't this sort of play more<BR>
_fun_ than a Referee saying: "Roll to hit on a random<BR>
location on the other ship." It is, after all, a role playing<BR>
game and not a roll playing one.<BR>
<BR>
> In the example above, a laser will take 2.1 seconds to<BR>
> reach the postion you see the ship at (630,000 km divived by the speed<BR>
> of light, which is 300,000 km/sec). And that position is where the ship<BR>
> was 2.1 seconds before you fired (it took 2.1 seconds for light or<BR>
> radar to get from it to you). So that means that you are aiming at a<BR>
> point where the ship was 4.2 seconds ago.<BR>
> In 4.2 seconds, at *1* g, the ship will have been able to move 88<BR>
> meters (D = .5*a*t^2) from the position it'd have had if it just<BR>
> coasted.<BR>
> So you'll be lucky to hit the *ship* much less a specific section of<BR>
> it. <BR>
<BR>
What if the ship displaces a million tons and its engineering <BR>
section is more than 88 meters across?<BR>
<BR>
At some distance against some size ship with some ability to<BR>
change its course through maneuver you should be able to fire <BR>
at parts of it. Given that the ship can maneuver in all three<BR>
dimentions this is presumably a rather short distance of course.<BR>
We need to figure out what this range is and then we need to <BR>
note it in the rules. Then we need to come up with an _optional_ <BR>
rule that will let players try things that should not succeeed <BR>
if the Referee decides to allow a more space operaish feel to <BR>
her game.<BR>
<BR>
> > What I need during play is a mechanic that allows me to answer those<BR>
> > questions quickly and easily.  What I need during design is a<BR>
> > sequence that will give me numbers that mechanic uses.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:52:51 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Les Howie <travgrognard@yahoo.ca><BR>
Subject: Small Ships/Big Ships/Fleets<BR>
<BR>
About the guns on 18th/19th Century merchants - while<BR>
exceptional ships like East India Company merchantmen<BR>
were quite well armed, most trade went in fly-boats<BR>
and schooners, which are quite small.  The economies<BR>
of trade at the time favoured the short turn-around<BR>
times for the small boats.<BR>
<BR>
About small player ships vs great big targets - Most<BR>
priracy these days is a few guys in a zodiac vs a<BR>
post-panamax container ship.  Occasionally the<BR>
merchant crew will try sosmething heroic with a fire<BR>
hose, but it is rare.<BR>
<BR>
One point to keep in mind on major fleet units is that<BR>
they are going to be kept concentrated for military<BR>
action.  In spite of having the largest and strongest<BR>
fleet in the late 19th Century, the British kept the<BR>
fleet at major stations.  For most purposes, the<BR>
watchword was "send a gunboat."  IMTU most player<BR>
encounters are with the small stuff. <BR>
<BR>
=====<BR>
Les Howie<BR>
Gearhead Heretic<BR>
imtu 1.0: tc t4 ru- ge++ !3i c++ jt++ au+ ls++ pi+ ta-- he++<BR>
<BR>
_______________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:48:06 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
> If the computer calculates and executes the evasion<BR>
> patterns, then what does the pilot do except hit a button?<BR>
<BR>
Well, in the RDEEP game, I tell you what I want to generate, and then<BR>
generate it through the computer. Someone with no piloting skill couldn't<BR>
do it, but equally a good pilot with no computer would take too long, would<BR>
let predictable elements slip in, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
I assumed that was why we had that Manoevre/Evade program loaded, anyways.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:49:35 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: sensors<BR>
<BR>
> And 50 is 21 to 30 hexes, and that is 330 kkm to 480 kkm.  That's a<BR>
> *lot* shorter than DSR isn't it?<BR>
<BR>
Yes, but then GURPS uses space-to-space missiles with shaped-charge HEAP<BR>
warheads. It's just an artifact of using GV, which was designed for a much<BR>
more generic setting than FFS.<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 19:11:37 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Alright; some observations, in bullet point form.<BR>
<BR>
1) We're not rewriting Traveller. Stuff that exists (like big ships) needs<BR>
to be left in.<BR>
<BR>
2) Most people aren't gearheads. They want a modular design system.<BR>
<BR>
3) Some people are gearheads. They want a complex design system.<BR>
<BR>
4) A complex design system can easily be used to build modules for a simple<BR>
one.<BR>
<BR>
5) Everybody wants different things. We don't have to prescribe. Write it<BR>
all in, and let each GM pick which non-OTU options they want to use.<BR>
<BR>
Fair enough?<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:50:15 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 09:28 AM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
>> That means that TL 20 ships have no heat production. And TL 20 *is*<BR>
>> possible. Just unlikely.<BR>
<BR>
>Either limit it to 1%, or simply let TL 20+ ships have no heat<BR>
>production.  I'm not terribly bothered, some reasonable extrapolation of<BR>
>black globe generators should allow near-zero heat production at TL<BR>
>15-17, since black globe  generators can apparently turn high-entropy<BR>
>energy into low-entropy energy.<BR>
<BR>
Are you ignoring the suggestion I made yesterday?  I'll make it<BR>
again.<BR>
<BR>
Use the TL as a divisor and have a flat % for TL3 or TL4 down.  For<BR>
instance...<BR>
<BR>
  TL<BR>
 0-4   90%<BR>
 5+    (400/TL)%<BR>
<BR>
Try it! <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:42:36 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
On 08/01/00 at 11:36 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>> What I need during play is a mechanic that allows me to answer those<BR>
>> questions quickly and easily.  What I need during design is a<BR>
>> sequence that will give me numbers that mechanic uses.<BR>
<BR>
>As you can see above *design* has nothing to do with those questions,<BR>
>especially the last one.<BR>
<BR>
Yes, it does...<BR>
<BR>
>But thanks for pointing out that the sensor rules could use that extra<BR>
>column.<BR>
<BR>
...and adding that column *might* be the answer.  <g> It might be if<BR>
that column does more for us than the last column on table 198 does.<BR>
<BR>
I don't know about you, but when I design something I'd like to have<BR>
the results provide answers to the sort of questions I asked.  <BR>
<BR>
Take an FFS2 PEMS 13.5.  The last column on the FFS2 table says you<BR>
can resolve a 2 m object at 50,000 km, but what can you resolve at<BR>
100,000, 1 million, 5 million?  And conversely, if the object is<BR>
size X at what range can you resolve it with a specific sensor?<BR>
Using my airlock at 330,000...that's a ~6 m object let's say...what<BR>
sensor rating is required to detect, target, or resolve that?  <BR>
<BR>
The design sequence *should* give you the data you need to answer<BR>
those questions....<BR>
<BR>
A. If it takes a formula requiring a scientific calculator then the<BR>
design sequence (and rules) should say so and give it, so the GM<BR>
and/or players can make the calc during play.<BR>
<BR>
B. If it can be abstracted into +/- DM's based on the Size number<BR>
we are already calcuating for objects during design then *that*<BR>
should be included in the design sequence (and rules), so the DM's<BR>
can be put onto the Vehicle/Equipment sheet and used by the GM and<BR>
players during play.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 19:36:45 -0700<BR>
From: "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
> Use the TL as a divisor and have a flat % for TL3 or TL4 down.  For<BR>
> instance...<BR>
><BR>
>   TL<BR>
>  0-4   90%<BR>
>  5+    (400/TL)%<BR>
<BR>
I think we might be biting off more than we can chew here. We could well<BR>
end up making TL-7 space flight totally impossible - and we have a fair<BR>
amount of evidence that it's not. (Although not much that TL-8 space flight<BR>
is possible...)<BR>
<BR>
Nick<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:38:23 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
At 10:36 PM -0800 8/1/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  > OK, lets step back. I'm trying to take these points one at<BR>
>  > a time.  The point I was addressing in my previous post<BR>
>  > is whether essentially you have to use black body emission.<BR>
>  > If you emit the same radiation as a black body, but you<BR>
>  > use another process, are the thermodynamics the same?<BR>
><BR>
>No. Which is my point. The *energy* emitted is the same. the *entropy*<BR>
>isn't.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
But how can they be different?  The thermodynamics of a state are<BR>
independent of the path you take to the state.  Entropy (which<BR>
is really a form of energy) is part of the thermodynamics.<BR>
<BR>
>  > Now it _is_ a law of thermodynamics any state is the same,<BR>
>  > no matter how you got there.  So if you can emit radiation,<BR>
>  > of any entropy, it doesn't matter how you emit it.  Whether<BR>
>  > it is by radiator fins or by some currently unknown higher<BR>
>  > TL technology.<BR>
><BR>
>You keep overlooking the fact that to emit that low entropy radiation,<BR>
>you have to *raise* the entropy of the system more than if you emitted<BR>
>it at high entropy.<BR>
<BR>
All I'm talking about here is emitting the same radiation from<BR>
the same heat sink by a process that is not black body radiation,<BR>
If black body radiation raises the entropy, then so does the<BR>
other process.<BR>
<BR>
>You are *assuming* that the states are the same to "prove" that they<BR>
>are the same.<BR>
<BR>
Um, no.  they are by definition the same.<BR>
<BR>
>They may be emitting the same amount of energy, but the entropy of<BR>
>the emitting system is *very* different.<BR>
<BR>
How can emitting the same photons have different entropy.<BR>
<BR>
>If you were right, then you've got a perpetual motion machine, because<BR>
>the low entropy radiation could be used to do work inside the system.<BR>
<BR>
No.  All I'm talking about doing is the exact same thing you can<BR>
do with black body radiation.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2868<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg04.mx.aol.com (rly-yg04.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.4]) by air-yg04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:42:24 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:41:33 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id OAA70015;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:41:28 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:38:20 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id OAA69697<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:38:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:38:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008021838.OAA69697@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2868<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2869</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 1:33:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2869<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Small Ships and Evasion<BR>
Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
SYLEA CLASS - Classic Traveller - 100,000 dT (was Re: Ship size limits )<BR>
Re: Spinal mount trivia<BR>
GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
another thought about miniatures<BR>
Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:54:55 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
The largest carriers ever built are the NIMITZ class.  The largest of these<BR>
will be RONALD REAGAN (CVN-76)<BR>
which is building at this time.  Following REAGAN, I don't know what size<BR>
the CVX and follow-on class will be.<BR>
<BR>
After a lot of work at it, I believe that the NIMITZ class are approximately<BR>
20,000 dT in Traveller terms.<BR>
They are roughly 1050 feet (320 m) in length.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
There are also plans for a msea-mobile airfield that is self-propelled.  It<BR>
will be essentially a 10,000-12,000 foot long modular array capable of<BR>
landing C-17's.  That will be quite large.<BR>
<BR>
Also, look up www.kawasaki-steel.co.jp/basic/engineer/is-e-ind.html for a<BR>
rather large project.<BR>
<BR>
I have stats on ex-HAPPY GIANT, stating that she was/is:<BR>
<BR>
62,511.7 dwt<BR>
1504 foot long (458.4 m)<BR>
225 foot beam (68.5m)<BR>
80.9 foot draught (24.66 m)<BR>
<BR>
Sounds like HAPPY GIANT was re-named.  I recall that she was sold and<BR>
re-named at some point.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 10:14 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> On 2 Aug 00, at 2:45, sneadj@mindspring.com wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > OK-<BR>
> ><BR>
> > The biggest RW ship anyone has mentioned is the Montana, which<BR>
> > weighs in at around 8,000 dtons.  How big (in dtons) is the largest<BR>
> > aircraft carrier anyone has ever built?<BR>
><BR>
> The biggest movable structure yet built was the oil tanker Jahre Viking at<BR>
> 564,763 tons deadweight, 458.45m length, 68.8m beam, 24.61m draught.<BR>
> Using 1:2 freeboard to draught, she comes out at (roughly) 11,643,350 cu<BR>
> m or 83,167 Td.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:00:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Small Ships and Evasion<BR>
<BR>
- --0-2078917053-965242836=:20415<BR>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII<BR>
<BR>
Hm...I was doing some computations, and discovered that given effective<BR>
weapon ranges of at least a light-second, fighters actually tend to be<BR>
effective against just about anything they can damage (what that is I <BR>
don't know; I  never figured out space combat in T4), because they're <BR>
actually really hard to hit.  I tried to generate some evasion rules <BR>
that are both playable and mathematically plausible; they don't resemble <BR>
the die-rolling conventions of any form of traveller, but they're very <BR>
close to correct mathematically.  See attached file for system and method.<BR>
- --0-2078917053-965242836=:20415<BR>
Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII<BR>
Content-Description: evade<BR>
<BR>
Summary of intent: the primary factor in hitting in space combat is<BR>
light-speed lag in sensors and weapons fire.  I was originally<BR>
intending to use standard die-rolling conventions, but it turns <BR>
out that none of the methods standard to Traveller works properly,<BR>
so I created my own.<BR>
<BR>
Assumptions: it is assumed that evading ships move in a random-walk<BR>
pattern, with each leg timed to be sufficient for a 50% chance of<BR>
evasion.  The net effect is that beyond that range, the odds of hitting<BR>
only fall as the third power of range, rather than the fourth power;<BR>
the rules for 'not dodging within X' cover longer leg lengths.  In<BR>
addition, a wide variety of simplifications are used to determine<BR>
actual chance of hitting.<BR>
<BR>
This system does not use attack rolls; they are assumed to be automatic.<BR>
However, weapons do have an ROF stat, which is log2(number of shots) and<BR>
is +3 for typical FFS weapon systems (weapons may be grouped to increase<BR>
this number; this is recommended).  Instead, the system uses 'evasion'<BR>
tests.  A ship's evasion number is based on its size and acceleration;<BR>
it is 5 * log10(Gs) - 0.5 * log2(dTons) + 5; the table below gives the <BR>
modifiers (find the next lower entry on both tables, and round down<BR>
at the end).<BR>
Mod     0   0.5 1   1.5 2   2.5 3   3.5 4   4.5 5       +5      -5<BR>
dTon    1   2   4   8   16  32  63  125 250 500 1000    x1000   /1000<BR>
Gs      1   1.3 1.6 2.0 2.5 3.1 4.0 5.0 6.3 8.0 10      x10     /10<BR>
<BR>
The actual combat method is quite simple: your base evasion rating is<BR>
Evasion + Range modifier + Other modifiers.  Range modifier is equal<BR>
to 10 * log10(range in light-seconds); for standard BL hexes, it is<BR>
as follows (for GT hexes, subtract 3):<BR>
Hexes   1   2   3   4   5   6   8   10  13  16  20  25  31  40  50  62  80<BR>
Range   -10 -7  -5  -4  -3  -2  -1  0   1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9<BR>
Other modifiers are situational, as follows (apply in the order listed).<BR>
*   Using 51-70% of acceleration to manuever: -1<BR>
*   Using 71-85% of acceleration to manuever: -2<BR>
*   Using 86-90% of acceleration to manuever: -3<BR>
*   Using over 90% of acceleration: no evasion allowed.<BR>
*   Not evading targets below evasion-X: +X/3(round down)<BR>
*   Value less than 0, or less than X above: set to 0.<BR>
*   ROF of attacker: -X.<BR>
<BR>
Once you have an attack rating, the evasion procedure is simple:<BR>
*   If positive, roll dice equal to evasion.  If any dice are 4+, you evade.<BR>
*   If zero, roll 2d.  You take 1 hit per result below 4.<BR>
*   If negative, as per zero, but roll 2^(1-N) dice instead.  If evasion<BR>
    was zero before ROF was applied, just assume all shots hit.<BR>
<BR>
*Use of Skills*<BR>
These rules ignore skill.  If you wish, skill rolls can be required;<BR>
a Difficult skill test gives the rated evasion or ROF; a spectacular<BR>
success adds 1, a failure subtracts 1, a spectacular failure subtracts 2<BR>
<BR>
Example (the ships haven't actually been built): five 30-T 8-G fighters<BR>
(evasion +4.5 - 2.5 + 5, or 7), against one 400-T 6-G SDB (evasion +3.5<BR>
- -4.0 + 5, or 4).  The fighters each have single heavy lasers (ROF 3),<BR>
the SDB has 16 lasers as a ROF 7 battery.<BR>
<BR>
Initial engagement range is 1 light-second (10 BL hexes); the SDB fires<BR>
at a single fighter.  The SDB is using 4 Gs to manuever (-1 evasion);<BR>
the fighters are also using 4 Gs to manuever (-0 evasion).  Thus,<BR>
modified evasion scores are:<BR>
Fighters: 7 +0(distance) +2(not evading below 6) -7(ROF) = 2<BR>
SDB: 4 +0(distance) -1(66% Gs) +1(not evading below 3) -3(ROF) = 1<BR>
<BR>
Thus, per turn, on average the SDB takes 2.5 hits, the fighters take<BR>
1/4 hit.  Assuming one hit can take out a fighter (can it?) the SDB<BR>
wins if its average loss in effectiveness per hit is less than 2%.<BR>
If the range dropped to half a light-second, modified evasion scores<BR>
would be -2 for the fighters (allowing the SDB to divide its battery<BR>
4 ways at 0 each), -3 for the SDB (the fighters get their maximum <BR>
number of hits, which is 50).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --0-2078917053-965242836=:20415--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:06:54 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
<BR>
Are you guys playing the same Traveller I am? I'm at work and so can't <BR>
reach Book 2 and HG2, but maybe someone can back me up on this:<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does one<BR>
> > need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
> > calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The<BR>
> whole<BR>
> > idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid hydrogen,<BR>
> > when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
<BR>
...and Tsykoduk wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> IIRC that it popped up in CT (a scout courier was '100 tons') and when MT<BR>
> came out it used Dton as a handwave to allow them to get things that massed<BR>
> correctly (a Type-S is not going to mass in at 100 metric tons!) :)<BR>
<BR>
Displacement tons, defined as ~13.5-14 cubic meters, go all the way back to<BR>
CT. I'm pretty sure they're so defined in High Guard, and I am absolutely<BR>
certain they're so defined in Traders and Gunboats (CT:S7 or CT:S9?)[1]. <BR>
Couldn't swear one way or the other about Book 2.<BR>
<BR>
...and Ian Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
> It's actually cubic meters that's a TNE invention *grin* Book 2, High Guard<BR>
> and MT all worked in dtons, and kinda assumed mass to be about 10 tons to<BR>
> the dton.<BR>
<BR>
Book 2 and HG, to the best of my knowledge, don't mention any particular <BR>
mass ratio like 10:1, and in fact, one or the other of them, I think HG, <BR>
says something to the effect of "since 20% to 50% of the ship will be fuel, <BR>
it's a reasonable approximation to equate one dton with one ton" -- which <BR>
you can argue with easily, but certainly doesn't suggest a 10:1 ratio.<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
 <BR>
[1] Tons had to be defined in terms of volume for T&G because it was all <BR>
about the deckplans.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 15:19:47 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: SYLEA CLASS - Classic Traveller - 100,000 dT (was Re: Ship size limits )<BR>
<BR>
If you look at Library data (A-M), there is a picture of a Sylea Class BB.<BR>
The caption specifically states that it is 100,000 dT.  I have heard that<BR>
later sources uprated this to 300,000 dT.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Christopher Thrash" <thrash@io.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 6:48 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> >Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 21:06:57 -0700<BR>
> >From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
> >Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
> ><BR>
> >> There seems to be plenty of evidence that someone at GDW/Far Futures<BR>
> >> considered ships larger than 5,000 dtons optional, to the point of<BR>
> >> specifically excluding them from basic source material even after the<BR>
> >> publication of HG (HG1 does have 1 Mdton ships, by the way).<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Since none of these sources are really of a military nature, it should be<BR>
no<BR>
> >surprise that small ships are used.<BR>
><BR>
> I disagree: it is a surprise that small ships are used *exclusively*.<BR>
><BR>
> (1) The Alien Modules are the only sources in CT for the Imperium's<BR>
> principle military adversaries and allies. There are no canonical warships<BR>
> for these groups larger than 5,000 dtons until The Rebellion Sourcebook<BR>
> (1988) -- none. That seems a strange omission, eh?<BR>
><BR>
> (2) Both _Expedition to Zhodane_ and _Broadsword_ have a decidedly<BR>
military<BR>
> bent, yet there are no large naval vessels mentioned, even offstage. (The<BR>
> fundamental premise of _Broadsword_ -- that a major government would hire<BR>
> an 800-dton privateer to conduct their counterinsurgency campaign -- has<BR>
> been discussed too often to mention except in passing.)<BR>
><BR>
> (3) Does it really make sense that 1,000- and 3,000-dton ships are<BR>
> "typical" of Tukera's merchant fleet? Or that Oberlindes lines "maintains<BR>
a<BR>
> fleet ranging in tonnage from 100-ton couriers to 5000-ton transports"?<BR>
Yet<BR>
> that is how they are described in The Traveller Adventure, pp. 138-140.<BR>
> Where are the 20,000-50,000 dton merchant liners?<BR>
><BR>
> I'm not saying GDW intended that big ships didn't exist in these contexts<BR>
> -- clearly, they did. But they very carefully constructed their products<BR>
to<BR>
> avoid using them: to keep the vessels "PC-scale", which in Traveller<BR>
> generally means 5,000 dtons or less.<BR>
><BR>
> We lost a lot of role-playing flavor when High Guard (demonstrably a<BR>
> wargame in a RPG setting) came out: contrary to the big ship space opera<BR>
> fans, it is very hard to organize a campaign around independents<BR>
> (non-government, non-official military) in a setting where naval vessels<BR>
> can brush off anything the PC's can afford without blinking. Look at the<BR>
> subsequent attempts to recapture that flavor: the Rebellion and Hard<BR>
Times,<BR>
> Virus, Milieu: 0. All would have been unnecessary, if GDW had resisted the<BR>
> temptation to go "one bigger, one better" in the first place, and stuck<BR>
> with ships (and therefore government) on a scale where PC's and their<BR>
> efforts matter.<BR>
><BR>
> The initial descriptions of the Imperium -- remote, decentralized,<BR>
> laissez-faire -- are very different from what came later _specifically_to<BR>
> justify the big ships in _High_Guard_. Every major change that came after<BR>
> was an attempt to recapture that weak, decentralized Imperium.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 12:20:21 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinal mount trivia<BR>
<BR>
Peter Trevor wrote:<BR>
> IIRC (its been a long time since I last read HG)  for  every  USP<BR>
> factor over 9 of a spinal mount meson gun you  get  an  automatic<BR>
> critical if you hit.  That ment that for a factor L meson gun  (I<BR>
> think) you had a statistically probable mission  kill  with  each<BR>
> shot that hit regardless of the size of  the  target.<BR>
<BR>
IIRC, it's one critical per factor that the spinal gun exceeds the <BR>
ship size USP of the target, which means that truly huge ships are<BR>
less vulnerable to spinal criticals; if you can guarantee that<BR>
your battleship's size USP is no less than the USP of the biggest <BR>
spinal mount your opponent can field, you are immune to auto crits.<BR>
<BR>
> Therefore,<BR>
> when designing squadrons you wanted to make your ships  as  cheap<BR>
> as possible while carrying such a weapon  ...  'cos  the  cheaper<BR>
> they were the more you had, and the more you had the more  combat<BR>
> effective your squadron  would  be.<BR>
<BR>
This still applies, but to a less extreme degree than if the auto<BR>
criticals weren't offset by target size.<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:29:40 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 06:49 PM,  "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> And 50 is 21 to 30 hexes, and that is 330 kkm to 480 kkm.  That's a<BR>
>> *lot* shorter than DSR isn't it?<BR>
<BR>
>Yes, but then GURPS uses space-to-space missiles with shaped-charge HEAP<BR>
>warheads. It's just an artifact of using GV, which was designed for a<BR>
>much more generic setting than FFS.<BR>
<BR>
Nick,  I don't know if it's just an artifact or a *decision* by Loren to have much shorter ranges for both sensors and weapons.  Although, Ve2 does produce shorter ranged sensors, there is an "in space" multiplier. If Loren didn't want these ranges he could have easily made them 10 times longer by changing that one multiplier for GT. He would have simply told the designers (and added in a sidebar) "Design as per Ve2, then multiply by 100.",  or 1000 or whatever he needed to get the ranges he did want.<BR>
<BR>
Loren are the ranges in GT an artifact of using Ve2 or a decision to return Traveller to shorter ranges?<BR>
<BR>
Further discussion..<BR>
<BR>
Looking in  Book 2 (p32) DETECTION . . . we see that "Ordinary or commercial starships can detect other ships out to a range of about one-half light-second..." and "Military and scout starships have detection ranges out ot two light-seconds.  Further along we see that there are two range DM's, giving three effective ranges: 0 to 250,000; 250,000 to 500,000; and 500,000 to 900,000.<BR>
<BR>
So, as a baseline we have the following for Sensor Ranges in basic CT:<BR>
<BR>
        Ship Type                Detection Range        Tracking Range<BR>
  Ordinary/Commercial Ships         150,000 km              900,000<BR>
  Military/Scout ships              600,000 km              900,000<BR>
<BR>
and for Laser Firing Ranges:<BR>
                                    DM<BR>
  Short           0 to 250,000      no<BR>
  Medium    250,000 to 500,000      -2<BR>
  Long      500,000 to 900,000      -5<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
It appears to me that GT's ranges match pretty well with CT's, artifact or decision. <BR>
<BR>
I know it isn't likely to happen, but I'd like to propose a much simplier goal for a design sequence, one that gives similar ranges for both sensors and weapons to that in B2 (and GT). Perhaps altered a little to match 0.1 light second hexes for hex based combat systems, but still working for range based combat systems.  <BR>
<BR>
My proposal is..<BR>
<BR>
for sensors:<BR>
                                                     Previously Dectected<BR>
        Ship Type                Detection Range        Tracking Range<BR>
  Ordinary/Commercial Ships         150,000 km           Detection x 4<BR>
  Military/Scout ships              600,000 km           Detection x 4<BR>
<BR>
for Laser Firing Ranges:<BR>
<BR>
                Civilian Class          Military Class  DM<BR>
  Short           0 to  60,000            0 to  90,000  no<BR>
  Medium     60,000 to 120,000       90,000 to 180,000  -2<BR>
  Long      120,000 to 240,000      180,000 to 360,000  -5<BR>
<BR>
Sensors may be designed out to normal Detection Range for their respective class and for longer ranges at an exponentially increasing cost.  Scout and Science options would extend the Tracking Range to x5 for Previously Detected or long duration scans.<BR>
<BR>
Weapons may be designed out to normal Firing Range (short) for their respective class and for longer ranges at an exponentially increasing cost.<BR>
<BR>
PAW, Meson, and Plasma/Fusion weapons could be given appropriate ranges for each of the two classes (although PAW and Meson probably don't exist in any but Military Class). Missiles would be handled similarly.<BR>
<BR>
We could include a TL modifier to maximum range for sensors and weapons, or perhaps better to make it a cost modifier. This would be a more simple system, but I think it would be appropriate for Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:29:32 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
<BR>
As I understand it, originally traveller ships were mapped in 5'x5'x10' squares, with 2 per ton, in fine D&D mapping style.  That works out to 500 cf/dton, and lets you have nice 10x10x10 rooms as staterooms.  The 'displacement ton of hydrogen' logic was a retroactive handwave to preserve the deckplans.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 12:38:40 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Nick,  I don't know if it's just an artifact or a *decision* by Loren to<BR>
> have much shorter ranges for both sensors and weapons.  Although, Ve2 does<BR>
> produce shorter ranged sensors, there is an "in space" multiplier. If Loren<BR>
> didn't want these ranges he could have easily made them 10 times longer by<BR>
> changing that one multiplier for GT. He would have simply told the designers<BR>
> (and added in a sidebar) "Design as per Ve2, then multiply by 100.",  or 1000<BR>
> or whatever he needed to get the ranges he did want. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, david pulver wrote the ship design section, and the ranges could<BR>
easily be upped without rules changes, it would just make bridges a bit <BR>
larger and considerably more expensive.  However, there are scaling problems<BR>
with large sensors in GT.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:39:00 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
I suppose that of the active listmembers, this is most directed to Robert<BR>
O'Connor, but anyone who's read it and feels they're qualified to comment<BR>
should by all means feel free...<BR>
<BR>
In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that activates<BR>
some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes apparently trigger<BR>
the 'next step' in evolution.  Part of the story involves a suggestion that<BR>
this was also the cause of the progression from H. Sap. Neanderthalensis to<BR>
H. Sap. Sapiens.  Is this plausible?  (And can anyone think of a way to<BR>
turn it into a good Traveller adventure [which would be guaranteed a home<BR>
at Freelance Traveller]?)<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:39:06 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:28:55 -0400 (EDT), SD Mooney<BR>
<dom@cybergoths.u-net.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Has anyone described what a fire would be like in Zero G?  I'm in the <BR>
>finishing touches of a scenario for BITS that needs a description and <BR>
>I've got about a day to complete it (one of our authors had to drop <BR>
>doing a book for unforseen personal circumstances so I'm having to <BR>
>bring something up the queue a lot faster than planned).<BR>
<BR>
I don't recall any real descriptions of the appearance of fire in 0G, but<BR>
there are some things that can be surmised, just from knowing how fire<BR>
works:<BR>
<BR>
1. If the 'fuel' (i.e., the material that is being oxidized) is stationary,<BR>
it (the fire) will have a tendency to 'snuff' itself if there is no local<BR>
air circulation, because it uses up all the accessible O2.  If the fuel is<BR>
liquid or gaseous, you should expect to see - literally - a ball of fire,<BR>
as it expands to fill the area voided of O2.<BR>
<BR>
2. If there _is_ local air circulation, it will behave 'normally', except<BR>
that the flames will be pointed in the direction of the circulation (IOW,<BR>
if a wooden table is burning, and the exhaust is in the floor, the flames<BR>
will point 'down', toward the exhaust).<BR>
<BR>
3. If the fire has 'snuffed' itself as per (1) above, DON'T OPEN THE DOOR<BR>
unless your _damned_ sure that the conditions inside aren't such that<BR>
combustion could resume with the mere addition of O2.  Did you ever see the<BR>
movie 'Backdraft'?  That's what's gonna happen.<BR>
<BR>
Based on the above, fire on ship is going to be _nasty_.  I'd make damn<BR>
sure that as little as possible is flammable, travel with the cargo hold<BR>
evacuated, and charge a stiff premium if my cargo has to travel in<BR>
controlled temperature and/or pressure, even if the cargo containers<BR>
themselves have the requisite controls and could theoretically travel in a<BR>
cold depressurized hold ('cause if those controls go wrong, and the cargo<BR>
inside burns, even without damaging the container, I sure as hell want to<BR>
be covered when that thing blows up on the destination world...).<BR>
<BR>
N.B. This is one of the reasons that IMTU, falsification of the manifest is<BR>
a criminal act, prosecutable by the Imperium, totally separate from any<BR>
purely local smuggling charges.  Furthermore, if I as Captain of the ship<BR>
have proof that what you told me I'm carrying is not what you've put aboard<BR>
my ship, I can document that fact, and jettison the cargo.  There will<BR>
necessarily be a hearing, but with that proof, I will walk, and collect<BR>
damages from you (typically, what I spent on berthing at the port where<BR>
your cargo was loaded plus all ships costs - operational and berthing -<BR>
through the port of call immediately following jettisoning of cargo), and<BR>
you will be charged with falsification of the manifest.  And this will<BR>
happen even if you falsify 'in my favor' (i.e., the actual cargo is safer<BR>
than the cargo falsely listed on the manifest).<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:46:16 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson writes:<BR>
>>Even though HG2 allows for vessels up to 1,000,000 tons, I get the<BR>
>>impression that ships over 100,000 tons are pretty rare.  It is<BR>
>>noteworthy that the largest "spinal mounts" are less than 10,000<BR>
>>tons (IIRC).  I'm not sure that I would refer to a weapon that<BR>
>>makes up 5% or less of a ship's tonnage as "spinal."<BR>
>Well, that's about as much as a spinal mount in a spherical hull can take up.<BR>
<BR>
	I don't remember how they are described in HG2, but I think of a "spinal<BR>
	mount" as a weapon that has a ship built around it.  If a weapon is no<BR>
	more of a ship than a laser turret on a type S scout, then I find it hard<BR>
	to think of it as such.  Just my cr. 0.02.<BR>
<BR>
>If you look at ship construction budgets, somewhere like Mora might support<BR>
>a fleet with a total displacement on the order of a hundred million tons.  It<BR>
>probably has a few large ships in there..<BR>
<BR>
	Probably.  I assume that most Imperial worlds spend a Very Tiny (tm)<BR>
	proportion of their budget on a navy.  Why have a big navy?  The Imperial<BR>
	and subsector navies are there, mercenary ships may be hired for short-<BR>
	term problems, and merchant shps can be requisitioned for search and<BR>
	rescue.  You don't need much for anti-pirate patrols, and most worlds are<BR>
	not worried about their neighbours attacking with a huge fleet.  Again,<BR>
	just my cr. 0.02.<BR>
<BR>
:)<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:02:23 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
"Jeff Rowse" <jeffrowse@hotmail.com> notes:<BR>
<BR>
>>Personally, I prefer a 'choose a hull size and stick the modules together'<BR>
approach; I cannot remember who suggested it (sorry), but I disagree with<BR>
the idea that those of us who are more interested in just 'sticking the bits<BR>
together' should be penalised with less-than-optimal ships whereas someone<BR>
who wants to spend hours juggling every last cubic cm and mW can have<BR>
something that will knock the stuffing out of us...  <<<BR>
<BR>
I was just thinking the same thing. The modular system is still a problem<BR>
without some limitation on the customizable option, or else you get the<BR>
situation noted above.<BR>
<BR>
A modest proposal (that will almost surely get ripped to pieces :) require<BR>
that custom designs fit into the constraints of the modular system, i.e. you<BR>
can only design *custom* modules (or perhaps cheat slightly by combining<BR>
more than one module, etc.) Of course, you might end up with something like<BR>
GT:FFS, and I don't think there's going to be a lot of support for that.<BR>
<BR>
Just another Cr .02<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:06:11 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Peter Trevor writes:<BR>
>>Even though HG2 allows for vessels up to 1,000,000 tons, I get<BR>
>>the impression that ships over 100,000 tons are pretty rare.<BR>
>>It is noteworthy that the largest "spinal mounts" are less than<BR>
>>10,000 tons (IIRC).  I'm not sure that I would refer to a weapon<BR>
>>that makes up 5% or less of a ship's tonnage as "spinal."<BR>
>IIRC (its been a long time since I last read HG)  for  every  USP<BR>
>factor over 9 of a spinal mount meson gun you  get  an  automatic<BR>
>critical if you hit.  That ment that for a factor L meson gun  (I<BR>
>think) you had a statistically probable mission  kill  with  each<BR>
>shot that hit regardless of the size of  the  target.  Therefore,<BR>
>when designing squadrons you wanted to make your ships  as  cheap<BR>
>as possible while carrying such a weapon  ...  'cos  the  cheaper<BR>
>they were the more you had, and the more you had the more  combat<BR>
>effective your squadron  would  be.  For  *military*  ships  this<BR>
>*discouraged* the 1M dton monstrosities and *encouraged*  cruiser<BR>
>sized battleriders.  When looking at HG you need to  include  TCS<BR>
>practicalities.  You can design a 1M dton warship (using  HG)  if<BR>
>you want, but the 3I wouldn't be interested.<BR>
<BR>
	My only point was that I would have expected much larger<BR>
	spinal mounts to be available for 1M dton ships.  However,<BR>
	on the subject of the employment of spinal mounts...<BR>
<BR>
	Your memory is nearly correct: for every factor over 9 the<BR>
	spinal mount gets another damage roll, not a critical hit.<BR>
	Any weapon does get an automatic critical hit for each factor<BR>
	that it exceeds the size factor of the target ship.  For this<BR>
	reason, big ships are attractive.  On the other hand, only<BR>
	one spinal may be installed in each ship (why a 1M dton ship<BR>
	can only have one 1K ton "spinal mount" is a bit of a mystery),<BR>
	so you can deploy more spinal mounts if you use smaller ships<BR>
	(and benefit from the extra damage rolls at least).  For a<BR>
	recent TCS campaign, I tried a mix of cheap destroyers that<BR>
	amounted to a spinal mount with the minimum ship to lug it<BR>
	around, and a few big battleships.<BR>
<BR>
	Of course, I regard HG2 as a tool to approximate the design<BR>
	and performance of large military ships.  That doesn't mean<BR>
	that ships IMTU have to use designs that are optimal according<BR>
	to HG2.  I try to design cool ships, and make them reasonably<BR>
	effective according to HG2, but that effectiveness is not the<BR>
	biggest concern.  Anyhow, 99% of starship combat IMTU uses my<BR>
	tweeked LBB2 rules.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:06:12 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: another thought about miniatures<BR>
<BR>
Loren asked us about our preferences for miniatures a while<BR>
ago.  I have a further response for him, but I'd like to<BR>
through it to the list:  What about paper or cardboard<BR>
vehicles?  <BR>
<BR>
They're not as durable as metal, resin, or plastic, but<BR>
they're so much cheaper that you might not even object to<BR>
putting actual battle damage onto them.  I have in the past<BR>
mocked up air/rafts, ATVs, and even a gcarrier using card<BR>
stock.  (I even did moving turrets with various weapons --<BR>
boy did I have free time twenty years ago.)  I put<BR>
camouflage and insignia on them using colored pens or<BR>
whatever my then girlfriend (an artist) had around the<BR>
house.  <BR>
<BR>
With paper vehicles, one could easily afford a company of<BR>
HO, 25mm, or other large scale grav tanks, and one wouldn't<BR>
mind playing Striker outside and maybe losing one or<BR>
getting it muddy.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn <BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:20:10 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 12:38 PM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
>> Nick,  I don't know if it's just an artifact or a *decision* by Loren to<BR>
>> have much shorter ranges for both sensors and weapons.  Although, Ve2 does<BR>
>> produce shorter ranged sensors, there is an "in space" multiplier. If Loren<BR>
>> didn't want these ranges he could have easily made them 10 times longer by<BR>
>> changing that one multiplier for GT. He would have simply told the designers<BR>
>> (and added in a sidebar) "Design as per Ve2, then multiply by 100.",  or 1000<BR>
>> or whatever he needed to get the ranges he did want. <BR>
<BR>
>Actually, david pulver wrote the ship design section, and the ranges<BR>
>could easily be upped without rules changes, it would just make bridges a<BR>
>bit  larger and considerably more expensive.  However, there are scaling<BR>
>problems with large sensors in GT.<BR>
<BR>
I actually know that David Pulver wrote that part of GT, but Loren was the editor and  the editor has final say on what gets printed...other than the owner, of course. :-)<BR>
<BR>
I'm sure Loren looked at David's numbers and signed off on them. In fact, I'd bet Steve Jackson did too. As I understand it, Steve is a big fan of Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:23:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Hivers & Cthulu<BR>
<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
<BR>
>> Ah, you should see my friend Jules' Cuddly Cthulu. It's<BR>
>>so sweet, with its little furry tentacles....<BR>
><BR>
>Where do you get those things?<BR>
<BR>
I think they just find you.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:22:52 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 04:06 PM,  Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca> said:<BR>
<BR>
>	Of course, I regard HG2 as a tool to approximate the design<BR>
>	and performance of large military ships.  That doesn't mean<BR>
>	that ships IMTU have to use designs that are optimal according<BR>
>	to HG2.  I try to design cool ships, and make them reasonably<BR>
>	effective according to HG2, but that effectiveness is not the<BR>
>	biggest concern.  Anyhow, 99% of starship combat IMTU uses my<BR>
>	tweeked LBB2 rules.<BR>
<BR>
Ian, I would really like to see your tweeked LBB2 rules. Could you post them?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 13:30:17 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Balkanized Systems<BR>
<BR>
>From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
<BR>
>I believe Larry Niven addresses this issue (the politics<BR>
>of "variable geography" in an inhabited asteroid belt) in<BR>
>the sequel to "The Mote in God's Eye" (whose title has,<BR>
>unfortunately, slipped my mind).<BR>
<BR>
"The Gripping Hand" by Niven & Pournelle.  I just read it;<BR>
it's very good.  It takes place about 25 years after the<BR>
events in the first book, and it's been almost that long<BR>
since I read the first book, so that worked out well.<BR>
<BR>
The politics of variable geography get a fair amount of<BR>
attention in the book.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2869<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (rly-ye04.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.201]) by air-ye04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:33:48 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:33:16 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA74600;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:33:11 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:30:20 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA74520<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:30:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:30:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008022030.QAA74520@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2869<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2870</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 3:45:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2870<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re : Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re : Soliton pulse lasers<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
Re: Small Ships/Big Ships/Fleets<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
RE: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Re : Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
Re: Warships and Privateers<BR>
Re: Anecdotes<BR>
Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship <BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 13:44:40 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
<BR>
See:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.io.com/~sjohn/sprkdun.htm <BR>
<BR>
paper characters as a font.<BR>
<BR>
and <BR>
<BR>
http://www.microtactix.com (not up at this moment)<BR>
<BR>
Who make Vyllage-on-the-cheep and Starport-on-the-cheep paper miniatures<BR>
buildings.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Loren asked us about our preferences for miniatures a while<BR>
> ago.  I have a further response for him, but I'd like to<BR>
> through it to the list:  What about paper or cardboard<BR>
> vehicles?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:07:20 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
>After a lot of work at it, I believe that the NIMITZ class are approximately<BR>
>20,000 dT in Traveller terms.<BR>
>They are roughly 1050 feet (320 m) in length.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
How big is a supertanker compared to a Nimitz?<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 15:09:31 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: pengebos@nmsu.edu<BR>
Subject: Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
> Loren asked us about our preferences for miniatures a while<BR>
> ago.  I have a further response for him, but I'd like to<BR>
> through it to the list:  What about paper or cardboard<BR>
> vehicles?  <BR>
<BR>
I would love to see a reprint/expansion of the old SJG cardboard hero<BR>
range, either in the original 15 or in 25mm.  On eo f the big problems for<BR>
using miniatures is all i can get is troop types - there is a major dearth<BR>
of non-military figures for sci-fi - I know of two lines, but both are<BR>
only available inengland.  The cardboard figuresw are fast easy and (best<BR>
of all) cheap.  Hopefully, the reprints and continuing success of G:T will<BR>
get interest up and convince Steve Jackson to re-release them.<BR>
<BR>
Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu><BR>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<degaalth@prodigy.net><BR>
		http://www.geocities.com/degaalth/<BR>
<BR>
  "Here at Ortillery Command we have at our diposal hundred megawatt laser<BR>
beams, mach 20 titanium rods and guided thermonuclear bombs. Some people say<BR>
 we think that we're God. We're not God. We just borrowed his SMITE button<BR>
                        for our fire control system"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:15:14 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
VonRammen wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
> A modest proposal (that will almost surely get ripped to pieces :) require<BR>
> that custom designs fit into the constraints of the modular system, i.e. you<BR>
> can only design *custom* modules (or perhaps cheat slightly by combining<BR>
> more than one module, etc.) Of course, you might end up with something like<BR>
> GT:FFS, and I don't think there's going to be a lot of support for that.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
This was the original intention behind the various design systems for<BR>
T4: QSDS, SSDS, and FFS2. QSDS and SSDS, in fact, were derived from list<BR>
members attempts at 'module'-izing FFS.<BR>
<BR>
Sadly, due to production constraints (QSDS (or was it SSDS?) had to be<BR>
ramped up from almost nothing to final product in _seven days_ by a VERY<BR>
dedicated crew of sleep deprived list gearheads. SSDS was published<BR>
next, THEN FFS2...) the systems were never more than incidentally<BR>
compatible, but the gist of the idea was:<BR>
<BR>
QSDS ships represented modular construction. The modules were<BR>
standardized throughout the third imperium, any class A starport could<BR>
make these and they were cheap: 25% off the list price. QSDS the system<BR>
was entirely table driven, and was derived from a list members earlier<BR>
effort at making a modular system for FFS1. QSDS appeared (in horribly<BR>
chopped up form) in the T4 manual; it may still be available on line<BR>
somewhere.<BR>
<BR>
SSDS represented standard construction. More optimization could be done<BR>
than with QSDS, less than with FFS. SSDS the system, was partly table<BR>
and partly equation driven. The game effect of using SSDS designs was to<BR>
make the ship cost 10% less than list price.<BR>
<BR>
FFS2 represented custom design and construction. Ships designed via FFS2<BR>
were full list price, any and all optimization could be done. As a game<BR>
system FFS2 was much more complex, all equation-driven with much more<BR>
detailed design sequences.<BR>
<BR>
My analogy was: <BR>
<BR>
QSDS lets me build a Chevy Nova-sized 4-door sedan. <BR>
<BR>
SSDS lets me specify that it is a Chevy Nova with the 383 engine, a<BR>
manual shift and big rear tires. <BR>
<BR>
FFS lets me say that the 383 had a Holley 4 barrel carb with a Ram-air<BR>
stack on it, the transmission had a Hurst shifter, they were Goodyear<BR>
Eagle race-quality slicks, and by the way there are purple fuzzy dice<BR>
hanging in the window.<BR>
<BR>
This was the dream. <BR>
<BR>
In practice, things were less successful, especially since FFS2 was<BR>
completed _after_ the other two, and AFAIK they were never updated to<BR>
reflect any design changes made in FFS2. QSDS is still my favorite ship<BR>
design system, though.<BR>
<BR>
Add to that an FFS-incompatible system for designing vehicles (VDS, done<BR>
by Greg Porter, which was used in Central Supply Catalog, and my<BR>
favorite design software of all time: Infini-V) you can see things went<BR>
downhill pretty fast. <BR>
<BR>
VDS, btw, is quite good; I have the BTRC VDS book, it's just<BR>
incompatible with FFS, but like G3G is a comparable generic vehicle<BR>
design system, like Gurps vehicles, in fact.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 07:34:24 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin wrote :-<BR>
> In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that activates<BR>
> some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes apparently trigger<BR>
> the 'next step' in evolution.<BR>
<BR>
I haven't read the book. Is the virus engineered or natural?<BR>
If the former, how did the designers know what to target to trigger the<BR>
'next stage of evolution'? What criteria did they use?<BR>
<BR>
If natural, where was the reservoir (e.g. influenza, West Nile virus)?<BR>
Why haven't there been case reports of mutations (unless mind-clouding<BR>
psionics or immortality are part of the package...)?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 07:36:49 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re : Soliton pulse lasers<BR>
<BR>
Luther Martin wrote :-<BR>
> If laser<BR>
> weapons will be used in space, where the non-linear effects are *really*<BR>
> minimized, I doubt that solitons can be used.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Thanks for the info. It looks like we're stuck with gravitic soliton<BR>
focussing then. No big drama.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:49:18 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
Hmmmmm.<BR>
<BR>
I was just thinking about having a world navy that includes 500,000 ton<BR>
ships and/or hundreds of 5,000 ton ships.  Not really what I want IMTU.<BR>
I'd like to be vaguely realistic, but not at the expense of the TU that I<BR>
wish to develop.  "How little can I reasonably expect worlds in the 3I to<BR>
spend on their navies?" I ask myself.<BR>
<BR>
For the sake of argument, I will assume that the average annual salary on a<BR>
typical world is about cr 6,000.  Perhaps a typical government will have an<BR>
annual budget of about cr 2,000 per citizen.  If this world is not<BR>
balkanized, it will probably have a smaller military budget (per capita)<BR>
than most current Terran states.  A quick check of an US State Department<BR>
web site suggests that countries on a balkanized world spend between 3% and<BR>
30% of their budgets on the military, with a median of about 8%.  Off the<BR>
top of my head, I'm going to try 1% as typical for non-balkanized worlds<BR>
(sure this is low, but I am on a mission here).  This would generate a<BR>
military budget of cr 20 per capita.  Now, how much of this goes into the<BR>
navy?  The Imperial and subsector navies are out there, but perhaps 5% is a<BR>
good place to start (remember, I'm still on a mission).  This would lead to<BR>
cr 1 per capita available for the navy's annual budget.  Fudging the costs<BR>
of running a navy of space- and star-ships, I will assume that the standing<BR>
navy has ships worth about 10x the annual budget.  Perhaps cr 10 per capita.<BR>
<BR>
So, where does this leave me?<BR>
<BR>
	Pop	population		navy<BR>
	0-5	<1,000,000		none<BR>
	6	1,000,000		a fighter<BR>
	7	10,000,000		a few type S scouts<BR>
	8	100,000,000		a few type C cruisers<BR>
	9	1,000,000,000		a few 5,000 ton battleships<BR>
	A	10,000,000,000	a few really big ships (50,000 ton monsters)<BR>
<BR>
This I can live with.  There are still some worlds with monster ships, but<BR>
most make do with  much more modest vessels.  Using low multipliers for the<BR>
population helps, and I am stretching the limits here.  That's OK by me.<BR>
<BR>
Hmmmmm.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 14:52:22 -0700<BR>
From: Cheryl <cheryl@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
The NASA website has photos of a candle flame in zero-g, and data from a<BR>
wide variety of combustion experiments in zero-g.<BR>
<BR>
See: http://microgravity.grc.nasa.gov/MSD/MSD_htmls/combustion.html<BR>
<BR>
But basically the posts thus far have been on the money regarding fire<BR>
behavior in that environment.<BR>
<BR>
- -Cheryl Glenn<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 14:59:12 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Small Ships/Big Ships/Fleets<BR>
<BR>
> One point to keep in mind on major fleet units is that<BR>
> they are going to be kept concentrated for military<BR>
> action.  In spite of having the largest and strongest<BR>
> fleet in the late 19th Century, the British kept the<BR>
> fleet at major stations.  For most purposes, the<BR>
> watchword was "send a gunboat."  IMTU most player<BR>
> encounters are with the small stuff.<BR>
><BR>
I agree.  Large naval vessels mean that naval resources a more concentrated,<BR>
meaning few vessels doing day-to-day patrolling.  PC ships an pirates become<BR>
more playable, IMHO.  If the Imperium is limited to only 'smaller' ships,<BR>
there will be thousands of them everywhere.  And the Imperium can afford to<BR>
build small ships that will out class anything in civilian hands (better<BR>
drives, no cargo, lots of armor, better sensors, etc).<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:05:21 -0500<BR>
From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@hex.net><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
At 09:30 PM 08/01/2000, Eris wrote:<BR>
>On 08/01/00 at 08:51 PM,  "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com> said:<BR>
><snip><BR>
>Peter, the positions of bridge positions isn't at issue.  Its making<BR>
>sure the design sequences we are talking about producing give<BR>
>results that *allow* for characters at each of the "stations" you<BR>
>referred to have an effect on the situation.  If the sensors<BR>
>automatically detect targets and the computer automatically<BR>
>processes and identifies those targets, then what is Sensor skill<BR>
>good for?  If the computer calculates and executes the evasion<BR>
>patterns, then what does the pilot do except hit a button?  If<BR>
>gunnery programs receive targeting data from the sensor programs and<BR>
>plot a firing pattern what does the Gunner do?<BR>
<BR>
Well when I was a "sensor operator", your skill came into play in the <BR>
bogeys what where to say the least borderline. The clear cut bogeys, became <BR>
Vampires, Skunks, etc. Also the sensor operators skill had an effect on <BR>
EW/ECCM, but that was due to the training that was received.<BR>
<BR>
I put my skills into gray area targets like a airborne bogey with a closing <BR>
range rate of over 300 mph, and at range of 20,000 yards but the distance <BR>
never decreased or increased. It also showed as surface target at the same <BR>
range rate and distance. The SPG-60 also was able to detect and track it, <BR>
other radars onboard also were able to detect and track it too. What was <BR>
it, well it an aircraft over 100 nm+ that due to atmospheric anomaly called <BR>
a "Duct", was being detected/tracked by my ship.<BR>
<BR>
I view sensor operator skills as being used for borderline tasks, or <BR>
unusual conditions. The routine stuff the hardware/software will deal with <BR>
it, better than most operators.<G><BR>
<BR>
Sinbad Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 15:07:50 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
<BR>
> Are you guys playing the same Traveller I am? I'm at work and so can't<BR>
> reach Book 2 and HG2, but maybe someone can back me up on this:<BR>
><BR>
> Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> > BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does<BR>
one<BR>
> > > need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
> > > calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The<BR>
> > whole<BR>
> > > idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid<BR>
hydrogen,<BR>
> > > when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
<BR>
Well, a casual glance at my copy of HG only makes reference to tons (which<BR>
represent approximately 14 stere).  I didn't see the term dtons used, but it<BR>
was just a casual glance.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:17:11 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin writes:<BR>
>I suppose that of the active listmembers, this is most directed to Robert<BR>
>O'Connor, but anyone who's read it and feels they're qualified to comment<BR>
>should by all means feel free...<BR>
<BR>
	I'm not much of a geneticist, but I do know a little about evolution.<BR>
	:)<BR>
<BR>
>In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that activates<BR>
>some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes apparently trigger<BR>
>the 'next step' in evolution.  Part of the story involves a suggestion that<BR>
>this was also the cause of the progression from H. Sap. Neanderthalensis to<BR>
>H. Sap. Sapiens.  Is this plausible?  (And can anyone think of a way to<BR>
>turn it into a good Traveller adventure [which would be guaranteed a home<BR>
>at Freelance Traveller]?)<BR>
<BR>
	I'm not clear on exactly what is being posited, but it doesn't sound<BR>
	plausible.  Is he talking about some DNA that has been sitting dormant<BR>
	in the human genome waiting for the right conditions to become active?<BR>
	Where did it come from?  Why hasn't it changed? (occasional errors in<BR>
	copying tend to alter DNA over many generations unless natural selection<BR>
	continuously removes the altered copies).  In what sense is this<BR>
	evolution?  It is important to keep in mind that evolution by natural<BR>
	selection is not a predetermined process.  It is an opportunistic<BR>
	process that depends on current conditions, available variability in<BR>
	genes for traits, developmental patterns already established in the<BR>
	lineage, etc.<BR>
<BR>
	Still, if you really want it in an adventure...  maybe the Hivers stuck<BR>
	some geneered DNA with incredibly effective replication and repair genes<BR>
	that somehow only replicate and repair the Hiver DNA.  Apart from the<BR>
	replication/repair bits, this DNA would include genes that ensure that<BR>
	the only cells in the body which carry the Hiver DNA are the germ cell<BR>
	lines (in the ovaries and testes).  Other genes would activate to produce<BR>
	enzymes that digest the Hiver DNA if any human tries to sequence that DNA.<BR>
	The real payload in the Hiver DNA would have to be able to make<BR>
	sophisticated changes in the development of the human embryo, and the<BR>
	subsequent biology of the human, despite there having been (probably minor)<BR>
	changes in the human DNA, development, and biology over the millenia.<BR>
	That would still not be evolution, just a predetermined change once the<BR>
	DNA insert was activated.  Actually, it sounds like something that only<BR>
	Grandfather would be up to.  Hope this helps.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:21:33 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
It varies with the ship, but they are generally larger.  They range up to<BR>
1500 feet in length and they are significantly larger in displacement<BR>
because unlike a carrier, they are closer to rectangular parallelpipdeds in<BR>
hullform.  I've been trying for years to track down the data on these<BR>
topics.  The USCG and other ship registries keep GRT data and uthey are used<BR>
in computing fees for Panama canal transit,  I found a little bit of info on<BR>
the web, but you have to pay for full access.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 5:07 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> >After a lot of work at it, I believe that the NIMITZ class are<BR>
approximately<BR>
> >20,000 dT in Traveller terms.<BR>
> >They are roughly 1050 feet (320 m) in length.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> How big is a supertanker compared to a Nimitz?<BR>
><BR>
> ______________________________<BR>
> summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
> (This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in<BR>
California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:52:35 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 02:15 PM,  Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> A modest proposal (that will almost surely get ripped to pieces<BR>
>> :) require that custom designs fit into the constraints of the<BR>
>> modular system, i.e. you can only design *custom* modules (or<BR>
>> perhaps cheat slightly by combining more than one module, etc.)<BR>
>> Of course, you might end up with something like GT:FFS, and I<BR>
>> don't think there's going to be a lot of support for that.<BR>
<BR>
IMO, there is only one thing wrong with the way GT's module system<BR>
works for quick ship design and that is that it the way it rolls<BR>
"power slices" into components.  If it listed the vol, area, mass<BR>
and cost for only the component and included power requirement as a<BR>
separate value, then added a section for Power Plants it would be<BR>
exactly what a lot of us are looking for.  Of course, we need more<BR>
modules, but a subset of Ve2 tweeked for Traveller would let us<BR>
build those modules.<BR>
<BR>
If you haven't looked at GURPS SPACE, 3ed, you need to.  It<BR>
incorporates a pretty good and easy to use Modular Ship Design<BR>
System in 25 pages, and thats for all kinds of technology.<BR>
<BR>
< it looks like I snipped *all* of Bruce's content <g> but that was<BR>
because I agreed with all of it and didn't have anything<BR>
constructive to add ><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 16:58:38 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Re : Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
On 08/03/00 at 07:34 AM,  "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Jeff Zeitlin wrote :-<BR>
>> In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that activates<BR>
>> some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes apparently trigger<BR>
>> the 'next step' in evolution.<BR>
<BR>
>I haven't read the book. Is the virus engineered or natural? If the<BR>
>former, how did the designers know what to target to trigger the 'next<BR>
>stage of evolution'? What criteria did they use?<BR>
<BR>
>If natural, where was the reservoir (e.g. influenza, West Nile virus)?<BR>
>Why haven't there been case reports of mutations (unless mind-clouding<BR>
>psionics or immortality are part of the package...)?<BR>
<BR>
I haven't read the book either, but it seems to me that *both* the<BR>
virus and the sequence of DNA in the human genome would have to have<BR>
been engineered for this to work.  The "next phase of evolution" ,in<BR>
that case, would have been pre-programmed and not natural selection<BR>
at all.  The "engineers" would introduce the virus into the<BR>
population at selected times to induce the changes.<BR>
<BR>
I hope we aren't talking about changes that would alter existing<BR>
members of the engineered species, humans.  It would be much cleaner<BR>
to propagate the changes through offspring.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:02:53 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 05:49 PM,  Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca> said:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>So, where does this leave me?<BR>
<BR>
>	Pop	population		navy<BR>
>	0-5	<1,000,000		none<BR>
>	6	1,000,000		a fighter<BR>
>	7	10,000,000		a few type S scouts<BR>
>	8	100,000,000		a few type C cruisers<BR>
>	9	1,000,000,000		a few 5,000 ton battleships<BR>
>	A	10,000,000,000	a few really big ships (50,000 ton monsters)<BR>
<BR>
>This I can live with.  There are still some worlds with monster ships,<BR>
>but most make do with  much more modest vessels.  Using low multipliers<BR>
>for the population helps, and I am stretching the limits here.  That's OK<BR>
>by me.<BR>
<BR>
Looks good to me!  Even if you had a range of values, say 50% to 300%, around your 10 IpCr per head it looks great! <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:27:38 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> My only point was that I would have expected much larger<BR>
> spinal mounts to be available for 1M dton ships.  However,<BR>
> on the subject of the employment of spinal mounts...<BR>
><BR>
So would I, but here is where "canon" has got us by the tail.<BR>
<BR>
This really is the critical factor.for ship sizes, the size of the spinal<BR>
mount.  I larger sizes conferred range advantages as they did in FF&Sm, then<BR>
there would be an arms race to build larger one with better targetting<BR>
arrays capable of developing solutions at longer ranges.  In CT/MT, however,<BR>
the largest TL15 mount is the T, whose size can be derived by measuring the<BR>
TIGRESS diameter or the length of the NEMESIS.  the TIGRESS diameter is more<BR>
restrictive, so that is the key.<BR>
<BR>
Unfortunately, any ship size above this in the canonical 3I would be an<BR>
increasingly impractical investment.<BR>
<BR>
I have to go for the moment, more on this later.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:29:20 EDT<BR>
From: JFZeigler@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 8/2/00 3:43:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that activates<BR>
>  some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes apparently trigger<BR>
>  the 'next step' in evolution.  Part of the story involves a suggestion that<BR>
>  this was also the cause of the progression from H. Sap. Neanderthalensis to<BR>
>  H. Sap. Sapiens.  Is this plausible?  (And can anyone think of a way to<BR>
>  turn it into a good Traveller adventure [which would be guaranteed a home<BR>
>  at Freelance Traveller]?)<BR>
<BR>
I am not a molecular biologist, nor do I play one on TV.  I did just read<BR>
_Darwin's Radio_, though.<BR>
<BR>
The basic premise seems sound.  Clearly evolution has more to work<BR>
with than the occasional random mutation and the simple sexual<BR>
shuffling of traits.  Retroviruses are real objects and are probably a<BR>
major source of genetic variation.  Meanwhile, the "punctuated equilibrium"<BR>
model for macroevolution seems to have evidence behind it.<BR>
<BR>
As to our DNA somehow being able to "sense" that the human species<BR>
is under stress, and then give rise to just the right variations to produce<BR>
a "homo superior" subspecies?  No, I find that hard to believe.  Bear's<BR>
speculative structure got a bit too elaborate for me at that point.<BR>
<BR>
Made a hell of a good story, though.<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav: Hmmm.  Maybe if that "library" of useful possible phenotypes<BR>
was deliberately placed in our DNA by little winged critters 300,000<BR>
years ago. . .Might explain the rapid subspeciation among all the<BR>
transplanted human groups once the Ancient era was over. . .<BR>
<BR>
- ----------<BR>
Jon F. Zeigler: Mathematician, computer geek, amateur historian, freelance<BR>
writer, occasional scribbler of bad poetry<BR>
"For any statement, no matter how innocuous, there exists a nonempty<BR>
set of people who will take offense at it."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:34:20 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 8/2/00 1:44 PM, johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu issued<BR>
forth:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> http://www.microtactix.com (not up at this moment)<BR>
<BR>
Why not, and when will it be?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:36:26 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
<BR>
Dunno...when I tried going there it kept timing out. I have no<BR>
relationship with them...the link was copped from the first site<BR>
mentioned. <BR>
<BR>
Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Via electronic medium on 8/2/00 1:44 PM, johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu issued<BR>
> forth:<BR>
> <BR>
> ><BR>
> > http://www.microtactix.com (not up at this moment)<BR>
> <BR>
> Why not, and when will it be?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 08:35:21 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Warships and Privateers<BR>
<BR>
> Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:55:29 GMT<BR>
> From: "Jeff Rowse" <jeffrowse@hotmail.com><BR>
> Subject: Warships & Privateers<BR>
><BR>
> All this talk of which Merchies could hammer which Man-o'-War reminds me -<BR>
> what about the 'Q'-ships?  Bog-standard Merchant hulls with concealed<BR>
> weaponry; the 'bad guys' in their warship would come close in to board and<BR>
> plunder, then find themselves looking down the business end of more<BR>
weaponry<BR>
> than they carried themselves.  How do you cover things like this IYTU?<BR>
> (IMTU, the Q-ship has a few dozen AFV-sized weapons hiding behind cutouts<BR>
in<BR>
> the hull...)<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
That works. As does the old 'Meson Gun in the Cargo Bay' trick. Plus the<BR>
'Plasma Gun behind the Fake Airlock' trick.<BR>
<BR>
Mind you, if they dont work, you can expect to get shot by the bad guys ...<BR>
<BR>
> Personally, I prefer a 'choose a hull size and stick the modules together'<BR>
> approach; I cannot remember who suggested it (sorry), but I disagree with<BR>
> the idea that those of us who are more interested in just 'sticking the<BR>
bits<BR>
> together' should be penalised with less-than-optimal ships whereas someone<BR>
> who wants to spend hours juggling every last cubic cm and mW can have<BR>
> something that will knock the stuffing out of us...  By all means give us<BR>
> the ability to create our own ships to the nth degree of precision if we<BR>
> want to, but how about a supply of 'prefab modules' as well?<BR>
<BR>
The #1 reason I am doing this is to get a set of consistent standard modules<BR>
that are built from a standard design system.<BR>
<BR>
It is probable that the modules will get a 10-20% 'volume discount' over<BR>
custom jobs.<BR>
<BR>
I am also thinking about putting in some currency conversion rules, or at<BR>
least a sidebar on 'Why isn't everything TL15 ?'.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 15:44:22 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Anecdotes<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 8/2/00 3:05 PM, sinbad@hex.net issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> I put my skills into gray area targets like a airborne bogey with a closing<BR>
> range rate of over 300 mph, and at range of 20,000 yards but the distance<BR>
> never decreased or increased. It also showed as surface target at the same<BR>
> range rate and distance. The SPG-60 also was able to detect and track it,<BR>
> other radars onboard also were able to detect and track it too. What was<BR>
> it, well it an aircraft over 100 nm+ that due to atmospheric anomaly called<BR>
> a "Duct", was being detected/tracked by my ship.<BR>
<BR>
Cool story, a few examples like this should be collected, any more out on<BR>
the list?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 15:45:03 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship <BR>
<BR>
>From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
<BR>
>IMTU, we have super-spy Dick Salamander (played by dashing<BR>
>Dirk Savage).  Lots of high-tech gadgets, super-villains<BR>
>like the evil yet suave SolSec master spy who holds his<BR>
>dope stick in that weird 'foreign' way and always has a<BR>
>few beautifully biosculpted minions is skin-tight<BR>
neo->leather body suits,or the powerful Zhodani psionic<BR>
with >his brilliant master plan to bring down the Imperium.<BR>
 >Hey, it plays well everywhere.<BR>
<BR>
Hmm -- I think my current campaign will have to include<BR>
some references to Dick Salamder's holovid show.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2870<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (rly-yc04.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.36]) by air-yc03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:45:50 2000<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:45:23 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA79995;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:45:21 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:45:06 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA79948<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:45:06 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:45:06 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008022245.SAA79948@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2870<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2871</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 5:58:21 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2871<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for the fire in Zero G<BR>
Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
RE: navy<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Miniatures Question<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
re:  Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
Re: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions (attn: Leonard)<BR>
Re: FAQ question<BR>
re:  Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
RE: Should I get MT?<BR>
Big Ships or something that can travel really fast and support life whilst doing it?<BR>
Re: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:36:09 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Thanks for the fire in Zero G<BR>
<BR>
Hi all,<BR>
<BR>
Thank you to everyone who described what fire would look like in Zero <BR>
G - I've shamelessly cribbed your descriptions for an event in the <BR>
scenario I'm working on.<BR>
<BR>
Leonard, Nick and Dave Shayne deserve special thanks.<BR>
<BR>
Cheers,<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:34:15 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
<BR>
  Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net> writes:<BR>
<BR>
>SD Mooney must have used some form of telepathy, virtually reflecting every<BR>
>one of my thoughts on the matter, when he wrote:<BR>
<BR>
That's the Zhodani scenario I'm working on for BITS.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
>For me, the bottom line is that I really don't believe that tinkering with<BR>
>the ship design system will make the game any better, and has some potential<BR>
>to make it worse.<BR>
<BR>
Particularly if the plug and play system is poor.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:32:17 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >That's 3 years without big ships.<BR>
>Three years is still "years." I choose my words very carefully.<BR>
<BR>
True, but that is three years out of *twenty-three*. I too choose my <BR>
words carefully.<BR>
<BR>
> >Then we have another 19 years with such [large] size ships being around.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>We also have Adventure 6: Expedition to Zhodane in 1981, The Traveller Book<BR>
>and Adventure 7: Broadsword in 1982, The Traveller Adventure in 1983,<BR>
>Beltstrike in 1984, all the Alien Modules (1984-1986), and Marc Miller's<BR>
>Traveller (QSDS) and T4's Starships (SSDS) in 1996, all without any mention<BR>
>of ships larger than 5,000 dtons*. Bulk Carriers are 1,000-3,000 dtons;<BR>
>cruisers are consistently 1,000-2,000 dtons.<BR>
<BR>
QSDS and SSDS are red herrings here, as it was always the intent to <BR>
bring out a system for larger ships. QSDS was a "simple" method for <BR>
generating player's ships. SSDS was intended as a more optimised <BR>
version of this also suitable for escorts.<BR>
<BR>
All the other books concentrate on ships that *players* are likely to <BR>
encounter in an RPG session, maybe even interact with. The players <BR>
are unlikely to interact much with a 200kdT dreadnought (exceptto get <BR>
out of its way). By putting the modifications to High Guard's design <BR>
sequence into the AMs it was possible for the more wargame orientated <BR>
players to build their own.<BR>
<BR>
>There seems to be plenty of evidence that someone at GDW/Far Futures<BR>
>considered ships larger than 5,000 dtons optional, to the point of<BR>
>specifically excluding them from basic source material even after the<BR>
>publication of HG (HG1 does have 1 Mdton ships, by the way).<BR>
<BR>
Why change it if it is aimed at players (ie RPG scale) not major <BR>
fleet engagements. HG was out and available. And the first serious <BR>
revision of CT (not the minor ones) was MT which included a 1MdT <BR>
design sequence out of the box. TNE had no design sequence until <BR>
Brilliant lances and FFS1, both of which handled big ships. T4 was <BR>
aimed to be a modern CT and refocused on the smaller ships (even more <BR>
relevant to M0 canonically as well).<BR>
<BR>
>I accept the label of "heretic" because I know I won't win this argument.<BR>
>There are too many people for whom the wargame aspects of the OTU are more<BR>
>important than maintaining a broad stage for roleplaying -- and I include<BR>
>everyone who ever thought the Rebellion was a good idea in this category,<BR>
>by default.<BR>
<BR>
Dun yourself a heretic if you like, but there is a space for both <BR>
5000 dT ships and superdreadnoughts. The frontier will have smaller <BR>
ships anyway, as the bigger ones are more strategic. The presence of <BR>
them doesn't inhibit roleplaying. Indeed, a 5kDT 'battleship' is as <BR>
dangerous to players as a 200kDT one. The only real difference is the <BR>
speed at which they die.<BR>
<BR>
>I prefer a Traveller where the character's actions matter, where heroic<BR>
>stands and desperate measures might just succeed once in a while, and where<BR>
>there is a "remote central government (referred to ... as the Imperium),<BR>
>possed of great industrial and technological might, but *unable*, due to<BR>
>the sheer distances and travel times involved, to exert total control<BR>
>everywhere within its star-spanning realm." (Book 4, p. 1. Emphasis mine.)<BR>
<BR>
And the jump lag provides such a situation, combined with the overall <BR>
limited numbers of ships. You'll have less 200kDT monsters for the <BR>
same money as the Kinunirs. Hundreds of Kinunir's would exert a more <BR>
effective control of the systems with the borders than a single <BR>
200kdT Plankwell would, because they can be in many places at once, <BR>
with the scope to severely damage any player scaled ship.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:57:05 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: RE: navy<BR>
<BR>
At 2:17 -0400 2/8/00,  Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
>BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does one<BR>
>need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
>calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The whole<BR>
>idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid hydrogen,<BR>
>when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
<BR>
CT.<BR>
<BR>
CT Book 2 Starships p13, line 6 (printing 1981 from BFB compilation)<BR>
CT Book 5 High Guard 2nd Edition p22, 1st line.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:46:10 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 20:10 -0400 1/8/00, eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
>Dom, I don't have a problem you using EP's. Heck I don't have a <BR>
>problem using them for a lot of things myself. However, we also need <BR>
>to know how many MW are in each EP, because my players are going to <BR>
>ask...and you know it. <g><BR>
>So, why can't EP's be defined as being a much smaller number of MW's?<BR>
<BR>
No reason.<BR>
<BR>
>Hey, let's say, 1 EP = 1 MW!! That would make us both happy wouldn't it? <weg><BR>
<BR>
Because I'd need a PP that generates 250 EPs to fire a single laser, <BR>
which means my whole hull will be Power Plant <weg>.<BR>
<BR>
Okay, so I'm touchy about HG2 but I think the EPs should be quite a <BR>
small abstract number, preferable a whole number. None of this <BR>
decimal stuff for the modular sequence ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 15:51:13 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
>From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
>Somebody even had the nerve to tell me "That's not how<BR>
>mechs are *supposed* to be painted."  Huh?  The damn<BR>
>things are supposed to be four stories tall, and radiate<BR>
>goodness-only-knows how much heat.  How much good will a<BR>
>little blotchy green paint do?  <BR>
>I have to confess that I sometimes feel the same way about<BR>
>starships being "military ultrablack." I often find it<BR>
>nicer to picture them with bright (and, perhaps, heraldic)<BR>
>"paint" jobs... <BR>
<BR>
One of my college classmates once remarked, upon seeing the<BR>
box for a model kit of a very large airplane (a B-52 or a<BR>
military transport, I forget which) asked, "why is it all<BR>
camouflaged?  Is the enemy going to mistake it for a flying<BR>
tree?"  I tried to explain about camouflage being helpful<BR>
when the plane is on the ground and planes above are<BR>
looking for it...<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 19:01:39 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Miniatures Question<BR>
<BR>
> Loren asked us about our preferences for miniatures a while<BR>
> ago.  I have a further response for him, but I'd like to<BR>
> through it to the list:  What about paper or cardboard<BR>
> vehicles?<BR>
<BR>
You are not the first one the idea has occured to. I'm looking at a lot of <BR>
things (and I have an article from Rob Prior on the subject for JTAS).<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 00:07:54 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 14:38 -0400 2/8/00,  "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com> wrote:<BR>
>IIRC (its been a long time since I last read HG)  for  every  USP<BR>
>factor over 9 of a spinal mount meson gun you  get  an  automatic<BR>
>critical if you hit.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Nope, spinals do 1 extra damage roll reduced by armour factor for each USP >9<BR>
All weapons do 1 critical for each factor their USP exceeds a ship's <BR>
size code. So a USP5 Beam laser system (6 lasers in 2 turrets at <BR>
TL13+) will cause 3 automatic criticals against a Beowulf/Marava.<BR>
These are reduced by armour for every two factors...<BR>
<BR>
Source HG2 p41<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 17:05:21 -0500<BR>
From: Sinbad Sam <sinbad@hex.net><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
At 09:30 PM 08/01/2000, Eris wrote:<BR>
>On 08/01/00 at 08:51 PM,  "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com> said:<BR>
><snip><BR>
>Peter, the positions of bridge positions isn't at issue.  Its making<BR>
>sure the design sequences we are talking about producing give<BR>
>results that *allow* for characters at each of the "stations" you<BR>
>referred to have an effect on the situation.  If the sensors<BR>
>automatically detect targets and the computer automatically<BR>
>processes and identifies those targets, then what is Sensor skill<BR>
>good for?  If the computer calculates and executes the evasion<BR>
>patterns, then what does the pilot do except hit a button?  If<BR>
>gunnery programs receive targeting data from the sensor programs and<BR>
>plot a firing pattern what does the Gunner do?<BR>
<BR>
Well when I was a "sensor operator", your skill came into play in the <BR>
bogeys what where to say the least borderline. The clear cut bogeys, became <BR>
Vampires, Skunks, etc. Also the sensor operators skill had an effect on <BR>
EW/ECCM, but that was due to the training that was received.<BR>
<BR>
I put my skills into gray area targets like a airborne bogey with a closing <BR>
range rate of over 300 mph, and at range of 20,000 yards but the distance <BR>
never decreased or increased. It also showed as surface target at the same <BR>
range rate and distance. The SPG-60 also was able to detect and track it, <BR>
other radars onboard also were able to detect and track it too. What was <BR>
it, well it an aircraft over 100 nm+ that due to atmospheric anomaly called <BR>
a "Duct", was being detected/tracked by my ship.<BR>
<BR>
I view sensor operator skills as being used for borderline tasks, or <BR>
unusual conditions. The routine stuff the hardware/software will deal with <BR>
it, better than most operators.<G><BR>
<BR>
Sinbad Sam<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:17:37 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Spinward Marches Trade Map Done!!!<BR>
<BR>
>From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
<BR>
>After a long time and several restarts the Spinward<BR>
>Marches trade map is complete. (Thank Ghu!).<BR>
>Please give it a look and tell me what you think. <BR>
<BR>
I think it's great!  You've put a lot of work into it, and<BR>
I'll be glad to use the results.  I'm starting a campaign<BR>
involving interstellar organized crime set in the Spinward<BR>
Marches just after the 5FW, so trade routes are of obvious<BR>
importance.  Now I suppose I'll have to buy Far Trader.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 00:09:34 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 14:38 -0400 2/8/00, "Nick Bradbeer" <nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:<BR>
>Alright; some observations, in bullet point form.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
>Fair enough?<BR>
<BR>
Yes.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 00:18:24 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 18:45 -0400 2/8/00, Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> wrote:<BR>
>QSDS ships represented modular construction. The modules were<BR>
>standardized throughout the third imperium, any class A starport could<BR>
>make these and they were cheap: 25% off the list price. QSDS the system<BR>
>was entirely table driven, and was derived from a list members earlier<BR>
>effort at making a modular system for FFS1. QSDS appeared (in horribly<BR>
>chopped up form) in the T4 manual; it may still be available on line<BR>
>somewhere.<BR>
<BR>
Version 1.5 with errata (the last version) is at BITS <BR>
http://www.bits.org.uk/ -> archive page. As is RPSCS.<BR>
<BR>
>SSDS represented standard construction. More optimization could be done<BR>
>than with QSDS, less than with FFS. SSDS the system, was partly table<BR>
>and partly equation driven. The game effect of using SSDS designs was to<BR>
>make the ship cost 10% less than list price.<BR>
<BR>
SSDS is at the Missouri Archive IIRC. URL linked from BITS.<BR>
>Add to that an FFS-incompatible system for designing vehicles (VDS, done<BR>
>by Greg Porter, which was used in Central Supply Catalog, and my<BR>
>favorite design software of all time: Infini-V) you can see things went<BR>
>downhill pretty fast.<BR>
<BR>
A demo version of Infini-V can be downloaded from BITS (product page).<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:08:22 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> The largest carriers ever built are the NIMITZ class.  The largest of these<BR>
> will be RONALD REAGAN (CVN-76)<BR>
> which is building at this time.  Following REAGAN, I don't know what size<BR>
> the CVX and follow-on class will be.<BR>
><BR>
> After a lot of work at it, I believe that the NIMITZ class are approximately<BR>
> 20,000 dT in Traveller terms.<BR>
> They are roughly 1050 feet (320 m) in length.<BR>
<BR>
20,000 dT is 270,000 m^3. Which means that the Nimitz would have to<BR>
have an average cross sectional area of 844 m^2. Let's assume that<BR>
she's twice as wide as she is tall. that'd give 21 m high by 41 m wide.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:14:31 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> That means that TL 20 ships have no heat production. And TL 20 *is*<BR>
>> possible. Just unlikely.<BR>
><BR>
> Either limit it to 1%, or simply let TL 20+ ships have no heat<BR>
> production.  I'm not terribly bothered, some reasonable extrapolation<BR>
> of black globe generators should allow near-zero heat production at<BR>
> TL 15-17, since black globe generators can apparently turn<BR>
> high-entropy energy into low-entropy energy.<BR>
<BR>
Which is why I wish they'd done a better job of cloning the Langston<BR>
field (which is rather obviously what black/white globes are based on).<BR>
<BR>
Langston fields absorb energy, but all you can do with it is store it<BR>
to release later. And you can't really "store" much of it, except in<BR>
the field itself. The field radiates the energy as if it was a big<BR>
black-body. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:26:46 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Mark Cook <markc@peak.org><BR>
Subject: Re: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
> <BR>
> In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that activates<BR>
> some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes apparently trigger<BR>
> the 'next step' in evolution.  Part of the story involves a suggestion that<BR>
> this was also the cause of the progression from H. Sap. Neanderthalensis to<BR>
> H. Sap. Sapiens.  Is this plausible?<BR>
<BR>
I can't address the mutation/evolution aspect of the concept, but Bear<BR>
founded it on a significantly flawed assumption.<BR>
<BR>
The overwhelming evidence available concludes that we did *not* evolve<BR>
from Neanderthalensis, but rather that they were "cousins" to our<BR>
real evolutionary ancestors.  They (Neanderthal) died out, and the<BR>
other branch (ours) continued to evolve into H. Sapiens Sapiens.<BR>
<BR>
        - Mark C.<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
 mark f. cook   *   shoestring graphics & printing   *  markc@ssgfx.com<BR>
 7160 n.w. somerset dr. * corvallis, or, 97330  *  http://www.ssgfx.com<BR>
 Phone: 541-745-5709                                  Fax: 541-745-5818      <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
          64,999,987 firearm owners killed no one yesterday.<BR>
                  Somehow, it didn't make the news.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:28:02 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
> At 2:17 -0400 2/8/00,  Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> >BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does<BR>
one<BR>
> >need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
> >calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The<BR>
whole<BR>
> >idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid hydrogen,<BR>
> >when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
><BR>
> CT.<BR>
><BR>
> CT Book 2 Starships p13, line 6 (printing 1981 from BFB compilation)<BR>
> CT Book 5 High Guard 2nd Edition p22, 1st line.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Thanks, Dom.<BR>
<BR>
Now I'll have to check my 1977 edition of CT when I get home.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:42:24 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> 20,000 dT is 270,000 m^3. Which means that the Nimitz would have to<BR>
> have an average cross sectional area of 844 m^2. Let's assume that<BR>
> she's twice as wide as she is tall. that'd give 21 m high by 41 m wide.<BR>
<BR>
She's also not rectangular, or anywhere close, which ups both the width and the<BR>
heigh significantly.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:15:39 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions (attn: Leonard)<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> 20,000 dT is 270,000 m^3. Which means that the Nimitz would have to<BR>
> have an average cross sectional area of 844 m^2. Let's assume that<BR>
> she's twice as wide as she is tall. that'd give 21 m high by 41 m wide.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Well, here's some of the data:<BR>
<BR>
Method 1:<BR>
Bounding Volume estimate:<BR>
<BR>
NIMITZ<BR>
Length1092 ft (332.8m)<BR>
Beam 134 ft (40.84)<BR>
Draught 100 ft (30.48m)<BR>
Bounding Volume = 414,322 stere = 30,690dT<BR>
<BR>
Now, I assume that the ship actually occupies half to 2/3 the RPP bounding<BR>
volume.  This gives about 15,300 dT to 20,400 dT.<BR>
<BR>
- ----<BR>
<BR>
Method 2:<BR>
Actual volume figures for USS WHIDBEY ISLAND (LSD-41):<BR>
<BR>
72, 180 stere.  Displacement 15,704 tons<BR>
<BR>
Scale this up and you arrive at an approximate figure for carriers:<BR>
(following figures given are fo NIMITZ)<BR>
<BR>
91,209/15,704 = 5.81<BR>
5.81* 72,180 = 419,222 stere.  This figure is only approximate because the<BR>
hullforms aren't overly similar.<BR>
<BR>
Strange that stere values are derived using two separate methods but roughly<BR>
agree, even though one is a bounding volume.  I haven't been able to find<BR>
exact internal volume figures.  Wish I could.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:19:00 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
<<snip>><BR>
> <BR>
> But I must admit that there is one really cool thing about Gurps<BR>
> Traveller.  (Other than the fact that my referee writes for them and I<BR>
> must praise them openly and buy him lots of Coke, which he drinks like...<BR>
> well, a penguin.  ^_-)<BR>
> <BR>
> Instead of rolling for hours and hours to get characters that would live,<BR>
> fill the needed spot in the party, and suit my style of play, I just build<BR>
> them.<BR>
> <BR>
> My first CT character ever was perfect-- beginner's luck, I guess.  The<BR>
> rest of them took a while to create.<BR>
> <BR>
> Kiri-chan  ^_^<BR>
> <BR>
> "...where I come from, Penguin Boy, a palm tree in the dumpster is<BR>
> regarded as a BAD sign... no matter what the Ambassador from Mongo says...<BR>
> what sector is that in anyways?"<BR>
>                                 --Lady Mitsuko Kisaragi haut-Rensselaer<BR>
<BR>
Now _that_ is a character quote for the ages! ;-D<BR>
<BR>
For those just joining our story, I refer you to:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/baycon_2000.htm<BR>
<BR>
The last three photos picture the TMLers in question (Kiri, Doug, and<BR>
Glenn).<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:37:56 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
<BR>
>Anyone have an idea of why I'm being refused a connection<BR>
>to this site?  I was trying to find out more about the<BR>
>Condition Reflex Infantry mentioned in some posts a while<BR>
>ago.  <BR>
<BR>
Unable to access solsec? for the purpose of researching<BR>
highly classified information?  Citizen, please wait right<BR>
there while I make a brief call ....<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:40:40 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Should I get MT?<BR>
<BR>
Further to this thread, are the MegaTraveller errata<BR>
collected and incorporated into the text anywhere (other<BR>
than in marginalia of my MT books)?<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 01:54:45 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Big Ships or something that can travel really fast and support life whilst doing it?<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFFCED.CC18F6A0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
<BR>
I was reading this little book on the big bang about the creation of the<BR>
universe. From what I can gather ther whole contents of the Universe were<BR>
diplaced in a matter of seconds, if not less. There fore there is power to<BR>
be had out there somewhere which may be harnessed. It's just a matter of<BR>
being able to create something to harness that power with life sustaining<BR>
properties. If masses unimaginable can be displaced over distances<BR>
incomprehendable, then why can't there be any room for BIG Star ships in the<BR>
assaid imagination of our minds...?<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFFCED.CC18F6A0<BR>
Content-Type: text/x-vcard;<BR>
	name="traveller@lists.imagiconline.com.vcf"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<BR>
	filename="traveller@lists.imagiconline.com.vcf"<BR>
<BR>
BEGIN:VCARD<BR>
VERSION:2.1<BR>
N:;traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
FN:traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
REV:20000803T005445Z<BR>
END:VCARD<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_000B_01BFFCED.CC18F6A0--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:57:33 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Kiri Aradia Morgan <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, John Groth wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Kiri Aradia Morgan wrote:<BR>
> > <BR>
> > "...where I come from, Penguin Boy, a palm tree in the dumpster is<BR>
> > regarded as a BAD sign... no matter what the Ambassador from Mongo says...<BR>
> > what sector is that in anyways?"<BR>
> >                                 --Lady Mitsuko Kisaragi haut-Rensselaer<BR>
> <BR>
> Now _that_ is a character quote for the ages! ;-D<BR>
> <BR>
It was definitely a moment where life was imitating art.<BR>
<BR>
You really would have thought you were in a Traveller adventure.  no shit,<BR>
there we were...<BR>
<BR>
standing outside a DESERTED, closed bar.<BR>
<BR>
Thankfully, I wasn't dressed like I am in the pic below.<BR>
<BR>
> For those just joining our story, I refer you to:<BR>
> <BR>
> http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/baycon_2000.htm<BR>
> <BR>
> The last three photos picture the TMLers in question (Kiri, Doug, and<BR>
> Glenn).<BR>
> <BR>
Hm.  I was actually trying to be my first Trav chara, Lady Julissa.<BR>
Because it was Emperor Strephon's party, and she happens to have saved his<BR>
butt.  But I look a lot more like Mitsuko than I do like Julissa.  Julissa<BR>
was, after all, a redhead.  And probably skinnier than me.<BR>
<BR>
There are not a lot of amerasian redheads in the world.  ^_^<BR>
<BR>
I guess you can call that a Mitsuko pic.  ^_^<BR>
<BR>
Kiri<BR>
<BR>
******************************************************************************<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan                                  93!  Thou Art God<BR>
tiamat@tsoft.com<BR>
<BR>
"If time passes, everything turns into beauty<BR>
If the rains stop, tears clean the scars of memory away<BR>
Everything starts wearing fresh colors<BR>
Every sound begins playing a heartfelt melody<BR>
Jealousy embellishes a page of the epic<BR>
Desire is embraced in a dream..."              -- X-JAPAN<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2871<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yd02.mx.aol.com (rly-yd02.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.2]) by air-yd03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:58:21 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yd02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:57:45 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id UAA85332;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:57:40 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:57:36 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id UAA85298<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:57:36 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:57:36 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008030057.UAA85298@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2871<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2872</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 6:51:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2872<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: FAQ question<BR>
Solomani Currency<BR>
Re: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Travellercentral.com Seach Engines Wierdness<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits [long]<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 01:58:58 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
Does the same entry appear in the reprints?<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 12:28 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > At 2:17 -0400 2/8/00,  Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> > >BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does<BR>
> one<BR>
> > >need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
> > >calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The<BR>
> whole<BR>
> > >idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid<BR>
hydrogen,<BR>
> > >when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > CT.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > CT Book 2 Starships p13, line 6 (printing 1981 from BFB compilation)<BR>
> > CT Book 5 High Guard 2nd Edition p22, 1st line.<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> Thanks, Dom.<BR>
><BR>
> Now I'll have to check my 1977 edition of CT when I get home.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:08:55 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
on 8/2/00 10:57 AM, SD Mooney at dom@cybergoths.u-net.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 2:17 -0400 2/8/00,  Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
>> BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does one<BR>
>> need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
>> calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The whole<BR>
>> idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid hydrogen,<BR>
>> when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
> <BR>
> CT.<BR>
> <BR>
> CT Book 2 Starships p13, line 6 (printing 1981 from BFB compilation)<BR>
> CT Book 5 High Guard 2nd Edition p22, 1st line.<BR>
<BR>
Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
nomenclature came from.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:14:44 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
on 8/2/00 5:57 PM, Kiri Aradia Morgan at tiamat@tsoft.com wrote:<BR>
>> For those just joining our story, I refer you to:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/baycon_2000.htm<BR>
>> <BR>
>> The last three photos picture the TMLers in question (Kiri, Doug, and<BR>
>> Glenn).<BR>
>> <BR>
<BR>
Interesting to see you all in the virtual flesh.  BTW, Doug's SOCOM looks<BR>
just a little to real (I'm assuming it's a prop).<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:18:38 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Solomani Currency<BR>
<BR>
Feel too lazy to read the books, I'm wondering:  Is there an official<BR>
Solomani Confederation currency a la the Imperial Credit?  What's the<BR>
exchange rate.  Any special notes?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
- --<BR>
"Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
mailto:webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://weapons.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:21:26 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
Ian Ferguson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Hmmmmm.<BR>
> <BR>
> I was just thinking about having a world navy that includes 500,000 ton<BR>
> ships and/or hundreds of 5,000 ton ships.  Not really what I want IMTU.<BR>
> I'd like to be vaguely realistic, but not at the expense of the TU that I<BR>
> wish to develop.  "How little can I reasonably expect worlds in the 3I to<BR>
> spend on their navies?" I ask myself.<BR>
> <BR>
<<snips list of assumptions leading to a per-capita Cr 10 value of<BR>
planetary navies>><BR>
> <BR>
> So, where does this leave me?<BR>
> <BR>
>         Pop     population              navy<BR>
>         0-5     <1,000,000              none<BR>
>         6       1,000,000               a fighter<BR>
>         7       10,000,000              a few type S scouts<BR>
>         8       100,000,000             a few type C cruisers<BR>
>         9       1,000,000,000           a few 5,000 ton battleships<BR>
>         A       10,000,000,000  a few really big ships (50,000 ton monsters)<BR>
<BR>
In terms of jump-capable ships, this helps set the parameters on the low<BR>
end.  On the high end (such as the Spinward Marches during the 5FW), I<BR>
found the following jump-capable planetary squadrons in a quick check of<BR>
my (possibly incomplete) copy of 5FW:<BR>
<BR>
Porozlo (Pop A):	1 BatRon, 1 CruRon, 1 AssaultRon<BR>
Efate (Pop 9):		1 BatRon, 1 CruRon<BR>
Jewell (Pop 9):		1 BatRon, 1 CruRon<BR>
Zivije (Pop 9):		1 BatRon, 1 CruRon<BR>
Regina (Pop 8):		2 CruRons<BR>
Alell (Pop 8):		1 CruRon<BR>
Equus (Pop 8):		1 CruRon<BR>
Extolay (Pop 8):	1 CruRon<BR>
Wochiers (Pop 8):	1 CruRon<BR>
<BR>
Only Efate (TL-13) and Jewell (TL-12) possess squadrons capable of J-3<BR>
or better.  The relatively low combat values of the various planetary<BR>
squadrons implies that the ships are at the smaller end of the spectrum<BR>
for their respective categories (about 100,000 dtons for capital ships,<BR>
and 30,000 dtons for cruisers).<BR>
<BR>
Note that this figure does not include SDB squadrons (calculated<BR>
separately IAW _Imperial Squadrons_), which presumably fall outside the<BR>
postulated 5% naval budget.  Ian also explicitly excluded subsector and<BR>
Imperial naval forces, which would presumably contain the vast majority<BR>
of 50,000+ dton cruisers and 200,000+ dton capital ships (or the<BR>
equivalent in battle rider BatRons with tenders).<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> This I can live with.  There are still some worlds with monster ships, but<BR>
> most make do with  much more modest vessels.  Using low multipliers for the<BR>
> population helps, and I am stretching the limits here.  That's OK by me.<BR>
<BR>
And the Spinward Marches in M:1100 pushes the upper limits for planetary<BR>
navies.  Sounds reasonable to me.<BR>
<BR>
Those of us who enjoy the presence of Really Big Ships still have the<BR>
subsector and Imperial forces as a haven.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 02:23:43 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
Can any one expand on this?<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 2:08 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> on 8/2/00 10:57 AM, SD Mooney at dom@cybergoths.u-net.com wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > At 2:17 -0400 2/8/00,  Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> >> BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does<BR>
one<BR>
> >> need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
> >> calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The<BR>
whole<BR>
> >> idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid<BR>
hydrogen,<BR>
> >> when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
> ><BR>
> > CT.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > CT Book 2 Starships p13, line 6 (printing 1981 from BFB compilation)<BR>
> > CT Book 5 High Guard 2nd Edition p22, 1st line.<BR>
><BR>
> Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
> nomenclature came from.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> "Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
> killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
> --<BR>
> Tod Glenn<BR>
> mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
> http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:22:59 EDT<BR>
From: Olegamer@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 8/2/00 9:09:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
 nomenclature came from.<BR>
 <BR>
 Tod<BR>
  >><BR>
<BR>
I think its a T4 convention. <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:33:06 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Victor Abraham Delnore <vad9m@unix.mail.virginia.edu><BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Ian Ferguson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Hmmmmm.<BR>
> <BR>
> I was just thinking about having a world navy that includes 500,000 ton<BR>
> ships and/or hundreds of 5,000 ton ships.  Not really what I want IMTU.<BR>
> I'd like to be vaguely realistic, but not at the expense of the TU that I<BR>
> wish to develop.  "How little can I reasonably expect worlds in the 3I to<BR>
> spend on their navies?" I ask myself.<BR>
> <BR>
> For the sake of argument, I will assume that the average annual salary on a<BR>
> typical world is about cr 6,000.  Perhaps a typical government will have an<BR>
> annual budget of about cr 2,000 per citizen.  If this world is not<BR>
> balkanized, it will probably have a smaller military budget (per capita)<BR>
> than most current Terran states.  A quick check of an US State Department<BR>
> web site suggests that countries on a balkanized world spend between 3% and<BR>
> 30% of their budgets on the military, with a median of about 8%.  Off the<BR>
> top of my head, I'm going to try 1% as typical for non-balkanized worlds<BR>
> (sure this is low, but I am on a mission here).  This would generate a<BR>
> military budget of cr 20 per capita.  Now, how much of this goes into the<BR>
> navy?  The Imperial and subsector navies are out there, but perhaps 5% is a<BR>
> good place to start (remember, I'm still on a mission).  This would lead to<BR>
> cr 1 per capita available for the navy's annual budget.  Fudging the costs<BR>
> of running a navy of space- and star-ships, I will assume that the standing<BR>
> navy has ships worth about 10x the annual budget.  Perhaps cr 10 per capita.<BR>
<BR>
But who's paying for the subsector and imperial navies?  In fact, how do<BR>
the subsector and imperial (I'm lower-casing because I mean the <BR>
generic imperial government of Traveller, the rules, and not<BR>
the Third Imperium of Traveller, the universe) governments pay for<BR>
anything?  You're assuming that the planetary government takes the largest<BR>
chunk out of everybody's paycheck.  What if it doesn't?  What if the<BR>
imperium takes the big money and the planet's share is more like a<BR>
twentieth-century city government's?  Then "big" planetary navies really<BR>
do become something like two escorts, a dozen SBDs, and a bunch of small<BR>
craft.  <BR>
<BR>
By the way, I don't have any of the modules, but doesn't it stand to<BR>
reason that MT sourcebooks dealing with the Rebellion would say something<BR>
detailed about planetary navies in that setting?<BR>
<BR>
- --Abe Delnore<BR>
<BR>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------- <BR>
| V. A. Delnore          	      vad9m@virginia.edu            |<BR>
| Graduate Student       	      (804) 971-8806                |<BR>
| Corcoran Department of History      1821 Jefferson Park Ave #4    |<BR>
| University of Virginia              Charlottesville VA 22903      |<BR>
| Mica mica parva stella miror quaenam sis tam bella  (Anon. lyric) |<BR>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:33:06 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Victor Abraham Delnore <vad9m@unix.mail.virginia.edu><BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Ian Ferguson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Hmmmmm.<BR>
> <BR>
> I was just thinking about having a world navy that includes 500,000 ton<BR>
> ships and/or hundreds of 5,000 ton ships.  Not really what I want IMTU.<BR>
> I'd like to be vaguely realistic, but not at the expense of the TU that I<BR>
> wish to develop.  "How little can I reasonably expect worlds in the 3I to<BR>
> spend on their navies?" I ask myself.<BR>
> <BR>
> For the sake of argument, I will assume that the average annual salary on a<BR>
> typical world is about cr 6,000.  Perhaps a typical government will have an<BR>
> annual budget of about cr 2,000 per citizen.  If this world is not<BR>
> balkanized, it will probably have a smaller military budget (per capita)<BR>
> than most current Terran states.  A quick check of an US State Department<BR>
> web site suggests that countries on a balkanized world spend between 3% and<BR>
> 30% of their budgets on the military, with a median of about 8%.  Off the<BR>
> top of my head, I'm going to try 1% as typical for non-balkanized worlds<BR>
> (sure this is low, but I am on a mission here).  This would generate a<BR>
> military budget of cr 20 per capita.  Now, how much of this goes into the<BR>
> navy?  The Imperial and subsector navies are out there, but perhaps 5% is a<BR>
> good place to start (remember, I'm still on a mission).  This would lead to<BR>
> cr 1 per capita available for the navy's annual budget.  Fudging the costs<BR>
> of running a navy of space- and star-ships, I will assume that the standing<BR>
> navy has ships worth about 10x the annual budget.  Perhaps cr 10 per capita.<BR>
<BR>
But who's paying for the subsector and imperial navies?  In fact, how do<BR>
the subsector and imperial (I'm lower-casing because I mean the <BR>
generic imperial government of Traveller, the rules, and not<BR>
the Third Imperium of Traveller, the universe) governments pay for<BR>
anything?  You're assuming that the planetary government takes the largest<BR>
chunk out of everybody's paycheck.  What if it doesn't?  What if the<BR>
imperium takes the big money and the planet's share is more like a<BR>
twentieth-century city government's?  Then "big" planetary navies really<BR>
do become something like two escorts, a dozen SBDs, and a bunch of small<BR>
craft.  <BR>
<BR>
By the way, I don't have any of the modules, but doesn't it stand to<BR>
reason that MT sourcebooks dealing with the Rebellion would say something<BR>
detailed about planetary navies in that setting?<BR>
<BR>
- --Abe Delnore<BR>
<BR>
- --------------------------------------------------------------------- <BR>
| V. A. Delnore          	      vad9m@virginia.edu            |<BR>
| Graduate Student       	      (804) 971-8806                |<BR>
| Corcoran Department of History      1821 Jefferson Park Ave #4    |<BR>
| University of Virginia              Charlottesville VA 22903      |<BR>
| Mica mica parva stella miror quaenam sis tam bella  (Anon. lyric) |<BR>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 18:39:34 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Travellercentral.com Seach Engines Wierdness<BR>
<BR>
Greetings,<BR>
<BR>
I'm always curious how people get to my Traveller website.  I took a look at<BR>
my web stats, and found the search engine referring keywords pretty<BR>
interesting, if not downright funny.  I thought I'd share them with the TML<BR>
for your amusement:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Referring Keywords<BR>
<BR>
AltaVista: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           3     hitting her in the groin<BR>
           3     farley file<BR>
           2     globber<BR>
           2     weapons<BR>
           2     3d grenade<BR>
           1     why the pc is better than the mac<BR>
           1     paolo francessca<BR>
           1     confusion reigns starship<BR>
           1     gm notes<BR>
           1     became a music producer<BR>
           1     general purpose machinegun pic<BR>
           1     player character list<BR>
           1     vegan traveller japan<BR>
           1     heavy machinegun<BR>
           1     corina nasty<BR>
           1     broad band antibiotic*<BR>
           1     starting * * adopted<BR>
           1     tattler.com<BR>
           1     she was crushed car dog cat pet<BR>
           1     aslans home page<BR>
           1     spinward marches<BR>
           1     khan pc game psx<BR>
           1     primary zone and secondary zone<BR>
           1     scalese<BR>
           1     the law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well<BR>
as the poor to sleep under bridges to beg in the streets and to steal bread<BR>
           1     sophants<BR>
           1     democracia<BR>
           1     queeb<BR>
           1     military shotgun<BR>
           1     carthusian monastery<BR>
           1     lift regiment<BR>
           1     aubisson<BR>
           1     marc miller home page<BR>
           1     mercenaire<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
AOL Netfind: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           1     classic traveller<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Ask Jeeves: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           1     what does c sbis mean metasearch<BR>
           1     which governments have the most corruption metasearch<BR>
           1     scalese metasearch<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Dogpile: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           1     solomani rim<BR>
           1     aliens role playing<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Google: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           3     geoff thompson<BR>
           3     vargr story<BR>
           3     cache:www.travellercentral.com/pc/brojules.html jules<BR>
herbert<BR>
           2     page two girl<BR>
           2     christening presents<BR>
           2     cache:www.travellercentral.com/pc/hunter.html escort<BR>
brantford police escort escort vessel pilot car<BR>
           2     ruck run<BR>
           2     firearm suppressors<BR>
           1     tatoo artist apprenticeship<BR>
           1     sengi<BR>
           1     hyper amber<BR>
           1     epicurean society<BR>
           1     jules herbert<BR>
           1     ambassadore hotel massage<BR>
           1     turbans when you dance<BR>
           1     ship agatha<BR>
           1     table dancers<BR>
           1     legion condor<BR>
           1     brotherhood of the serpent<BR>
           1     pepperspray buy<BR>
           1     brother jules<BR>
           1     silencers suppressors<BR>
           1     poncho shelter us army tent gear survival kit<BR>
           1     hotel ambassadore<BR>
           1     serio auto accident<BR>
           1     alien bondage<BR>
           1     child perfume<BR>
           1     clairidges<BR>
           1     matriarch cigars<BR>
           1     tod glenn<BR>
           1     aguilon consulting<BR>
           1     stomped the cockroach<BR>
           1     cache:www.travellercentral.com/mercenaire/mercenaire13.html<BR>
poncho shelter us army tent gear survival kit surplus<BR>
           1     dana kirby<BR>
           1     soma tranquilizer<BR>
           1     degrees of freemasonry<BR>
           1     kiss drug perfume resist store dealer<BR>
           1     tod glenn traveller<BR>
           1     silencers firearms<BR>
           1     firing circuits<BR>
           1     medical womb<BR>
           1     lady bountiful portrait<BR>
           1     borloi<BR>
           1     hourly motel<BR>
           1     digest group publications<BR>
           1     jenessa character<BR>
           1     classic traveller upp<BR>
           1     male dancers<BR>
           1     drugs in porno<BR>
           1     algine<BR>
           1     gay bondage<BR>
           1     duct taped chair pictures<BR>
           1     need for more money rich people<BR>
           1     rocker porn<BR>
           1     regina clubs<BR>
           1     francesca thomas<BR>
           1     vargr<BR>
           1     fake doctor s notes<BR>
           1     army correspondance courses<BR>
           1     revolver gas seal<BR>
           1     cfp 90<BR>
           1     green dragon society<BR>
           1     heat bloom<BR>
           1     cache:www.travellercentral.com/minornpc.html trunk boy<BR>
           1     ballistic crack<BR>
           1     night vision cqb<BR>
           1     escort room stockings heels<BR>
           1     tongue twisters for children, pictures<BR>
           1     mike hoare and mercenary<BR>
           1     milspec women boot<BR>
           1     carthusian<BR>
           1     silenced firearms<BR>
           1     arianaaa<BR>
           1     lee clan origins<BR>
           1     lisa chang<BR>
           1     regina tourism<BR>
           1     vilani language<BR>
           1     raped tattoo needle<BR>
           1     spying equipment<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
LookSmart: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
          12     traveller<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Metacrawler: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           1     mercer black<BR>
           1     rhino motors<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
MSN (Microsoft Network):<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           1     general purpose machinegun<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Netscape Search: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
          10     traveller<BR>
           1     instellarms<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Northern Light: <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           1     assault rifles<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Other Search Engines:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
           6     technic<BR>
           2     unholy<BR>
           2     .577 tyranosaur<BR>
           1     boxed set<BR>
           1     trygaer<BR>
           1     benjiman air guns<BR>
           1     black walnut buy<BR>
           1     definitely fond of<BR>
           1     regina<BR>
           1     altavista<BR>
           1     barrett m 98<BR>
           1     con<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:27:04 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 02:31:54 +1200<BR>
>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
><BR>
>On 1 Aug 00, at 23:26, Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> We also have Adventure 6: Expedition to Zhodane in 1981, The Traveller Book<BR>
>> and Adventure 7: Broadsword in 1982, The Traveller Adventure in 1983,<BR>
>> Beltstrike in 1984, all the Alien Modules (1984-1986), and Marc Miller's<BR>
>> Traveller (QSDS) and T4's Starships (SSDS) in 1996, all without any<BR>
mention of<BR>
>> ships larger than 5,000 dtons*. Bulk Carriers are 1,000-3,000 dtons;<BR>
cruisers<BR>
>> are consistently 1,000-2,000 dtons. <BR>
><BR>
>I hate to disagree with you here Chris (especially since I see and agree <BR>
>with the validity of the point you are making), but Adv 6 makes it fairly<BR>
clear <BR>
>that the ships mentioned are only the escorts for much larger ships (p36, <BR>
>para 3).<BR>
<BR>
Touche -- I concede the point.<BR>
<BR>
Now, do you wish to discuss the other 14 works I cited?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:48:57 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits [long]<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 11:06:39 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
>From: Steven Bonneville <bonnevil@ima.umn.edu><BR>
>Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
><BR>
>Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> (1) The Alien Modules are the only sources in CT for the Imperium's<BR>
>> principle military adversaries and allies. There are no canonical warships<BR>
>> for these groups larger than 5,000 dtons until The Rebellion Sourcebook<BR>
>> (1988) -- none. That seems a strange omission, eh?<BR>
><BR>
>Not true.  _K'kree_ has some very large ships, and some odd rules to <BR>
>integrate bits of HG with bits of Book 2 to build them.  There's a ship<BR>
>predesigned in the 10000-ton class, as I recall.  The "frigate" is <BR>
>supposedly a *light* K'kree warship in the 6000-ton class.  Obviously,<BR>
>they're a special case.  :)  <BR>
<BR>
You recall incorrectly. There are three ships listed in AM2: a 6,000-ton<BR>
merchant, a 6,000-ton diplomatic courier, and a 5,000-ton frigate (p. 13).<BR>
The write-up for the frigate does not use the word "light" at all.<BR>
<BR>
Do not presume to correct me unless you are prepared to check your sources<BR>
- -- I do.<BR>
<BR>
>> The initial descriptions of the Imperium -- remote, decentralized,<BR>
>> laissez-faire -- are very different from what came later _specifically_to<BR>
>> justify the big ships in _High_Guard_. Every major change that came after<BR>
>> was an attempt to recapture that weak, decentralized Imperium. <BR>
><BR>
>Actually, the big ships help -- they capture a lot of Naval funding in<BR>
>a few places.  ...  Now it probably makes sense<BR>
>to optimize for massive numbers of escort-scaled ships built around things<BR>
>like missile-9 bays.  ... This has the disadvantage that<BR>
>the Navy now has more ships to patrol with and harass players and so on.<BR>
>Rather than the "AHL in the wrong system" you have "twenty Kinunirs here<BR>
>and thirty in the wrong systems".<BR>
<BR>
Precisely: I don't want "massive numbers" of anything belonging to an<BR>
Imperium. How many piracy flamewars center around an Imperial Navy so large<BR>
it could flood every member system with pickets, if it were necessary to<BR>
control pirates? <BR>
<BR>
I want the assumptions about the central goverment in Traveller restored to<BR>
the way it was originally described:<BR>
<BR>
"Traveller assumes a remote centralized government (referred to in this<BR>
volume as the Imperium), possessed of great industrial and technological<BR>
might, but unable, due to the sheer distances and travel times involved, to<BR>
exert total control at all levels everywhere within its star-spanning<BR>
realm. On the frontiers, extensive home rule provisions allow planetary<BR>
populations to choose their own forms of government, raise and maintain<BR>
armed forces for local security, pass and enforce laws governing local<BR>
conduct, and regulate (within limits) commerce. Defense of the frontier is<BR>
mostly provided by local indigenous forces, stiffened by scattered Imperial<BR>
naval bases manned by small but extremely sophisticated forces. Conflicting<BR>
local interests often settle their differences by force of arms, with<BR>
Imperial forces looking quietly the other way, unable to effectively<BR>
intervene as a police force in any but the most wide-spread of conflicts<BR>
without jeopardizing their primary mission of the defense of the realm.<BR>
Only when local conflicts threaten either the security or the economy of<BR>
the area do Imperial forces take an active hand, and then it is with speed<BR>
and overwhelming force."<BR>
<BR>
Book 4, Mercenary, p. 1. (1978)<BR>
<BR>
"Traveller assumes a remote centralized government (referred to in this<BR>
volume as the Imperium) possessed of great industrial and technological<BR>
might; but due to the sheer distances and travel times involved within its<BR>
star-spanning realm, the Imperium is unable to be everywhere at once. As a<BR>
result, the Imperium allows a large degree of autonomy to its subject<BR>
worlds, calling only for some respect for its overall policies, and for a<BR>
united front against outside pressures.<BR>
"To monitor the space lanes, the Imperium maintains a Navy. Because these<BR>
forces can never be everywhere at once, local provinces (subsectors) also<BR>
maintain navies, as do individual worlds. This three-tiered structure of<BR>
Imperial, subsector, and planetary navies produces a flexible system for<BR>
patrolling space, while putting the limited resources of the Imperium to<BR>
best use."<BR>
<BR>
Book 5, High Guard, p. 1. (1979)<BR>
<BR>
"The naval forces within the Imperium are divided into three general<BR>
categories -- Imperial forces, devoted to the central ruling Imperium and<BR>
answering only to it; subsector forces, which patrol their individual<BR>
subsectors, filling the gaps that the Imperial forces cannot handle; and<BR>
local (planetary) forces raised to protect individual worlds. The<BR>
distinctions between such forces are primarily those of size, resources,<BR>
and duties."<BR>
<BR>
Book 5, High Guard, p. 2. (1979)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
"unable, due to the sheer distances and travel times involved, to exert<BR>
total control at all levels everywhere within its star-spanning realm"<BR>
<BR>
"scattered Imperial naval bases manned by small but extremely sophisticated<BR>
forces"<BR>
<BR>
"unable to effectively intervene as a police force in any but the most<BR>
wide-spread of conflicts"<BR>
<BR>
"these forces can never be everywhere at once"<BR>
<BR>
"subsector forces, which patrol their individual subsectors, filling the<BR>
gaps that the Imperial forces cannot handle"<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I didn't make any of this up, you see. I just read what was there, and ask<BR>
myself how much trouble we could avoid if we really believe (and apply)<BR>
what was said.<BR>
<BR>
For the record, then: I have no objection to naval vessels larger than<BR>
5,000-dtons -- IF player-characters are never likely to run into them, or<BR>
be thwarted by their presence, except during a major war.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2872<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (rly-yc04.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.36]) by air-yc01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:51:47 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:51:06 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id VAA87735;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:50:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:50:55 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id VAA87690<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:50:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:50:55 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008030150.VAA87690@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2872<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2873</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 8:44:27 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest     Wednesday, August 2 2000     Volume 1999 : Number 2873<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
Re: Warships & Privateers<BR>
Re: Anecdotes<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2872<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2860<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2860<BR>
Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
I like Star Destroyers (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2872<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 19:02:21 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
>  Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where<BR>
>  the 'dtons' nomenclature came from.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I first saw it in GT.  The default use for tons in GURPS is<BR>
weight and dtons was used as less confusing.....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:00:42 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
I wrote:<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
> A modest proposal (that will almost surely get ripped to pieces :) require<BR>
> that custom designs fit into the constraints of the modular system, i.e.<BR>
you<BR>
> can only design *custom* modules (or perhaps cheat slightly by combining<BR>
> more than one module, etc.) Of course, you might end up with something<BR>
like<BR>
> GT:FFS, and I don't think there's going to be a lot of support for that.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> replies:<BR>
<BR>
>>>My analogy was:<BR>
<BR>
QSDS lets me build a Chevy Nova-sized 4-door sedan.<BR>
<BR>
SSDS lets me specify that it is a Chevy Nova with the 383 engine, a<BR>
manual shift and big rear tires.<BR>
<BR>
FFS lets me say that the 383 had a Holley 4 barrel carb with a Ram-air<BR>
stack on it, the transmission had a Hurst shifter, they were Goodyear<BR>
Eagle race-quality slicks, and by the way there are purple fuzzy dice<BR>
hanging in the window.<BR>
<BR>
This was the dream. <<<<BR>
<BR>
Yes, but what I was alluding to in my original post was what might happen<BR>
when ships designed under a simpler system come up against ships designed<BR>
under a more complex system. It seems to me that the modular ships aren't<BR>
just going to lose, they're going to get reamed, which is just penalizing<BR>
people for not wanting to take the time to totally immerse themselves in<BR>
FFS3. That's what I meant by making *all* the systems have to use a modular<BR>
design, or something else to level the playing field somewhat. I chose<BR>
modules, because then you can allow people to use the full FFS rules to<BR>
create more advanced, custom modules, that anyone could use without having<BR>
to do the design work themselves. This levels out the playing field. Of<BR>
course, if it's possible to design FFS so that the big custom jobbies don't<BR>
have an overwhelming advantage over the Chevy Novas, I don't have as big an<BR>
objection. I'm just looking out for nightmare scenarios like the GM isn't a<BR>
gearhead and a player *is*...<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:26:04 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) wrote<BR>
><BR>
>> In mail you write:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> > Okay, here's the sort of questions I get asked by players, <BR>
><BR>
>> But it does sound like we could use a "resolves X meters at 100,000 km"<BR>
>> entry on the sensor tables to answer questions like the above two.<BR>
><BR>
> Doesn't the ability of a sensor, or at least a visual sensor, <BR>
> to resolve an object depend on more than just its angular size?<BR>
> Isn't it easier to determine where the edges of an object are<BR>
> (and thus determine its size) if that object is bright and<BR>
> shiny (or the equivalent for the spectrum in question) rather <BR>
> than dark and dull? Would this chart assume a base reflectivity <BR>
> and give a modifier based on these factors?<BR>
<BR>
Probably. But I was assuming that for a given sensor rating in the DSR,<BR>
it'd be a constant. So all visual PEMS 12 would be able to reselve the<BR>
same, with lower ratings being worse and higher ratings being better.<BR>
<BR>
<megasnip><BR>
<BR>
> Sure Traveller is less of a space opera than the popular<BR>
> TV show I just parodied but isn't this sort of play more<BR>
> _fun_ than a Referee saying: "Roll to hit on a random<BR>
> location on the other ship." It is, after all, a role playing<BR>
> game and not a roll playing one.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, I can see allowing some of that. But targeting a specific part of a<BR>
ship shpould still be a matter of luck *and* skill. In other words,<BR>
your knowledge/skill can improve the odds, but it should still be<BR>
random. <BR>
<BR>
>> In the example above, a laser will take 2.1 seconds to<BR>
>> reach the postion you see the ship at (630,000 km divived by the speed<BR>
>> of light, which is 300,000 km/sec). And that position is where the ship<BR>
>> was 2.1 seconds before you fired (it took 2.1 seconds for light or<BR>
>> radar to get from it to you). So that means that you are aiming at a<BR>
>> point where the ship was 4.2 seconds ago.<BR>
>> In 4.2 seconds, at *1* g, the ship will have been able to move 88<BR>
>> meters (D = .5*a*t^2) from the position it'd have had if it just<BR>
>> coasted.<BR>
>> So you'll be lucky to hit the *ship* much less a specific section of<BR>
>> it. <BR>
><BR>
> What if the ship displaces a million tons and its engineering <BR>
> section is more than 88 meters across?<BR>
<BR>
Well, in that case the players could hit it. And then, if it notices,<BR>
they are in *big* trouble... :-)<BR>
<BR>
> At some distance against some size ship with some ability to<BR>
> change its course through maneuver you should be able to fire <BR>
> at parts of it. Given that the ship can maneuver in all three<BR>
> dimentions this is presumably a rather short distance of course.<BR>
> We need to figure out what this range is and then we need to <BR>
> note it in the rules. Then we need to come up with an _optional_ <BR>
> rule that will let players try things that should not succeeed <BR>
> if the Referee decides to allow a more space operaish feel to <BR>
> her game.<BR>
<BR>
Off the top of my head...<BR>
<BR>
minimum radius of target circle = .5 * a * (2*range/c)^2<BR>
<BR>
where:<BR>
<BR>
radius and range are in meters<BR>
a is in m/s^2 (ie 1 g = 10)<BR>
c = 3e8 m/s<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 16:39:35 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 08/01/00 at 11:36 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
><BR>
>>> What I need during play is a mechanic that allows me to answer those<BR>
>>> questions quickly and easily.  What I need during design is a<BR>
>>> sequence that will give me numbers that mechanic uses.<BR>
><BR>
>>As you can see above *design* has nothing to do with those questions,<BR>
>>especially the last one.<BR>
><BR>
> Yes, it does...<BR>
><BR>
>>But thanks for pointing out that the sensor rules could use that extra<BR>
>>column.<BR>
><BR>
> ...and adding that column *might* be the answer.  <g> It might be if<BR>
> that column does more for us than the last column on table 198 does.<BR>
<BR>
I don't have FF&S 2.<BR>
<BR>
> I don't know about you, but when I design something I'd like to have<BR>
> the results provide answers to the sort of questions I asked.  <BR>
><BR>
> Take an FFS2 PEMS 13.5.  The last column on the FFS2 table says you<BR>
> can resolve a 2 m object at 50,000 km, but what can you resolve at<BR>
> 100,000, 1 million, 5 million? <BR>
<BR>
It's a linear function of range. double the range, the minimum<BR>
resolvable size doubles. You see, the resolution is actually an<BR>
*angle*...<BR>
<BR>
So:<BR>
<BR>
range	size<BR>
- -----	----<BR>
50k 	2m<BR>
100k	4m<BR>
1M	40m<BR>
5M	200m<BR>
<BR>
> And conversely, if the object is<BR>
> size X at what range can you resolve it with a specific sensor?<BR>
<BR>
Again, it's a linear function. <BR>
<BR>
> Using my airlock at 330,000...that's a ~6 m object let's say...what<BR>
> sensor rating is required to detect, target, or resolve that?  <BR>
<BR>
Simple proportions:<BR>
<BR>
size of object    range to object<BR>
- --------------- = ----------------<BR>
size from table   range from table<BR>
<BR>
Plug in the figures you've got, and solve for the one you don't. I<BR>
assume the table either gives ranges for a constant size (2m seems<BR>
reasonable for that) or gives sizes for a constant range.<BR>
<BR>
If the first is true, you have an object 3 times as big as the 2m used<BR>
in the table. Which means it can be resolved 3 times as far away. Or:<BR>
<BR>
6m / 2m = 330,000 km / X<BR>
3 = 330,000 km / X<BR>
3 * X = 330,000 km<BR>
X = 110,000 km<BR>
<BR>
You want a sensor that can resolve a 2 meter object at 110,000 km or<BR>
more. <BR>
<BR>
If the second case is true, then you work from the range...<BR>
<BR>
6m/X = 330,000 km / 50,000 km<BR>
6m/X = 6.6<BR>
6m = 6.6 * X<BR>
6m/6.6 = X<BR>
.91m = X<BR>
<BR>
So you'd want a sensor that can resolve objects .91 m *or less* at<BR>
50,000 km.<BR>
<BR>
Either way, you can quickly run down the column to find the minimum<BR>
sensor you need.<BR>
<BR>
> The design sequence *should* give you the data you need to answer<BR>
> those questions....<BR>
<BR>
It's simple geometry. Stuff that *I* would never have guessed anyone<BR>
needed to have explained. <BR>
<BR>
> A. If it takes a formula requiring a scientific calculator then the<BR>
> design sequence (and rules) should say so and give it, so the GM<BR>
> and/or players can make the calc during play.<BR>
<BR>
As you can see above, you can do it with a 4 function calculator, or<BR>
even with pencil and paper.<BR>
<BR>
> B. If it can be abstracted into +/- DM's based on the Size number<BR>
> we are already calcuating for objects during design then *that*<BR>
> should be included in the design sequence (and rules), so the DM's<BR>
> can be put onto the Vehicle/Equipment sheet and used by the GM and<BR>
> players during play.<BR>
<BR>
As you can see from the above, the sensor rules and tables already give<BR>
all the necessary data. But maybe an example or two are needed. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:20:32 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Well, as I've pointed out many times, it's perfectly possible to jump<BR>
>> into the system at some random location out of weapons range of the<BR>
>> mainworld, and days away at max accel. <BR>
>> <BR>
>> That means you can make observations for a few days and jump out again<BR>
>> before they can get a ship anywhere near you. <BR>
>> <BR>
>> So I expect that there will be a lot of small, not at all stealthy<BR>
>> ships that can do two jumps without refueling and have *enormous*<BR>
>> folding sensor arrays. <BR>
><BR>
> This is quite true, but there's one serious problem with "peek-and-scoot"<BR>
> spy vessels: the enemy knows that he's under observation, and will<BR>
> respond accordingly.  "Peek-and-scoot" vessels would, furthermore, be<BR>
> unsuitable for other espionage tasks, like dropping off and picking up<BR>
> agents in unfriendly star systems.<BR>
<BR>
The thing is, it's canonical that you can't hide jump exit. At any<BR>
range worth dealing with, it's too visible. If you jump in far enough<BR>
out to maybe be unnoticed, and come in stealthily, it'll take *years*<BR>
to get near the planet.<BR>
<BR>
You'll have to sneak the agents into the system as passengers on shps<BR>
that arrive openly. And they'll have to get out the same way. <BR>
<BR>
And likewise, you'll have to live with the enemy knowing that *someone*<BR>
is observing him. Of course, in some areas, you won't be sure *who* is<BR>
observing. For example, in the Spinward marches, it could be Zhodani,<BR>
Vargr, Aslan, Darrians, Sword worlders...<BR>
<BR>
Hell, it could even be the Imperial navy, or the Scouts doing a<BR>
training mission. Or a megacorp spying on rivals.<BR>
<BR>
Given that it won't be that hard to keep you continually under<BR>
observation, you just have to live with it. Disguise what you can, and<BR>
do stuff to confuse the analysts on the other side.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:31:32 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 10:36 PM -0800 8/1/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>  > OK, lets step back. I'm trying to take these points one at<BR>
>>  > a time.  The point I was addressing in my previous post<BR>
>>  > is whether essentially you have to use black body emission.<BR>
>>  > If you emit the same radiation as a black body, but you<BR>
>>  > use another process, are the thermodynamics the same?<BR>
>><BR>
>>No. Which is my point. The *energy* emitted is the same. the *entropy*<BR>
>>isn't.<BR>
><BR>
> But how can they be different?  The thermodynamics of a state are<BR>
> independent of the path you take to the state.  Entropy (which<BR>
> is really a form of energy) is part of the thermodynamics.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, then they are *different* states. After all, the amount of energy<BR>
being radiated may be the same, but the *spectrum* is different, and so<BR>
will be the *internal* state.<BR>
<BR>
>>  > Now it _is_ a law of thermodynamics any state is the same,<BR>
>>  > no matter how you got there.  So if you can emit radiation,<BR>
>>  > of any entropy, it doesn't matter how you emit it.  Whether<BR>
>>  > it is by radiator fins or by some currently unknown higher<BR>
>>  > TL technology.<BR>
>><BR>
>>You keep overlooking the fact that to emit that low entropy radiation,<BR>
>>you have to *raise* the entropy of the system more than if you emitted<BR>
>>it at high entropy.<BR>
><BR>
> All I'm talking about here is emitting the same radiation from<BR>
> the same heat sink by a process that is not black body radiation,<BR>
> If black body radiation raises the entropy, then so does the<BR>
> other process.<BR>
<BR>
You are emiiting the same amount of *energy*. Not the same radiation. <BR>
<BR>
>>You are *assuming* that the states are the same to "prove" that they<BR>
>>are the same.<BR>
><BR>
> Um, no.  they are by definition the same.<BR>
<BR>
What definition? <BR>
<BR>
By your logic, a diode array emitting 100 watts at a particular<BR>
wavelnegth along with 10 watts of heat is the same "state" as a chunk<BR>
or iron emitting 110 watts of thermal radiation.<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, ain't so. <BR>
<BR>
>>They may be emitting the same amount of energy, but the entropy of<BR>
>>the emitting system is *very* different.<BR>
><BR>
> How can emitting the same photons have different entropy.<BR>
<BR>
THEY AREN'T EMITTING THE SAME PHOTONS!!!!!!<BR>
<BR>
The *total* energy may be the same. The energy *distribution* is<BR>
different.<BR>
<BR>
>>If you were right, then you've got a perpetual motion machine, because<BR>
>>the low entropy radiation could be used to do work inside the system.<BR>
><BR>
> No.  All I'm talking about doing is the exact same thing you can<BR>
> do with black body radiation.<BR>
<BR>
You are taking about taking *heat* and turning it into non-thermal<BR>
radiation. Which requires *lowering* the entopy of that radiation,<BR>
which means the entropy of the ship increases, which means you wind up<BR>
with more heat to get rid of.<BR>
<BR>
Just what kind of screwy definition of "state" are you using, anyway?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> ______________________________<BR>
> summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
> (This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in <BR>
> California.)<BR>
><BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:41:56 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Book 2 and HG, to the best of my knowledge, don't mention any particular <BR>
> mass ratio like 10:1, and in fact, one or the other of them, I think HG, <BR>
> says something to the effect of "since 20% to 50% of the ship will be fuel, <BR>
> it's a reasonable approximation to equate one dton with one ton" -- which <BR>
> you can argue with easily, but certainly doesn't suggest a 10:1 ratio.<BR>
<BR>
Well, the problem is that a cubic meter of water masses a ton. A cubic<BR>
meter of steel or copper masses *8* tons. A cubic meter of LH2 masses<BR>
70.8 kg at -253 C (20 K). And air masses around 1 kg per cubic meter.<BR>
<BR>
So a ship, especially one with cargo, tends to weigh a heck of a lot<BR>
more than an equal volume of LH2. Nearly as much as the same volume of<BR>
water, if the illos of ships that have made water landings are to be<BR>
believed. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 17:57:46 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Warships & Privateers<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Personally, I prefer a 'choose a hull size and stick the modules together' <BR>
> approach; I cannot remember who suggested it (sorry), but I disagree with <BR>
> the idea that those of us who are more interested in just 'sticking the bits <BR>
> together' should be penalised with less-than-optimal ships whereas someone <BR>
> who wants to spend hours juggling every last cubic cm and mW can have <BR>
> something that will knock the stuffing out of us... <BR>
<BR>
The problem is that it's *impossible* to make a "plug together the<BR>
modules" setup that will give the same results as a detailed system<BR>
without turning it into a detailed system. <BR>
<BR>
So we have two choices. Let the "plug together" system make better<BR>
ships (which at least one incarnation of the rules was loathed for<BR>
doing) or they will be not quite as good. <BR>
<BR>
And given that in the real world, "plug together" construction *is*<BR>
cheaper, but less optimized, than "custom built" construction, I don't<BR>
think it's at all unreasonable to set it up that way. <BR>
<BR>
> By all means give us <BR>
> the ability to create our own ships to the nth degree of precision if we <BR>
> want to, but how about a supply of 'prefab modules' as well?<BR>
<BR>
That's what we've been talking about. You'll just have to realize that<BR>
prefab modules *to mean wasted space or wasted power, or some other<BR>
"non-optimum" performance sometimes.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:20:39 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Anecdotes<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Via electronic medium on 8/2/00 3:05 PM, sinbad@hex.net issued forth:<BR>
><BR>
>> I put my skills into gray area targets like a airborne bogey with a closing<BR>
>> range rate of over 300 mph, and at range of 20,000 yards but the distance<BR>
>> never decreased or increased. It also showed as surface target at the same<BR>
>> range rate and distance. The SPG-60 also was able to detect and track it,<BR>
>> other radars onboard also were able to detect and track it too. What was<BR>
>> it, well it an aircraft over 100 nm+ that due to atmospheric anomaly called<BR>
>> a "Duct", was being detected/tracked by my ship.<BR>
><BR>
> Cool story, a few examples like this should be collected, any more out on<BR>
> the list?<BR>
<BR>
The classic is from the early days of the DEW line.<BR>
<BR>
One day in the first few weeks of operation, the radars started<BR>
reporting *thousands* of targets. Scared the *hell* out of people.<BR>
After a few minutes, they realized that the targets weren't acting<BR>
right for missiles.<BR>
<BR>
They dropped the alert a level or two and then finally canceled it when<BR>
someone realized that they were getting *very* delayed echoes from the<BR>
*Moon* which had just risen above the horizon. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 19:34:34 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2872<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
> nomenclature came from.<BR>
<BR>
Oh, that. I can't swear I ever saw it in official print. For all I know it <BR>
came into use on the TML as an abbreviation for "displacement tons" simply<BR>
to avoid ambiguity with mass-tons.<BR>
<BR>
- -RB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:13:13 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2860<BR>
<BR>
>>("Reasonable distance" doesn't matter - what matters is what<BR>
>>fraction of the sky your radiators can be seen by)<BR>
<BR>
>Exactly, "almost".<BR>
<BR>
>The fraction of the sky is determined by the angle of emmission.<BR>
>But as you want to detect the ship from further away, the total<BR>
>area of the sphere increases.  So the number of ships you need<BR>
>to make sure that one of them is in that fraction of the sky<BR>
>goes up.<BR>
<BR>
No.<BR>
<BR>
Do I need to draw diagrams? Imagine a 2-dimensional world,<BR>
and a ship that can only be seen in its 90 degree front arc.<BR>
If I place a sensing ship randomly, it has a 25% chance of being<BR>
in that arc, irrespective of distance.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:10:47 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
At 5:31 PM -0800 8/2/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  >>No. Which is my point. The *energy* emitted is the same. the *entropy*<BR>
>  >>isn't.<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > But how can they be different?  The thermodynamics of a state are<BR>
>  > independent of the path you take to the state.  Entropy (which<BR>
>  > is really a form of energy) is part of the thermodynamics.<BR>
><BR>
>Ok, then they are *different* states. After all, the amount of energy<BR>
>being radiated may be the same, but the *spectrum* is different, and so<BR>
>will be the *internal* state.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
No.  I'm saying the same photons at the same energy.  At this<BR>
point I just want to get past the idea that it has to be<BR>
a fin radiating by black body radiation....<BR>
<BR>
>  > How can emitting the same photons have different entropy.<BR>
><BR>
>THEY AREN'T EMITTING THE SAME PHOTONS!!!!!!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
They are, that is what I'm saying.  You are trying to address<BR>
issues you think I'm working on rather than the ones I am<BR>
working on.  I'm trying to get someone on this while avoiding<BR>
everyone jumping to what they think the final answer is.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:13:35 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2860<BR>
<BR>
At 8:13 PM -0700 8/2/00, Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
>Do I need to draw diagrams? Imagine a 2-dimensional world,<BR>
>and a ship that can only be seen in its 90 degree front arc.<BR>
>If I place a sensing ship randomly, it has a 25% chance of being<BR>
>in that arc, irrespective of distance.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
That's not what I'm talking about.  I'm addressing the issue<BR>
that you can make sure you detect them by scattering ships<BR>
around.  Distance makes a difference on that.<BR>
<BR>
If you want to start talking about one detector happening to<BR>
be in the solid angle, then you start getting into question<BR>
about what the emmitter knows about where the enemy might<BR>
not be.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 22:27:52 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 05:41 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>Well, the problem is that a cubic meter of water masses a ton. A cubic<BR>
>meter of steel or copper masses *8* tons. A cubic meter of LH2 masses<BR>
>70.8 kg at -253 C (20 K). And air masses around 1 kg per cubic meter.<BR>
<BR>
Hey, 1000 kg / 70.8 kg = 14.12, that's where the 14 comes from. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:33:13 -0500<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
Subject: I like Star Destroyers (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
> Tim, I suspect that a lot of the Huge Ship Contingent aren't<BR>
> interested in deckplans, or in using their monsters in roleplaying<BR>
> gmaes.  I'm thinking they are mostly wargamers and pure gearhead<BR>
> designers.<BR>
<BR>
Nah, we just like the imagry of a huge starships filling the movie screen<BR>
for something like 10+ seconds. Oh, and blowing up space stations the size<BR>
small moons by hitting the right exhaust port with proton torpedoes. ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
yikes@evansville.net<BR>
<BR>
"The basic rules of Traveller contained in this book are flexible enough to<BR>
allow almost any science fiction theme to be recreated without significantly<BR>
disturbing the balance of play." (The Traveller Book, 1982, pg. 10)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:37:58 -0500<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
Subject: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
> There are too many people for whom the wargame aspects of the OTU are more<BR>
> important than maintaining a broad stage for roleplaying -- and I include<BR>
> everyone who ever thought the Rebellion was a good idea in this category,<BR>
> by default.<BR>
<BR>
Wow, now that was insulting.<BR>
<BR>
I liked the Rebellion because I thought it created a dramatic background<BR>
setting. But I suppose that's the anti-roleplaying, crazy wargamer in me.<BR>
<BR>
Ciao,<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
yikes@evansville.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:41:33 -0700<BR>
From: sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
Mark Cook <markc@peak.org> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
> > <BR>
> > In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that<BR>
> > activates some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes<BR>
> > apparently trigger the 'next step' in evolution.  Part of the story<BR>
> > involves a suggestion that this was also the cause of the<BR>
> > progression from H. Sap. Neanderthalensis to H. Sap. Sapiens.  Is<BR>
> > this plausible?<BR>
> <BR>
> I can't address the mutation/evolution aspect of the concept, but Bear<BR>
> founded it on a significantly flawed assumption.<BR>
> <BR>
> The overwhelming evidence available concludes that we did *not* evolve<BR>
> from Neanderthalensis, but rather that they were "cousins" to our real<BR>
> evolutionary ancestors.  They (Neanderthal) died out, and the other<BR>
> branch (ours) continued to evolve into H. Sapiens Sapiens.<BR>
<BR>
Depends upon whose overwhelming evidence you believe.  I'm fairly <BR>
suspicious of some of the DNA evidence they have on this point, <BR>
and am must more persuaded by the intermediate skeletons which <BR>
suggest very strongly to many archeologists that H Sap. Sap.<BR>
and H. Sap. Neanderthalis interbred in various locations, and that <BR>
they didn't as much die out as blend in (except perhaps in Northern <BR>
Europe where the populations were most distinct in time and <BR>
location and most physically different).  <BR>
<BR>
The above two positions (we interbred with them and they all died <BR>
out) are currently very much under debate in archeological circles. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 22:41:02 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2872<BR>
<BR>
On 08/02/00 at 07:34 PM,  Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
>> nomenclature came from.<BR>
<BR>
>Oh, that. I can't swear I ever saw it in official print. For all I know<BR>
>it  came into use on the TML as an abbreviation for "displacement tons"<BR>
>simply to avoid ambiguity with mass-tons.<BR>
<BR>
I recall complaining about people mixing volume and mass some years ago. I can't say who had the idea of the dtons though. I know dtons (displacement tons), td (tons displacement), and  Std (standard displacement tons) all refer to the same thing, the volume of 1,000 kg of liquid H2...and either 13.5 or 14 cubic meters (or stere...which is another debate). <g> <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2873<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (rly-zc01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.1]) by air-zc01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:44:27 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:43:45 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id XAA92151;<BR>
	Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:43:39 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:43:18 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id XAA92103<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:43:18 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:43:18 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008030343.XAA92103@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2873<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2874</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/2/00 10:22:06 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, August 3 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2874<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: FAQ question<BR>
Re: Travellercentral.com Seach Engines Wierdness<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Big Ships or something that can travel really fast and support life whilst doing it?<BR>
RE: navy<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
RE: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
Re: Ship sizes [long]<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
Re: Privateers<BR>
Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
RE: Ship sizes [long]<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 20:37:58 -0700<BR>
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: FAQ question<BR>
<BR>
Yes, it's an airsoft gun.  I should know, I'm the owner :)  No actual<BR>
penguins were harmed in the making of those pictures (though the ambassador<BR>
from Mongo seems slightly, shall we say, nervous, to have Doug & I pointing<BR>
perfectly real looking guns at him :)<BR>
<BR>
Jesse<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Tod Glenn<BR>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 6:15 PM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Re: FAQ question<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> on 8/2/00 5:57 PM, Kiri Aradia Morgan at tiamat@tsoft.com wrote:<BR>
> >> For those just joining our story, I refer you to:<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/baycon_2000.htm<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> The last three photos picture the TMLers in question (Kiri, Doug, and<BR>
> >> Glenn).<BR>
> >><BR>
><BR>
> Interesting to see you all in the virtual flesh.  BTW, Doug's SOCOM looks<BR>
> just a little to real (I'm assuming it's a prop).<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> "Everything I need to know, I learned from<BR>
> killing smart people and eating their brains."<BR>
> --<BR>
> Tod Glenn<BR>
> mailto:webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
> http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 22:55:27 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Travellercentral.com Seach Engines Wierdness<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Greetings,<BR>
> <BR>
> I'm always curious how people get to my Traveller website.<BR>
<BR>
*shrug*<BR>
<BR>
I just followed the URLs from your posts.  Boring, but effective.<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:45:18 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> on 8/2/00 10:57 AM, SD Mooney at dom@cybergoths.u-net.com wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> At 2:17 -0400 2/8/00,  Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
>>> BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.  Why does <BR>
> one<BR>
>>> need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be required for<BR>
>>> calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own sake?  The <BR>
> whole<BR>
>>> idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid hydrogen,<BR>
>>> when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
>> <BR>
>> CT.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> CT Book 2 Starships p13, line 6 (printing 1981 from BFB compilation)<BR>
>> CT Book 5 High Guard 2nd Edition p22, 1st line.<BR>
><BR>
> Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
> nomenclature came from.<BR>
<BR>
Out of the need to quit confusing "ton" (a measure of *mass*) with a<BR>
measure of volume. Players got *real* confused.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:49:12 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Unable to acccess SolSec.org<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
><BR>
>>Anyone have an idea of why I'm being refused a connection<BR>
>>to this site?  I was trying to find out more about the<BR>
>>Condition Reflex Infantry mentioned in some posts a while<BR>
>>ago.  <BR>
><BR>
> Unable to access solsec? for the purpose of researching<BR>
> highly classified information?  Citizen, please wait right<BR>
> there while I make a brief call ....<BR>
<BR>
"He went for it! Get the call traced, and be ready to extract Dan ASAP..."<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 20:59:19 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Yes, but what I was alluding to in my original post was what might happen<BR>
> when ships designed under a simpler system come up against ships designed<BR>
> under a more complex system. It seems to me that the modular ships aren't<BR>
> just going to lose, they're going to get reamed, which is just penalizing<BR>
> people for not wanting to take the time to totally immerse themselves in<BR>
> FFS3. That's what I meant by making *all* the systems have to use a modular<BR>
> design, or something else to level the playing field somewhat. I chose<BR>
> modules, because then you can allow people to use the full FFS rules to<BR>
> create more advanced, custom modules, that anyone could use without having<BR>
> to do the design work themselves.<BR>
<BR>
Only problem isd, if you can design modules, you can design an entire<BR>
*ship* with the same rules. And it *will* be better.<BR>
<BR>
> This levels out the playing field. Of<BR>
> course, if it's possible to design FFS so that the big custom jobbies don't<BR>
> have an overwhelming advantage over the Chevy Novas, I don't have as big an<BR>
> objection. I'm just looking out for nightmare scenarios like the GM isn't a<BR>
> gearhead and a player *is*...<BR>
<BR>
The GM doesn't have to allow the design...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:03:28 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ships or something that can travel really fast and support life whilst doing it?<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I was reading this little book on the big bang about the creation of the<BR>
> universe. From what I can gather ther whole contents of the Universe were<BR>
> diplaced in a matter of seconds, if not less. There fore there is power to<BR>
> be had out there somewhere which may be harnessed. It's just a matter of<BR>
> being able to create something to harness that power with life sustaining<BR>
> properties. If masses unimaginable can be displaced over distances<BR>
> incomprehendable, then why can't there be any room for BIG Star ships in the<BR>
> assaid imagination of our minds...?<BR>
<BR>
Things work *very* differently at the energy densities involved in the<BR>
first fraction of a second of the Big Bang. <BR>
<BR>
Perhaps you noticed that *matter* didn't exist until considerably<BR>
*after* the inflationary period? :-)<BR>
<BR>
"Well, yes, the new drive *does* allow crossing the Imperium in a<BR>
matter of minutes. But you arrive as a quark/gluon plasma...."<BR>
<BR>
Oops. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:12:25 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: navy<BR>
<BR>
Actually, it came about in MT (or earlier):<BR>
<BR>
MT Ref's Manual: pg 57<BR>
<BR>
Small Craft: Any craft with a volume of 270 to 1350 KL (20 to 100 tons<BR>
displacment)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of<BR>
Olegamer@aol.com<BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 6:23 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 8/2/00 9:09:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time,<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
 nomenclature came from.<BR>
<BR>
 Tod<BR>
  >><BR>
<BR>
I think its a T4 convention.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:15:54 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
I agree with this:<BR>
<BR>
I wish that they had left PP's into GT Modular Ship Design. It is kinda odd<BR>
to design a ship that incorprates PP slices into a turret weapon.. I just<BR>
cannot grok that :)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
<BR>
IMO, there is only one thing wrong with the way GT's module system<BR>
works for quick ship design and that is that it the way it rolls<BR>
"power slices" into components.  If it listed the vol, area, mass<BR>
and cost for only the component and included power requirement as a<BR>
separate value, then added a section for Power Plants it would be<BR>
exactly what a lot of us are looking for.  Of course, we need more<BR>
modules, but a subset of Ve2 tweeked for Traveller would let us<BR>
build those modules.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:17:29 -0700<BR>
From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:37:58 -0500, "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
<BR>
> > There are too many people for whom the wargame aspects of the OTU are more<BR>
> > important than maintaining a broad stage for roleplaying -- and I include<BR>
> > everyone who ever thought the Rebellion was a good idea in this category,<BR>
> > by default.<BR>
><BR>
>Wow, now that was insulting.<BR>
<BR>
At the very least, a specious overgeneralization.<BR>
<BR>
>I liked the Rebellion because I thought it created a dramatic background<BR>
>setting. But I suppose that's the anti-roleplaying, crazy wargamer in me.<BR>
<BR>
Now, given your previous post on this thread, by Rebellion do you mean MT's <BR>
morally-bankrupt game of King of the Mountain (see also Battletech's <BR>
appropriately-named Succession Wars), or the Alliance to Restore the Republic?<BR>
<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
- --------------<BR>
Kelly St.Clair     "Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridis HOMINES EST!"<BR>
kellys@efn.org<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 21:16:33 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
Someone wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > There are too many people for whom the wargame aspects of the<BR>
> OTU are more<BR>
> > important than maintaining a broad stage for roleplaying -- and<BR>
> I include<BR>
> > everyone who ever thought the Rebellion was a good idea in this<BR>
> category,<BR>
> > by default.<BR>
<BR>
In the past year alone, I have played Traveller war games which have<BR>
reflected an incredibly wide range of stuff. In Fifth Frontier War (one of<BR>
my personal favorites) you have the grand strategic level of play. In Battle<BR>
Rider and Brilliant Lances you have ship combat of either a few ships or<BR>
squadrons. In Snapshot you have all sorts of fun running amok in starships.<BR>
In Mayday you have something. I'm not quite sure exactly what it is, but<BR>
it's fun to play in any case. In Striker you have a great system for<BR>
small-unit combat. I'm sad to say that I haven't actually played AHL or<BR>
Invasion Earth in the past year or so, but they also reflect different parts<BR>
of the broad stage which is the Traveller universe. You would be unlikely to<BR>
ever get in this range of play in a role-playing game, at least not over a<BR>
one-year period.<BR>
<BR>
At the risk of sounding incredibly opinionated (but what the heck, I am,<BR>
after all), war games kick a**.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:23:38 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> <BR>
> > On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> Well, as I've pointed out many times, it's perfectly possible to jump<BR>
> >> into the system at some random location out of weapons range of the<BR>
> >> mainworld, and days away at max accel.<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> That means you can make observations for a few days and jump out again<BR>
> >> before they can get a ship anywhere near you.<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> So I expect that there will be a lot of small, not at all stealthy<BR>
> >> ships that can do two jumps without refueling and have *enormous*<BR>
> >> folding sensor arrays.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > This is quite true, but there's one serious problem with "peek-and-scoot"<BR>
> > spy vessels: the enemy knows that he's under observation, and will<BR>
> > respond accordingly.  "Peek-and-scoot" vessels would, furthermore, be<BR>
> > unsuitable for other espionage tasks, like dropping off and picking up<BR>
> > agents in unfriendly star systems.<BR>
> <BR>
> The thing is, it's canonical that you can't hide jump exit. At any<BR>
> range worth dealing with, it's too visible. If you jump in far enough<BR>
> out to maybe be unnoticed, and come in stealthily, it'll take *years*<BR>
> to get near the planet.<BR>
<BR>
I know that jump _exit_ is extremely unsubtle.  The question is, how<BR>
obvious is jump _initiation_?  If jump initiation is difficult to<BR>
detect, then there is a mission for ELINT ships such as the AuricTech<BR>
_Pueblo_ series of ELINT collection platforms.  Very stealthy, with<BR>
endurance of at least one standard year.  It jumps in with several other<BR>
ships (warships, Type S scout/couriers, whatever), and remains<BR>
on-station once the other ships jump out.<BR>
<BR>
If, OTOH, jump initiation has a significant signature, then one solution<BR>
would be to have a largish ELINT ship jump in around the Oort cloud,<BR>
deposit one or more smaller jump-capable ELINT ship(s) (with heavy<BR>
stealthing and fairly high acceleration), then jump out shortly before<BR>
the enemy engages.  One hopes that the daughter ship(s) can remain<BR>
undetected for a while (having never jumped in itself/themselves),<BR>
allowing useful ELINT collection.<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 00:46:37 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes [long]<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 07:59:39 -0700<BR>
>From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
>Subject: Re: ship sizes<BR>
><BR>
>>Why not? In the 17th and 18th centuries, most warships were the same size<BR>
>>as merchantmen; the largest ships-of-the-line carried only ~10-20x as many<BR>
>>guns as the smallest fighting sloop. The largest modern aircraft are only<BR>
>>~100x the size of the smallest, and couldn't carry nearly that much more<BR>
>>ordnance if they wanted to.<BR>
><BR>
>This is an overgeneralization. The ships that were the same size as<BR>
>warships were the big merchant ships that were major investments for<BR>
>large corportations - these are not the sort of ships players will ever<BR>
>own, unless they are a large corportation. The ships that a rich individual<BR>
>or group with a bank loan could buy were tiny things, a hundredth the size<BR>
>of a warship.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
HMS /Sovereign of the Seas/, a 100-gun warship launched in 1637, displaced<BR>
1,522 tons. "The /Sovereign of the Seas/, which was the most powerful ship<BR>
of her time, was also the first true three-decked ship."<BR>
<http://pc-78-120.udac.se:8001/WWW/Nautica/Ships/Sovereign_of_the_Seas(1637)<BR>
.html><BR>
<BR>
"[Stora] Kronan<BR>
"A Swedish 126 gun warship ... launched in 1668... with a calculated<BR>
displacement of 2140 tons. The armament of 126 guns made her the most<BR>
powerful ship of her time."<BR>
<http://pc-78-120.udac.se:8001/WWW/Nautica/Ships/Sailing_Warships/Kronan(166<BR>
8).html> <BR>
<BR>
HMS /Victory/ was launched in 1765 as a 100-gun first rate ship of the<BR>
line. She displaces a little over 2,000 tons (2,162.2), and cost 63,176<BR>
pounds. <BR>
<http://pc-78-120.udac.se:8001/WWW/Nautica/Ships/Sailing_Warships/Victory(17<BR>
65).html><BR>
<BR>
USS /Constitution/, a frigate of 44 guns launched in 1797, displaced 2,000<BR>
tons.<BR>
<http://pc-78-120.udac.se:8001/WWW/Nautica/Ships/Sailing_Warships/Constituti<BR>
on.html><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Are you seriously suggesting that all privateers were less than 22 tons<BR>
burthen, with one gun each? The median seems (see also below) to be around<BR>
100 tons.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
"Two smaller vessels, the /Greyhound/ of 120 tons and the /Roebuch/ of 90<BR>
tons, were built of the /chips/ or waste from the building of the<BR>
/Sovereign of the Seas/." (ibid.)<BR>
<BR>
HMS /Bounty/ (1783) was a fully-rigged ship, at 220.3 tons burthen, and<BR>
cost 2,600 pounds.<BR>
<http://pc-78-120.udac.se:8001/WWW/Nautica/Ships/Bounty.html><BR>
<BR>
The Continental Congress commissioned 1,697 privateers between 1776 and<BR>
1783. These ships carried an average of 8 or 9 guns<BR>
<http://www.usmm.org/revolution.html>. The bond for their commission alone<BR>
cost $5,000 (for ships of less than 100 tons) to $10,000 (for ships of 100<BR>
tons or more) (Wilbur, _Pirates and Patriots of the Revolution_, p. 26).<BR>
Many of them were purpose-built raiding vessels (Wilbur, op. cit., p. 25). <BR>
<BR>
"Elias Derby [of Salem, Massachusetts] and his family owned wholly or in<BR>
part more than 25 privateers, and had interest in twice that number."<BR>
(Wilbur, ibid.)<BR>
<BR>
The British commissioned the captured American privateer /George<BR>
Washington/ (20 guns) as a regular Royal Navy vessel, renaming her /General<BR>
Monk/. She was later recaptured by Captain Barney of the privateer /Hyder<BR>
Ally/ (16 guns). (Wilbur, op. cit., p. 71).<BR>
<BR>
"As captain of the privateer /Machias Liberty/, Jeremiah O'Brien later<BR>
captured two armed British schooners and delivered his prisoners to George<BR>
Washington. On the General's recommendation, the government of<BR>
Massachusetts appointed O'Brien to command his two prizes."<BR>
<http://www.usmm.org/revolution.html><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I stand by my assertions, without modification.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Also, although a SOL carried "only" 10 times as many guns as a sloop,<BR>
>those guns were 6-8 times bigger on an individual basis, for 60 times<BR>
>as much weight of metal...<BR>
<BR>
No argument there. I am not suggesting that privately-owned vessels were<BR>
ever a match for first rate ships of the line. I do assert that they were<BR>
viable weapons of war, if only in a commerce-raiding capacity, and -- if<BR>
correctly handled -- were capable of defeating frigates and other small<BR>
warships on occassion. These conditions are replicated fairly well in a<BR>
universe with 100-5,000 dton starships; they are quite impossible when<BR>
"small" warships are 10,000 dtons or more.<BR>
<BR>
>Investment levels are one reason there have to be big ships. PC ships<BR>
>are, by definition, within the purchasing range of a few individuals<BR>
supported<BR>
>by a bank. Even granted that these are exceptional individuals - one in a<BR>
>thousand, say - a planet with a population of even 100 million people will<BR>
have enough resources to buy a hundred thousand such ships. This is pretty<BR>
unmanageable.<BR>
<BR>
The total population of the American colonies in 1770-1780 was around<BR>
2.1-2.8 million, yet they launched 1,700 armed vessels -- one for every<BR>
1,650 citizens. <BR>
<BR>
_Engineering_ is the reason no one launched ships larger than ~2,000 tons<BR>
- -- the state of the art had reached the limits of what wood and sail can<BR>
support. Larger vessels required iron and steel hulls, and later steam<BR>
engines.<BR>
<BR>
I suggest that, before going overboard in defense of large ships, you<BR>
determine whether they are even practical given the progress of material<BR>
technologies in Traveller. I repeat: a 5,000-dton ship is large even for a<BR>
surface ship by current standards, and surface ships are poor analogies for<BR>
spacecraft architecture. <BR>
<BR>
Remember the Saturn V? 600 dtons -- that's all. If that was the practical<BR>
engineering limit at TL6, the best ships at TL15* would be ~50,000 dtons<BR>
(at 4g). I can live with that if I have to, and play at a lower TL. Kiss<BR>
/Tigress/ goodbye, however.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
*using Table 158: Hull Materials, on p. 101 of FF&S2. <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 23:54:02 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
VonRammen wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> I wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> <BR>
> > A modest proposal (that will almost surely get ripped to pieces :) require<BR>
> > that custom designs fit into the constraints of the modular system, i.e.<BR>
> you<BR>
> > can only design *custom* modules (or perhaps cheat slightly by combining<BR>
> > more than one module, etc.) Of course, you might end up with something<BR>
> like<BR>
> > GT:FFS, and I don't think there's going to be a lot of support for that.<BR>
> <BR>
> Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> replies:<BR>
> <BR>
> >>>My analogy was:<BR>
> <BR>
> QSDS lets me build a Chevy Nova-sized 4-door sedan.<BR>
> <BR>
> SSDS lets me specify that it is a Chevy Nova with the 383 engine, a<BR>
> manual shift and big rear tires.<BR>
> <BR>
> FFS lets me say that the 383 had a Holley 4 barrel carb with a Ram-air<BR>
> stack on it, the transmission had a Hurst shifter, they were Goodyear<BR>
> Eagle race-quality slicks, and by the way there are purple fuzzy dice<BR>
> hanging in the window.<BR>
> <BR>
> This was the dream. <<<<BR>
> <BR>
> Yes, but what I was alluding to in my original post was what might happen<BR>
> when ships designed under a simpler system come up against ships designed<BR>
> under a more complex system. It seems to me that the modular ships aren't<BR>
> just going to lose, they're going to get reamed, which is just penalizing<BR>
> people for not wanting to take the time to totally immerse themselves in<BR>
> FFS3. That's what I meant by making *all* the systems have to use a modular<BR>
> design, or something else to level the playing field somewhat. I chose<BR>
> modules, because then you can allow people to use the full FFS rules to<BR>
> create more advanced, custom modules, that anyone could use without having<BR>
> to do the design work themselves. This levels out the playing field. Of<BR>
> course, if it's possible to design FFS so that the big custom jobbies don't<BR>
> have an overwhelming advantage over the Chevy Novas, I don't have as big an<BR>
> objection. I'm just looking out for nightmare scenarios like the GM isn't a<BR>
> gearhead and a player *is*...<BR>
<BR>
A couple of points:<BR>
<BR>
1.  Custom-built ships should have a major performance advantage over<BR>
ships built using standard modules, with the following stipulations:<BR>
<BR>
	a.  Customized ships tend to be far more expensive than ships built<BR>
around standard modules.  Current analogies:  While a Ford Mustang with<BR>
a 5.6 liter engine may well outperform a Mustang with a 5.0 liter<BR>
engine, the cost of developing a new engine will likely price the<BR>
Mustang 5.6 out of more drivers' budgets.  Similarly, while the M1008<BR>
CUCV Chevy pickup and the M998 HMMWV are both rated as 5/4 ton utility<BR>
cargo vehicles, the HMMWV is both more capable in off-road situations<BR>
and more expensive.  The issue can easily become one of "the most bang<BR>
for the buck," in which case the likelihood of success belongs to<BR>
whichever design most clearly fits the proposed mission.<BR>
<BR>
	b.   Customized ships run the risk of being less reliable than<BR>
standardized ships.  Applying the Ford Mustang analogy, the Ford 5.0<BR>
liter engine is well-tested and reasonably reliable.  A new 5.6 liter<BR>
engine would lack the lengthy service life of the 5.0 engine, thus<BR>
making it harder to work out any bugs in the design.<BR>
<BR>
2.  TML gearheads have demonstrated a willingness to share designs. <BR>
Those players or referees who find themselves the target of extremely<BR>
minimaxed designs can always commission designs from the TML gearhead<BR>
community.  I have provided several designs as a response to requests<BR>
from fellow TMLers.<BR>
<BR>
Bottom line:  While your stock Chevy Nova is unlikely to win a drag race<BR>
against a thoroughly customized Nova, the stock version is probably more<BR>
reliable, and will get you and your stuff from point A to point B at<BR>
least as easily as the custom Nova.  If this doesn't suit you, there are<BR>
plenty of technicians who will teach you how to improve your Nova's<BR>
performance.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:57:28 -0500<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
> Now, given your previous post on this thread, by Rebellion do you mean<BR>
MT's<BR>
> morally-bankrupt game of King of the Mountain (see also Battletech's<BR>
> appropriately-named Succession Wars), or the Alliance to Restore the<BR>
Republic?<BR>
<BR>
Uh, these are not the droids you are looking for. Go about your business.<BR>
Move along, move along.<BR>
<BR>
;-)<BR>
<BR>
Ciao,<BR>
<BR>
Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
yikes@evansville.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:15:40 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
<BR>
>I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
>carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval vessel.Can<BR>
>anyone think of an example?<BR>
<BR>
Jack Aubrey's successful defence of the Company's China Fleet in<BR>
1805 - one frigate (HMS Surprise) and a line of battle composed of<BR>
the indiamen Alfred, Coutts, Wexford, Lushington, Ganges, Exeter, Abergavenny,<BR>
Addington, Bombay Castle, Camden, Cumberland, Hope, Royal George,<BR>
Dorset, Ocean, against a French regular squadron (a ship of the line,<BR>
two frigates, and some miscellany.) No French ships were taken, but<BR>
the French, taking heavy damage to irreplacable spars and believing that<BR>
some of the Indiamen were regular warships, were driven off.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
P.S. Sticklers will object that the above account is, technically speaking,<BR>
fictional, appearing in Patrick O'Brian's "H.M.S. Surprise", but I have little<BR>
time for such quibbles.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:19:04 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Privateers<BR>
<BR>
>> I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
>> carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval vessel.Can<BR>
>> anyone think of an example?<BR>
>Here are some:<BR>
>http://www.usmm.org/warof1812.html<BR>
I believe all the examples here are of privateers successfully taking<BR>
merchants, not defeating Navy vessels in full-up combat. Generally<BR>
a privateer's job is to run from the Navy and look for more merchants to<BR>
capture. The largest privateers operational in the war of 1812 were<BR>
still no match for late-war British frigates, let alone Americans.<BR>
<BR>
Also, again, I should stress that the near-frigate privateers were<BR>
generally the investments of rich merchants or corporations, not<BR>
individuals.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 22:35:04 -0700<BR>
From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com><BR>
Subject: Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> through it to the list:  What about paper or cardboard<BR>
> vehicles?<BR>
...<BR>
> mind playing Striker outside and maybe losing one or<BR>
> getting it muddy.<BR>
<BR>
I can see the San Jose after action report now:<BR>
<BR>
...and then the whole battalion was swept away by one of Mongo's freak<BR>
force 1000 gales...<BR>
<BR>
Kristian<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:20:57 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship sizes [long]<BR>
<BR>
I agree with the small ship vote - If you feel that 1kt destroyers are too<BR>
small, just run a simple combat:<BR>
<BR>
1 1kt destroyer (Imp Navy - Armed with Nukes, or not)<BR>
<BR>
vs<BR>
<BR>
2 200 ton traders w/ the weapons mix that PC's would have.<BR>
<BR>
In my Humble Experince, the 1kt ship, if well piloted will mop up the floor<BR>
with the two civies.<BR>
<BR>
Point 1)<BR>
<BR>
Military ships can afford better sensors and stealth (I can see you before<BR>
you can see me. Bang you are dead)<BR>
<BR>
Point 2)<BR>
<BR>
Military ships mount heavyer armor then civvies (even if you see me, some of<BR>
your shots will not effect me)<BR>
<BR>
Point 3)<BR>
<BR>
a 1kt ship mount at least twice the weapons of the civie ships listed. It<BR>
can have offencsive and defensive weapons. (So, you see me and you shoot<BR>
your missles at me - my dedicated defensive turret(s) take them out)<BR>
<BR>
Point 4)<BR>
<BR>
A Naval ship will have a crew that has at least been trained in how to work<BR>
together as a team under fire, and at best has worked together as a team<BR>
under fire. (this is a minor point, but disipline under fire cannot hurt!)<BR>
<BR>
Point 5)<BR>
<BR>
If the civvies accually suceed in trashing a Naval ship - Well, you know how<BR>
the cop killer is looked at in police circles?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ------<BR>
No argument there. I am not suggesting that privately-owned vessels were<BR>
ever a match for first rate ships of the line. I do assert that they were<BR>
viable weapons of war, if only in a commerce-raiding capacity, and -- if<BR>
correctly handled -- were capable of defeating frigates and other small<BR>
warships on occassion.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (rly-yh03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.35]) by air-yh05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:22:05 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 01:21:33 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id BAA96138;<BR>
	Thu, 3 Aug 2000 01:21:26 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 3 Aug 2000 01:21:14 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id BAA96104<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 01:21:14 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 01:21:14 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008030521.BAA96104@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2875</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/3/00 7:57:15 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, August 3 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2875<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
DTons (was Re: navy)<BR>
Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship <BR>
re:  Spinward Marches Trade Map<BR>
Fuel question<BR>
Ship sizes<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
RE: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
RE: Miniatures Question<BR>
RE: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
Re: I like Star Destroyers (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
RE: Should I get MT?<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
RE: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
FF&S 3<BR>
Re: Travellercentral.com Seach Engines Wierdness<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 17:25:52 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On 2 Aug 00, at 21:27, Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 02:31:54 +1200<BR>
> >From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
> >Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
> >I hate to disagree with you here Chris (especially since I see and agree with<BR>
> >the validity of the point you are making), but Adv 6 makes it fairly<BR>
> clear <BR>
> >that the ships mentioned are only the escorts for much larger ships (p36,<BR>
> >para 3).<BR>
<BR>
> Touche -- I concede the point.<BR>
<BR>
> Now, do you wish to discuss the other 14 works I cited?<BR>
<BR>
Not really, like I said I can see and agree with your point (to an extent). <BR>
Traveller's roleplaying supplements have always focused on ships likely to <BR>
be appropriate in a roleplaying setting; and I agree with you that it should <BR>
continue to do so. However that is a matter that is really in the hands of <BR>
those who control publication (Marc Miller, Loren Wiseman, Steve Jackson <BR>
and Andy Lilly basically) and given that they seem to have kept the focus <BR>
that way for the last 33 years, I don't have a lot of worries about any radical <BR>
change in focus.<BR>
<BR>
However, while Traveller has been a roleplaying game first, it has always <BR>
had a strong wargaming aspect as well (witness Mayday, Snapshot, High <BR>
Guard, Trillion Credit Squadron and the host of boardgames). Along with <BR>
this, the roleplaying supplements have always made it fairly clear that <BR>
larger ships do exist (Adv 6, The Spinward Marches Campaign, both <BR>
Library Datas etc) even if the players don't meet them. What I don't want to <BR>
see is a new design sequence that actively discourages the existence of <BR>
these larger vessels (which is what it seems to me is being proposed) <BR>
and/or prevents them from being designed.<BR>
<BR>
Some Traveller players (me for example) like romping off into wargames on <BR>
occasions and battling to the death with 200+ Kton dreadnoughts, it <BR>
doesn't mean that I want to see them in my roleplaying sessions (though <BR>
stealing the plans for the latest Zhodani battlecruiser made a fine adventure <BR>
once). Basically what I want is a complex FFS3 that allows me to design <BR>
those megaships for my wargames and a simple modular QSDS (fully <BR>
compatible with the complex system) that allows me to design the smaller <BR>
ships suitable for roleplaying. Sure limit the QSDS to 5,000 ton, not a <BR>
problem, actually a darn good idea; keep the megamonsters out of the <BR>
roleplaying game (an even better idea); keep the fighters (plenty of <BR>
specialised niches for them). But don't prohibit the existence of those <BR>
megamonsters and don't give me all powerful starfighters al la Starwars or <BR>
Battlestar Galatica. That's not the Traveller I know and love.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:20:54 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: pengebos@nmsu.edu<BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000, Joseph R. Dietrich wrote:<BR>
> I liked the Rebellion because I thought it created a dramatic background<BR>
> setting. But I suppose that's the anti-roleplaying, crazy wargamer in me.<BR>
<BR>
I hated the rebellion.  If you didn't have a big big big ship you couldn't<BR>
do anything but stay far away.  <BR>
<BR>
Now Hard Times made for interesting role-playing.<BR>
<BR>
Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu><BR>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<degaalth@prodigy.net><BR>
		http://www.geocities.com/degaalth/<BR>
<BR>
	"Traveller is a role-playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a role-playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a role-playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a role-playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a role-playing game"<BR>
		- repeat it until it hurts.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 01:30:14 EDT<BR>
From: GypsyComet@aol.com<BR>
Subject: DTons (was Re: navy)<BR>
<BR>
>In a message dated 8/2/00 9:09:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <BR>
>webmaster@travellercentral.com writes:<BR>
><BR>
><< Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
> nomenclature came from.<BR>
> <BR>
> Tod<BR>
>  >><BR>
><BR>
>I think its a T4 convention. <BR>
><BR>
<BR>
 I know _I_ was using it back in the MT days on GEnie, as an easy way to <BR>
distinguish between mass Tons and displacement Tons. I tended to capitalize <BR>
it though: "DTon". I recall it was instantly recognized as such without me <BR>
needing to explain it, so I suspect it's been in Gearhead Mental Shorthand <BR>
("GMS"?) since ships acquired mass in MT...<BR>
<BR>
GC<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 22:51:31 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: (OT) Re: Redeeming features of Starship <BR>
<BR>
on 8/2/00 3:45 PM, Glenn Goffin at gmgoffin@yahoo.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Hmm -- I think my current campaign will have to include<BR>
> some references to Dick Salamder's holovid show.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Don't forget his producer, Alberto Carrotte.  Nor Dr. X.  Somewhere, we have<BR>
a list of the films (at least the ones where Dirk Savage played Dick<BR>
Salamander--naturally he's not the first.  The third Dick S, as I recall.<BR>
Dr.X is never played by the same actor, and has changed both gender and race<BR>
throughout the series.<BR>
<BR>
In the most recent film, Dick apparently dies in the end.  However, it not<BR>
much of a secret the Carrotte is already working on "Return to Spider<BR>
Island".  Meanwhile, Dirk is taking a break, playing the part of Inspector<BR>
Seymore Globber in "Major Case Squad", filmed on location on Regina Orbital.<BR>
<BR>
As a side note, "MCS" is regarded as a gritty action film everywhere but<BR>
Regina, where it is high comedy.  The locals are quite aware of the<BR>
disparity of appearance between vid star Dirk Savage and the real Seymore<BR>
Globber (who has been described as Sidney Greenstreet's hips with Mick<BR>
Jagger's lips and a salivary gland problem) Read all about it on<BR>
TravellerCentral<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:14:43 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Spinward Marches Trade Map<BR>
<BR>
- --- Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >After a long time and several restarts the Spinward<BR>
> >Marches trade map is complete. (Thank Ghu!).<BR>
> >Please give it a look and tell me what you think. <BR>
> <BR>
> I think it's great!  You've put a lot of work into it, and<BR>
> I'll be glad to use the results.  I'm starting a campaign<BR>
> involving interstellar organized crime set in the Spinward<BR>
> Marches just after the 5FW, so trade routes are of obvious<BR>
> importance.  Now I suppose I'll have to buy Far Trader.<BR>
 <BR>
That would be of help. The credit amounts tavelling through the <BR>
routes are as follows though. Since some of the folks out there <BR>
have a different meaning for a billion that Americans like <BR>
myself, I have left them in millions.<BR>
<BR>
Minor          100 MCr -     1,000 MCr<BR>
Feeder       1,000 MCr -    10,000 MCr <BR>
Main        10,000 MCr -   100,000 MCr <BR>
Major      100,000 MCr - 1,000,000 MCr <BR>
Super    1,000,000 MCr+<BR>
<BR>
I would imagine a super trade route would have a lot of operertunity <BR>
for organized crime. <BR>
<BR>
I am glad you found it useful,<BR>
<BR>
Terry<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 23:16:25 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Terry Mixon <tlmixon@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Fuel question<BR>
<BR>
How would one go about looking at trade and deterimine roughly how <BR>
many ships pass through and then how much fuel would be used? I have <BR>
an idea to create something and would need a way to know how much <BR>
fuel is purchased in a starport over a year. Can anyone toss an idea <BR>
my way?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks,<BR>
<BR>
Terry<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:19:44 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
There has been a lot of discussion as to how big modern ships are in <BR>
Traveller terms. Most of this seems to involve trying to work it out by the <BR>
ships dimensions. There is an easier way to do it. A ship displaces a fixed <BR>
weight of water, and this has a fixed volume. This will tell you the volume of <BR>
the ship below the waterline (ForEx, Nimitz displaces 102,000 tonnes, 1 <BR>
tonne of water is roughly 1 cubic meter, therefore Nimitz has about <BR>
102,000 cu m below the waterline). From this you get Nimitz having around <BR>
7200 Traveller dTon below the waterline. Modern warships have at least <BR>
100% reserve boyancy (volume above the waterline), giving Nimitz a <BR>
minimum size of 14,400 dTons; probably more. Therefore we can <BR>
comfortably place Nimitz in the 14,000 to 20,000 dTon range.<BR>
<BR>
However, supercarriers are not the largest ships around. The largest ship is <BR>
the supertanker Jahre Viking (ex Happy Giant, ex Seawise Giant). She has <BR>
a deadweight tonnage of 564,763 (which I believe means she can carry that <BR>
much cargo). This means that the Jahre Viking has at least 564,763 cu m <BR>
below the waterline. That about 40,000 dTons. Taking reverse boyancy and <BR>
other displacement into account, I think its safe to put the Jahre Viking in <BR>
the 70,000 to 80,000 dTon range, maybe more. If we can build self <BR>
supporting structures this big at TL8, I don't think 1,000,000 dTons at TL15 <BR>
is unreasonable.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 04:57:30 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:22:59 EDT<BR>
>From: Olegamer@aol.com<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>In a message dated 8/2/00 9:09:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time,<BR>
>webmaster@travellercentral.com writes:<BR>
><BR>
><< Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the<BR>
'dtons'<BR>
> nomenclature came from.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
>  >><BR>
><BR>
>I think its a T4 convention.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Aghhh. I can't stand it any more.<BR>
<BR>
Supplement 7 Traders and Gunboats page 5: (emphasis is mine.)<BR>
<BR>
  "The creation of starship deck plan data is based on the<BR>
assumption that one ton of mass displacement equals fourteen<BR>
cubic meters. The starship *displacement ton* is derived from<BR>
the volume of one ton of liquid hydrogen, the material used as<BR>
fuel for starships."<BR>
<BR>
The term and it's definition are both CT.<BR>
<BR>
In a quick survey of the design books of all versions of Traveller<BR>
I find no reference to the abreviation dton. The closest I find<BR>
is in FFS2 where they reference T<subscript>D.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:57:14 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
> From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
>I'm just looking out for nightmare scenarios like the GM isn't a<BR>
> gearhead and a player *is*...<BR>
<BR>
The modules are going to be built as good as Ditzie and I can build them.<BR>
They will also have a cost advantage, so while you might be able to squeeze<BR>
some performance out of custom units, I dont think you will squeeze enough.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 00:45:45 +0200<BR>
From: Michael Koehne <kraehe@copyleft.de><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
Moin David P. Summers,<BR>
<BR>
> >After a lot of work at it, I believe that the NIMITZ class are approximately<BR>
> >20,000 dT in Traveller terms.<BR>
> >They are roughly 1050 feet (320 m) in length.<BR>
> <BR>
> How big is a supertanker compared to a Nimitz?<BR>
<BR>
  I think some tanker are bigger than a Nimitz - the Nimitz had 'only'<BR>
  91,500 dt. This would compare in weight to a 9kdt traveller starship.<BR>
<BR>
Bye Michael<BR>
- -- <BR>
  mailto:kraehe@copyleft.de             UNA:+.? 'CED+2+:::Linux:2.2.14'UNZ+1'<BR>
  http://www.xml-edifact.org/           CETERUM CENSEO MSDOS ESSE DELENDAM<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 02:39:39 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 5:31 PM -0800 8/2/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>  >>No. Which is my point. The *energy* emitted is the same. the *entropy*<BR>
>>  >>isn't.<BR>
>>  ><BR>
>>  > But how can they be different?  The thermodynamics of a state are<BR>
>>  > independent of the path you take to the state.  Entropy (which<BR>
>>  > is really a form of energy) is part of the thermodynamics.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Ok, then they are *different* states. After all, the amount of energy<BR>
>>being radiated may be the same, but the *spectrum* is different, and so<BR>
>>will be the *internal* state.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> No.  I'm saying the same photons at the same energy.  At this<BR>
> point I just want to get past the idea that it has to be<BR>
> a fin radiating by black body radiation....<BR>
<BR>
I give up. You aren't listening. <BR>
<BR>
I'll just note as my *final* commebt that it *can't* be the same energy<BR>
photons, because if it was then it *would* be black body radiation.<BR>
<BR>
>>THEY AREN'T EMITTING THE SAME PHOTONS!!!!!!<BR>
><BR>
> They are, that is what I'm saying.  You are trying to address<BR>
> issues you think I'm working on rather than the ones I am<BR>
> working on.  I'm trying to get someone on this while avoiding<BR>
> everyone jumping to what they think the final answer is.<BR>
<BR>
No, I'm trying to point out that you are ignoring entropy.<BR>
<BR>
But since you won't accept that, there's no point in your replying to<BR>
this message.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 11:20:15 +0100 <BR>
From: Matt Bond <MBOND@karpad.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Nick Bradbeer [mailto:nick@traveller.freeserve.co.uk]<BR>
> Sent: 03 August 2000 03:37<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> > Use the TL as a divisor and have a flat % for TL3 or TL4 down.  For<BR>
> > instance...<BR>
> ><BR>
> >   TL<BR>
> >  0-4   90%<BR>
> >  5+    (400/TL)%<BR>
> <BR>
> I think we might be biting off more than we can chew here. We <BR>
> could well<BR>
> end up making TL-7 space flight totally impossible - and we <BR>
> have a fair<BR>
> amount of evidence that it's not. (Although not much that <BR>
> TL-8 space flight<BR>
> is possible...)<BR>
> <BR>
> Nick<BR>
<BR>
Bear in mind that in RL TL7 space flight, the heat build up from the<BR>
launch engines is pretty much disposed of by disposing of the engines<BR>
(booster rockets mainly) and the exhaust. The actual space vehicles<BR>
themselves have relatively tiny power plants, and are only a few dtons<BR>
total volume in any case. Probably only a few m2 of radiators can<BR>
dispose of the heat built up from day-to-day orbital activity.<BR>
<BR>
Also, most TL7 space vehicles don't have to dispose of the heat build up<BR>
from firing honking great lasers...<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:13:42 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Miniatures Question<BR>
<BR>
GDWGAMES@aol.com wrote :<BR>
> > Loren asked us about our preferences for miniatures a while<BR>
> > ago.  I have a further response for him, but I'd like to<BR>
> > through it to the list:  What about paper or cardboard<BR>
> > vehicles?<BR>
><BR>
> You are not the first one the idea has occured to. I'm looking at<BR>
> a lot of things (and I have an article from Rob Prior on the<BR>
> subject for JTAS).<BR>
<BR>
Just a data point, I still have the cardboard cut-outs from the back cover<BR>
of Judges Guild "Tancred" scenario pack.<BR>
<BR>
While very simple '2D' cut-outs, with movable "turrets", they worked great<BR>
with SJG's cardboard figures, and had enough detail to help tactical<BR>
decisions and player visualization.<BR>
<BR>
They had a "top down" view printed on one side, and a "mao view" on the<BR>
other side like the standard Traveller deck plans, so you just flipped the<BR>
cut-out when you wanted to know where people were in the vehicle.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 11:44:00 +0100 <BR>
From: Matt Bond <MBOND@karpad.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: John Groth [mailto:wombat@premier.net]<BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<snip><BR>
> > The thing is, it's canonical that you can't hide jump exit. At any<BR>
> > range worth dealing with, it's too visible. If you jump in <BR>
> far enough<BR>
> > out to maybe be unnoticed, and come in stealthily, it'll <BR>
> take *years*<BR>
> > to get near the planet.<BR>
> <BR>
> I know that jump _exit_ is extremely unsubtle.  The question is, how<BR>
> obvious is jump _initiation_? <BR>
<BR>
IIRC SOpM states that Jump exit and initiation have the same energy<BR>
release. A brilliant flash of light that subsides quickly leaving the<BR>
faint blueish glow of the jump grid on the hull which soon fades. Entry<BR>
to Jump is the reverse, a build up of charge in the jump grid, then a<BR>
sudden flash that quickly fades.<BR>
<BR>
IIRC there is mention in HG as to how many EP are required to jump.<BR>
Assuming half this energy is released in the Initialisation system, and<BR>
half is 'carried' through to the exit system, we now have a value for<BR>
the energy of the point source of the jumping ship. It should be easy<BR>
enough to calculate how far away this energy will be passively<BR>
detectable at each TL. <BR>
<BR>
Personally, I dislike the idea that the flash is readily detectable at<BR>
system-wide distances, and IMTU it is barely noticeable over background<BR>
radiation beyond a million km or so unless you were specifically looking<BR>
at that exact spot with the intention of detecting a jump exit. <BR>
<BR>
Not that I have bothered to actually calculate the figures, it just<BR>
feels 'right' for my games.<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 07:10:39 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: I like Star Destroyers (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
Yes. Big ships look very cool and impress the locals.  Me like.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 11:33 PM<BR>
Subject: I like Star Destroyers (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > Tim, I suspect that a lot of the Huge Ship Contingent aren't<BR>
> > interested in deckplans, or in using their monsters in roleplaying<BR>
> > gmaes.  I'm thinking they are mostly wargamers and pure gearhead<BR>
> > designers.<BR>
><BR>
> Nah, we just like the imagry of a huge starships filling the movie screen<BR>
> for something like 10+ seconds. Oh, and blowing up space stations the size<BR>
> small moons by hitting the right exhaust port with proton torpedoes. ;-)<BR>
><BR>
> Joseph R. Dietrich<BR>
> yikes@evansville.net<BR>
><BR>
> "The basic rules of Traveller contained in this book are flexible enough<BR>
to<BR>
> allow almost any science fiction theme to be recreated without<BR>
significantly<BR>
> disturbing the balance of play." (The Traveller Book, 1982, pg. 10)<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 08:02:19 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:37:58 -0500<BR>
>From: "Joseph R. Dietrich" <yikes@evansville.net><BR>
>Subject: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
><BR>
>> There are too many people for whom the wargame aspects of the OTU are more<BR>
>> important than maintaining a broad stage for roleplaying -- and I include<BR>
>> everyone who ever thought the Rebellion was a good idea in this category,<BR>
>> by default.<BR>
><BR>
>Wow, now that was insulting.<BR>
><BR>
>I liked the Rebellion because I thought it created a dramatic background<BR>
>setting. But I suppose that's the anti-roleplaying, crazy wargamer in me.<BR>
<BR>
Very well: I apologize. I did not intend to be insulting. Allow me to<BR>
elaborate, hopefully in a less inflamatory manner this time.<BR>
<BR>
If you like the idea of the Rebellion /per se/ (which I don't think is<BR>
quite the same as liking the Rebellion as a background for role-playing),<BR>
you are necessarily supporting the following ideas as well:<BR>
<BR>
(1) That there is (or was) a strong, centralized Imperial government -- one<BR>
worth fighting over.<BR>
<BR>
(2) That, unfortunately, such a government is stifling to roleplaying in<BR>
general, and should be removed to give players more scope.<BR>
<BR>
(3) That large-scale fleet actions (wargames) and their effects make a<BR>
better background to play in than said powerful, centralized government.<BR>
<BR>
We have agreed at least that ships of ~5,000 dtons and less are "PC-scale",<BR>
whether there are larger ships or not (if there is a dissenting voice,<BR>
please speak up).<BR>
I don't agree with Andrew (I think it was) that a frontier region can avoid<BR>
larger, "strategic" vessels: by definition, those need to be posted near<BR>
the borders, which is just where you don't want them from a role-playing<BR>
standpoint.<BR>
<BR>
I think I have demonstrated that there is at least one historical period<BR>
where privately-owned vessels were able to participate in full-scale<BR>
warfare in a meaningful fashion, primarily because the purpose-built<BR>
warships of the day were at most only an order of magnitude larger.<BR>
<BR>
A solution (not "the" solution, note) to the problems caused by a strong,<BR>
centralized Imperial government is to admit that, although fun, large<BR>
warships drove the development of Traveller increasingly out of the control<BR>
of individual referees and players, and return to the original concept of a<BR>
remote, relatively weak, and decentralized Imperium. Such a solution<BR>
virtually requires limiting naval vessels to "PC-scale," as well.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 2000 22:59:28 +0100<BR>
From: Ewan Quibell <E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
SD Mooney wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Hi folks,<BR>
> <BR>
> Has anyone described what a fire would be like in Zero G?  I'm in the<BR>
> finishing touches of a scenario for BITS that needs a description and<BR>
> I've got about a day to complete it (one of our authors had to drop<BR>
> doing a book for unforseen personal circumstances so I'm having to<BR>
> bring something up the queue a lot faster than planned).<BR>
<BR>
I'm a little late in posting so this might be on no use, but IIRC I<BR>
think the Captain of the rescue ship in the film Event Horizon describes<BR>
a Zero G fire in one of the scenes. I don't know if this is true to the<BR>
real world but I think he describes it as a ball of flames coming on in<BR>
waves. I'd be interested to know if this was true to life if anyone knows.<BR>
<BR>
Regards<BR>
<BR>
Ewan<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
   Ewan Quibell                       Their's not to make reply,<BR>
   Senior Communications Engineer     Their's not to reason why,<BR>
   Computer Centre                    Their's but to do and die:<BR>
   University of Brighton             Into the valley of Death<BR>
                                      Rode the six hundred.<BR>
   E.D.Quibell@brighton.ac.uk              Alfred, Lord Tennyson<BR>
<BR>
   #include<stddisclaimer.h><BR>
<BR>
   My spelling is entirely due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic license<BR>
<BR>
   University of Brighton - Sunday Times' University of the Year<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 13:28:02 +0100 <BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Should I get MT?<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
> Further to this thread, are the MegaTraveller errata<BR>
> collected and incorporated into the text anywhere (other<BR>
> than in marginalia of my MT books)?<BR>
<BR>
You can find MT errata at:<BR>
http://www.downport.com/tas/mterrata.html<BR>
<BR>
As for incorporating it into the text I  *think*  that  the  Word<BR>
copies of MT that Marc dishes out in limited number each year may<BR>
be corrected.  But I've yet to be able to get a copy  for  myself<BR>
to check.<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 06:19:27 -0700<BR>
From: shudson@lightspeed.bc.ca (Steven Hudson)<BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
>From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
>Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
...<BR>
>than most current Terran states.  A quick check of an US State Department<BR>
>web site suggests that countries on a balkanized world spend between 3% and<BR>
>30% of their budgets on the military, with a median of about 8%.  Off the<BR>
<BR>
  You might want to check that your getting % of budget rather than %<BR>
of national income. IIRC, Striker calculates based on the latter.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 14:45:42 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
<<<I know that jump _exit_ is extremely unsubtle.  The question is, how<BR>
obvious is jump _initiation_?>>><BR>
<BR>
I figure that since it's possible to detect a ships direction when it goes<BR>
to J-space, if not the distance, its pretty unsubtle. IIRC going to jump is<BR>
characterised with a build-up of energies on the jump grid and a brilliant<BR>
discharge as the jump is initiated, with the arrival from jump running in<BR>
reverse. IMHO this suggests that the sensor of choice for detecting ships<BR>
exiting jumpspace would be a PESA, and the best way for spy ships to<BR>
approach a planet is to jump in outside sensor range, thrust toward the area<BR>
of operations and then rely on momentuum and EW to stay undetected...unless<BR>
they have some pretty darned radical emissions damping<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 10:02:14 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: FF&S 3<BR>
<BR>
> > By all means give us<BR>
> > the ability to create our own ships to the nth degree of precision if we<BR>
> > want to, but how about a supply of 'prefab modules' as well?<BR>
>That's what we've been talking about. You'll just have to realize that<BR>
>prefab modules *to mean wasted space or wasted power, or some other<BR>
>"non-optimum" performance sometimes.<BR>
<BR>
I agree with this.<BR>
<BR>
The prefab plug&play system should be built from the detailed system.<BR>
<BR>
This adds the advantage of letting gearheads in training tweak systems by <BR>
working on a single subsystem of a ship.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com - Opinions should be yours too!<BR>
Exigis Domus Hillaria - http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 08:00:42 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Travellercentral.com Seach Engines Wierdness<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
To: "TML" <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 6:39 PM<BR>
Subject: Travellercentral.com Seach Engines Wierdness<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Greetings,<BR>
><BR>
> I'm always curious how people get to my Traveller website.  I took a look<BR>
at<BR>
> my web stats, and found the search engine referring keywords pretty<BR>
> interesting, if not downright funny.  I thought I'd share them with the<BR>
TML<BR>
> for your amusement:<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Referring Keywords<BR>
><BR>
<<Snipped - one very bizarre list >>><BR>
<BR>
Uhm.... Tod .... what *do* you have hiden away on that website?<BR>
You made my morning. Everyone is going to wonder, all day, 'Why is he<BR>
grinning?'<BR>
<BR>
> --<BR>
> "SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
> --<BR>
> Tod Glenn<BR>
> webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
> webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
> --<BR>
> http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
> http://www.solsec.org<BR>
> http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2875<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (rly-yc04.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.36]) by air-yc01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 10:57:15 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 10:56:48 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id KAA16311;<BR>
	Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:56:42 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:56:22 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id KAA16274<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:56:22 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:56:22 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008031456.KAA16274@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2875<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2876</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/3/00 9:55:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, August 3 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2876<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Dtons<BR>
Re: Ship sizes<BR>
Modules vs. Custom (WAS: FFS3 Poll)<BR>
RE: Dtons<BR>
Re: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: Sickbay power requirements<BR>
Re: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Trying to Catch Up...<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Re: Ship sizes<BR>
Re: Starship density<BR>
RE: Tweeked LBB2 Starship Combat (long)<BR>
Re: Starship density<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 11:46:29 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Les Howie <travgrognard@yahoo.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Dtons<BR>
<BR>
My recollection is thus:<BR>
<BR>
In the original LBB, there is no mention of what a<BR>
"ton" is -- when I first designed ships I assumed it<BR>
was a measure of mass.<BR>
<BR>
It was first defined as a volume measure in the<BR>
"Traders and Gunboats" supplement, equal to the volume<BR>
of one ton of hydrogen (14 & change cubic meters).<BR>
<BR>
The term ton was retained throughout the CT era. <BR>
Striker (IIRC) was the first design system to<BR>
differentiate mass and volume, but only included a few<BR>
ship components (at least, I think the "drop tube" was<BR>
in there) and did not actually use the term<BR>
displacement ton.<BR>
<BR>
Did MT diffenetiate Mass and Volumne for ships? If so,<BR>
did it use the "dton" terminology?  If it did not, I<BR>
think it first surfaced in TNE.<BR>
<BR>
=====<BR>
Les Howie<BR>
Gearhead Heretic<BR>
imtu 1.0: tc t4 ru- ge++ !3i c++ jt++ au+ ls++ pi+ ta-- he++<BR>
<BR>
_______________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 07:57:47 -0800<BR>
From: Peter Newman <pnewman@gci.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> wrote<BR>
<BR>
> There has been a lot of discussion as to how big modern ships are in <BR>
> Traveller terms.  The largest ship is <BR>
> the supertanker Jahre Viking (ex Happy Giant, ex Seawise Giant). She has <BR>
> a deadweight tonnage of 564,763 (which I believe means she can carry that <BR>
> much cargo). This means that the Jahre Viking has at least 564,763 cu m <BR>
> below the waterline. That about 40,000 dTons. Taking reverse boyancy and <BR>
> other displacement into account, I think its safe to put the Jahre Viking in <BR>
> the 70,000 to 80,000 dTon range, maybe more. If we can build self <BR>
> supporting structures this big at TL8, I don't think 1,000,000 dTons at TL15 <BR>
> is unreasonable.<BR>
<BR>
Supertankers are _not_ self supporting they are partially <BR>
supported by the water. If you were to pick up a supertanker<BR>
and place it on dry land it would have structural problems. [1]<BR>
This does not mean that we could not build self supporting<BR>
structures of that size at our TL but it does mean that<BR>
supertankers aren't self supporting. A starship needs to be self<BR>
supporting as canon starships (in CT, MT, & TNE) of _any_ size <BR>
can land on a planet just fine (although unstreamlined ones will <BR>
require a vacuum to do so). Once they have landed they will<BR>
be supporting their own weight. IIRC the general rule of thumb <BR>
is that a starship can support itself in gravity's up to its<BR>
G rating. Thus if a million Dton SDB with a six G drive must<BR>
be able to support all million Dtons at up to six G's.<BR>
In reality this is an oversimplification and the ability to take<BR>
6 G's of thrust from your Thruster plate should not automatically<BR>
imply the ability to take 6 G's of thrust on your landing legs.<BR>
<BR>
[1] Even if resting on its bottom or its top, if it were resting<BR>
on a side these problems would be worse. If you tried to rest<BR>
a supertanker on its bow or stern ends (i.e. stand it up vertically<BR>
like a skyscraper) it would probably collapse very soon. An<BR>
nautical engineering type should be able to provide data as to<BR>
the structural strength of tankers.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:00:50 -0400<BR>
From: "VonRammen" <von_rammen@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Modules vs. Custom (WAS: FFS3 Poll)<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> notes:<BR>
<BR>
>>The modules are going to be built as good as Ditzie and I can build them.<BR>
They will also have a cost advantage, so while you might be able to squeeze<BR>
some performance out of custom units, I dont think you will squeeze<BR>
enough.<<<BR>
<BR>
You know, my first reaction was, "Great! We're going to have really<BR>
optimized modules."<BR>
<BR>
Then I thought: Ditzie is desingning them?<BR>
<BR>
This might be the perfect cross-over from gearhead "roll-playing" to<BR>
non-gearhead "role-playing." Just think of the "extra features" modules that<BR>
Ditzie designs are going to have...the microwave oven in the galley is also<BR>
a weapons-grade maser...the ship's sound system is banned on most inhabited<BR>
planets...and let's not even *think* about what the cargo robots included in<BR>
the ship's price are going to be able to do! :-0<BR>
<BR>
However, things like the _Montana_ design still trouble me somewhat. It<BR>
seems to me that a lot of features that I wouldn't necessarily want to work<BR>
up (the customized particle guns, for example) could give a big edge, or<BR>
worse, an unexpected edge (if for example the ref was not the gearhead the<BR>
player was) to the uber-gearhead. However, if the cost and reliability are<BR>
impacted with enough significance, I think I can live with it. I just want<BR>
to preserve a worldview where some one who could follow the MT design<BR>
sequence (me, for one :) can still design an effective ship of the line<BR>
without going nuts or having to take graduate level mathematics classes. And<BR>
that while effective, the super-tricked out ships are going to be white<BR>
elephants constructed for very specialized functions, or because the<BR>
interstellar version of Mad Ludwig of Bavaria just likes big ships* :)<BR>
<BR>
And as an aside, Ian, let me just say that throughout you've been a voice of<BR>
reason in calming the fears of the non- or semi-gearhead crowd, IMHO. Your<BR>
guidance gives me a lot of confidence in the project!<BR>
<BR>
Also, anybody going to work on a robot design sequence? I didn't recall FFS1<BR>
having one. No index, so hard to check (N.B.: FFS3 needs an index!)<BR>
<BR>
Fred Ramen<BR>
<BR>
*Wagner's patron, found of building castles in a neo-Renaissance style<BR>
(including the exquisite Neuschwanstein) with public money, eventually found<BR>
floating face down in a lake. Suspects seem to have included the taxpayers<BR>
of the Kingdom of Bavaria.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 17:00:13 +0100 <BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Dtons<BR>
<BR>
Les Howie wrote:<BR>
> Did MT diffenetiate Mass and Volumne for ships? If so,<BR>
> did it use the "dton" terminology?  If it did not, I<BR>
> think it first surfaced in TNE.<BR>
<BR>
MT used displacement tons to identify vehicle hull sizes but  for<BR>
all componants used kiloliters (for volume)  and  kilograms  (for<BR>
mass) in the design sequence.<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:04:38 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
Jon Zeigler writes:<BR>
>>In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that activates<BR>
>>some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes apparently trigger<BR>
>>the 'next step' in evolution.<BR>
>I am not a molecular biologist, nor do I play one on TV.  I did just read<BR>
>_Darwin's Radio_, though.<BR>
>The basic premise seems sound.  Clearly evolution has more to work<BR>
>with than the occasional random mutation and the simple sexual<BR>
>shuffling of traits.  Retroviruses are real objects and are probably a<BR>
>major source of genetic variation.  Meanwhile, the "punctuated equilibrium"<BR>
>model for macroevolution seems to have evidence behind it.<BR>
<BR>
	Beware any statement that starts with "Clearly..."  :)<BR>
<BR>
	Our current understanding of evolutionary processes is that<BR>
	random mutation provides more than enough genetic variation for<BR>
	evolution to proceed faster than has been observed in the fossil<BR>
	record.  Reshuffling that occurs during sexual reproduction also<BR>
	helps, and there may be some small amount of genetic exchange<BR>
	between lineages through viruses.  "Punctuated equilibrium" is<BR>
	still contoversial at best, and there is a great deal of<BR>
	evidence that macroevolution proceeds by the same mechanisms as<BR>
	microevolution.<BR>
<BR>
>As to our DNA somehow being able to "sense" that the human species<BR>
>is under stress, and then give rise to just the right variations to produce<BR>
>a "homo superior" subspecies?  No, I find that hard to believe.  Bear's<BR>
>speculative structure got a bit too elaborate for me at that point.<BR>
<snipped><BR>
<BR>
	Yup.  Plus, evolution has little to do with survival of the species<BR>
	and much to do with survival and reproduction of individuals.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:07:15 EDT<BR>
From: Kagehira@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Sickbay power requirements<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 8/2/00 7:54:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Sickbay Power Requirements<BR>
>  <BR>
>  In mail you write:<BR>
>  <BR>
>  > Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
>  >> For sickbay, I say we inquire and find out how much power an individual<BR>
>  >> "bed" in a modern ICU requires. And if it seems a bit low, double it. <BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > Your upper bound here is going to be a kilowatt :-<BR>
>  > (looks around 'the office') :-<BR>
>  > ventilator 200W<BR>
>  <BR>
>  Funny, that's what *my* "ventilator" (a CPAP unit) draws... :-)<BR>
>  <BR>
>  > dialysis 100W<BR>
>  > cooling/warming blankets 200W<BR>
>  > intra-aortic balloon pump 200W<BR>
>  > monitoring equipment 100W<BR>
>  > lighting, airconditioning, etc.<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > Note that not everyone is on all the gadgets listed above. For long,<BR>
>  > anyway...<BR>
>  <BR>
>  Yeah. Oddly enough, my off the top of my head guess last night would<BR>
>  have been a kW...<BR>
>  <BR>
>  I say we adopt that figure. 1 kW per "bed", plus another for each<BR>
>  "workstation". <BR>
>  <BR>
>  Because of the "special needs" (stuff like pure O2, special air<BR>
>  filtering for surgery, etc), I'd say that each bed in sickbay costs<BR>
>  *two* people worth of life support costs for the ship. With the "bonus"<BR>
>  that in an emergency, two people *can* use that life support. That<BR>
>  refers to ambulatory patients, not folks who need the "bed's" life<BR>
>  support. <BR>
>  <BR>
>  And the lifesupport/power for the sick bay is at least *partially*<BR>
>  independent of the rest of the ship.<BR>
>  <BR>
>  Sound good?<BR>
<BR>
I'd double it for added equipment (x-ray or equivalent, neural scanner and <BR>
probably a few other nifty items.).<BR>
<BR>
Bryan<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:12:18 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
John Groth writes:<BR>
>Note that this figure does not include SDB squadrons (calculated<BR>
>separately IAW _Imperial Squadrons_), which presumably fall outside the<BR>
>postulated 5% naval budget.<BR>
<BR>
	Actually, I was thinking in terms of all military spaceships,<BR>
	starships, small craft, etc.  However, my numbers are (obviously)<BR>
	arbitrary and pretty close to the minimum conceivable.<BR>
<BR>
>Ian also explicitly excluded subsector and<BR>
>Imperial naval forces, which would presumably contain the vast majority<BR>
>of 50,000+ dton cruisers and 200,000+ dton capital ships (or the<BR>
>equivalent in battle rider BatRons with tenders).<BR>
<BR>
	Yup.  That is another whole can of gogh.  Just how big do folks<BR>
	rekon the subsector and Imperial navies are relative to the<BR>
	planetary ones?<BR>
<BR>
>>This I can live with.  There are still some worlds with monster ships, but<BR>
>>most make do with  much more modest vessels.  Using low multipliers for the<BR>
>>population helps, and I am stretching the limits here.  That's OK by me.<BR>
>And the Spinward Marches in M:1100 pushes the upper limits for planetary<BR>
>navies.  Sounds reasonable to me.<BR>
<BR>
	There we have it campers.  Just place YTU in between and we will<BR>
	happily endorse it.  :)<BR>
<BR>
>Those of us who enjoy the presence of Really Big Ships still have the<BR>
>subsector and Imperial forces as a haven.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
	Run away, run away!<BR>
<BR>
:)<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:16:25 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
Matt Bond writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Bear in mind that in RL TL7 space flight, the heat build up from the<BR>
> launch engines is pretty much disposed of by disposing of the engines<BR>
> (booster rockets mainly) and the exhaust. The actual space vehicles<BR>
> themselves have relatively tiny power plants, and are only a few dtons<BR>
> total volume in any case. Probably only a few m2 of radiators can<BR>
> dispose of the heat built up from day-to-day orbital activity.<BR>
<BR>
And despite this, the space shuttle will overheat if it doesn't open its cargo bay doors, which double as radiators.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:24:47 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
Victor Delnore writes:<BR>
>>For the sake of argument, I will assume that the average annual salary on a<BR>
>>typical world is about cr 6,000.  Perhaps a typical government will have an<BR>
>>annual budget of about cr 2,000 per citizen.  <snipped>  Off the<BR>
>>top of my head, I'm going to try 1% as typical for non-balkanized worlds<BR>
>><snipped> This would generate a<BR>
>>military budget of cr 20 per capita.  Now, how much of this goes into the<BR>
>>navy?  The Imperial and subsector navies are out there, but perhaps 5% is a<BR>
>>good place to start (remember, I'm still on a mission).  This would lead to<BR>
>>cr 1 per capita available for the navy's annual budget.<BR>
>But who's paying for the subsector and imperial navies?  In fact, how do<BR>
>the subsector and imperial (I'm lower-casing because I mean the <BR>
>generic imperial government of Traveller, the rules, and not<BR>
>the Third Imperium of Traveller, the universe) governments pay for<BR>
>anything?  You're assuming that the planetary government takes the largest<BR>
>chunk out of everybody's paycheck.  What if it doesn't?  What if the<BR>
>imperium takes the big money and the planet's share is more like a<BR>
>twentieth-century city government's?  Then "big" planetary navies really<BR>
>do become something like two escorts, a dozen SBDs, and a bunch of small<BR>
>craft.  <BR>
<snipped><BR>
<BR>
	I was not (yet) getting into the subsector and imperial navies, but I<BR>
	was not just assuming that the planetary government takes the largest<BR>
	chunk out of everybody's paycheck (not to mention property taxes,<BR>
	import/export duties, corporate taxes, etc.), I was assuming that the<BR>
	planetary government is the only entity gouging the population.  That<BR>
	government then pays the imperium some amount, which the imperium then<BR>
	uses to pay for the Scout service, the Navy, the Marines, colonization<BR>
	efforts, bureaucracy, friendship pins, etc.  IMTU, the Imperium<BR>
	governs "the space between the stars" and stays out of planetary<BR>
	stuff (mostly).  An imperium with more direct involvement with the<BR>
	citizens is possible, of course.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:25:32 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Trying to Catch Up...<BR>
<BR>
Okay, so I'm trying to catch up on the FFS3 threads.  Am I right that as<BR>
of now we are planning:<BR>
<BR>
1. To put in a modular system which will producer cheaper/less optimal<BR>
designs with less time by the designer.<BR>
<BR>
2. To put in an optional set of rules which will reduce the<BR>
acceleration/agility of big ships relative to small ones by appeal to<BR>
thruster-plate area limits and/or structural limits.<BR>
<BR>
3. To make big ships more expensive (i.e., a non-linear expense to size<BR>
function).<BR>
<BR>
If not, I think we should have all these things.  I like big monster ships<BR>
myself, but they should be ponderous and deadly, not swift and deadly. <BR>
Also, the added cost will keep the number of dreadnoughts down to<BR>
manageable levels.  I think the cost increases and acceleration decreases<BR>
are probably the best way to satisfy both the "small ships" and "big<BR>
ships"  camps.  Of course, it will satisfy neither completely, but that's<BR>
sorta the point :-). <BR>
<BR>
BTW, I understand that I've been appointed "Chief of Maintenance" or some<BR>
such title.  Good by me, but any serious participation will have to wait<BR>
until mid-september or so.  Big busy now.<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
P.S. I sense a bit of tension growing on some related threads.  Let's all<BR>
take a deep breath and realize that we're basically talking about our<BR>
little boy (and girl) fantasies of "kewl space ships" and "nifty blaster<BR>
rays" here, okay? <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:26:01 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
Steven Hudson writes:<BR>
>>than most current Terran states.  A quick check of an US State Department<BR>
>>web site suggests that countries on a balkanized world spend between 3% and<BR>
>>30% of their budgets on the military, with a median of about 8%.  Off the<BR>
>You might want to check that your getting % of budget rather than %<BR>
>of national income. IIRC, Striker calculates based on the latter.<BR>
<BR>
	I don't know anything about Striker, but the numbers I pulled off the<BR>
	web site are % of budget.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:25:30 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:19:44 +1200<BR>
>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
>Subject: Ship sizes<BR>
><BR>
>Taking reverse boyancy and <BR>
>other displacement into account, I think its safe to put the Jahre Viking in <BR>
>the 70,000 to 80,000 dTon range, maybe more. If we can build self <BR>
>supporting structures this big at TL8, I don't think 1,000,000 dTons at TL15 <BR>
>is unreasonable.<BR>
<BR>
The trouble, Andrew, is that surface ships are *not* self-supporting --<BR>
they *float*. They are supported by bouyancy over every square meter of<BR>
submerged hull area, from stem to stern. At best, they are designed to<BR>
resist a certain amount "hogging" and "sagging" (being supported only on<BR>
some portions of the hull), but the bigger the ship becomes, the less this<BR>
is a factor in her design (LOA >> expected range of wavelengths). Ships in<BR>
drydock have to be carefully supported all along their length (and beam,<BR>
for ships with a block coefficient near 1), because otherwise they will crack.<BR>
<BR>
Heavier-than-aircraft and spacecraft subject to acceleration do not have<BR>
this luxury. To put it bluntly, it is the difference between a prefab shed<BR>
resting on the ground and a cantilever bridge. <BR>
<BR>
Surface ships are also not designed to withstand more than fractional-g<BR>
accelerations. If you stood /Jahre Viking/ on her stern, how long would she<BR>
last before crumpling like cardboard? How much additional bracing and<BR>
framework would be required to make her capable of withstanding even 1g<BR>
along her axis? Imagine a steel frame building of the appropriate height,<BR>
multiply the internal structure to account for greater than 1g acceleration<BR>
if needed, and then increase every design margin to account for the<BR>
differences between a static structure and a vehicle.<BR>
<BR>
The largest mobile, self-supporting structure I know of was the Saturn V,<BR>
at 600 dtons.* At 3,250 stons, it had a density midway between the 10<BR>
ston/dton figure from FF&S, and the 3 ston/dton average I get for ships in<BR>
GT, so that's about right. Saturn V was streamlined, and designed to a<BR>
nominal 3.98g. Assuming that an increase X in tensile strength<BR>
("toughness") permits a corresponding increase in volume (and mass) of<BR>
X^3/2, the largest equivalent ship at TL15 should be (47.1/2.43)^3/2 * 600<BR>
= 51,200 dtons.<BR>
<BR>
In fact, here's a chart of max size vs. TL (still assuming 4g and<BR>
streamlined):<BR>
<BR>
TL	Size<BR>
6	600<BR>
7	2,000<BR>
8	4,000<BR>
10	6,000<BR>
12	14,000<BR>
14	40,000<BR>
15	50,000	<BR>
<BR>
[I'm still working on the relationship between acceleration and frame<BR>
structure; I'm not convinced it's linear in acceleration the way FF&S has it.]<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
*The crawler that transported it may be larger; certainly the combination<BR>
of crawler, launcher, and gantry was. But I don't think that example is as<BR>
relevent.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 09:35:28 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Starship density<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
> In mail you write:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Book 2 and HG, to the best of my knowledge, don't mention any particular <BR>
> > mass ratio like 10:1, and in fact, one or the other of them, I think HG, <BR>
> > says something to the effect of "since 20% to 50% of the ship will be fuel, <BR>
> > it's a reasonable approximation to equate one dton with one ton" -- which <BR>
> > you can argue with easily, but certainly doesn't suggest a 10:1 ratio.<BR>
> <BR>
> Well, the problem is that a cubic meter of water masses a ton. A cubic<BR>
> meter of steel or copper masses *8* tons. A cubic meter of LH2 masses<BR>
> 70.8 kg at -253 C (20 K). And air masses around 1 kg per cubic meter.<BR>
> <BR>
> So a ship, especially one with cargo, tends to weigh a heck of a lot<BR>
> more than an equal volume of LH2. Nearly as much as the same volume of<BR>
> water, if the illos of ships that have made water landings are to be<BR>
> believed. <BR>
<BR>
More importantly, the mass/volume ratio of ships is hugely variable from <BR>
type to type. Even among warships, an J-0, PP-20 SDB is far denser (20% LH2<BR>
by volume) than a typical Imperial fleet unit that's J-4, PP-10 (50% LH2 by <BR>
volume). Thus, under High Guard, maneuver drive as percentage of volume is <BR>
a joke.<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:44:04 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Tweeked LBB2 Starship Combat (long)<BR>
<BR>
Eris writes:<BR>
>Ian, I would really like to see your tweeked LBB2 rules. Could you post them?<BR>
<BR>
	Certainly, but they are a little long-winded and currently disorganized.<BR>
<BR>
Initiative: unless one side gains the initiative through specific tactics,<BR>
each side rolls 1D+Ship Tactics and the higher result becomes the "Intruder."<BR>
<BR>
I use the LBB2 scale and combat turn sequence except that "Laser Return<BR>
Fire" phases are exactly like "Laser Fire" phases [no special software is<BR>
required, any weapon (except sand/missiles) may be fired even if not fired<BR>
upon].  Missiles may be fired on at any range, but when targeted just<BR>
before impact they are considered to be at a range of 150 km.<BR>
<BR>
Attack<BR>
	Roll 8+ on 2D plus skill and software adjustments plus the following:<BR>
<BR>
	Range		Beam		Energy		Meson<BR>
	*0"		+2		+2		+2<BR>
	1-50"		+1		-0		+12<BR>
	51-100"	-0		-2		-0<BR>
	101-150"	-1		-4 ( dmg)	-2<BR>
	151-200"	-2		-6 ( dmg)	-3<BR>
	201-250"	-3		-8 ( dmg)	-4<BR>
	251-300"	-4		no		-6<BR>
	301-350"	-5		no		-7<BR>
	351-400"	-6		no		-8<BR>
	401-450"	-7 ( dmg)	no		no<BR>
	451-500"	-8 ( dmg)	no		no<BR>
<BR>
	* At range < 100 km, fire 1/minute<BR>
	* At range < 10 km, fire 1/6 seconds<BR>
	* At range < 1 km, roll to hit specific parts<BR>
<BR>
	Beam includes lasers and PA's<BR>
	Energy includes plasma and fusion guns<BR>
<BR>
	Sandcasters	Laser (only ship sand is launched towards)<BR>
	1		-1<BR>
	2		-2<BR>
	4		-3<BR>
	8		-4<BR>
	16		-5<BR>
	32		-6<BR>
<BR>
	Target<BR>
	Tonnage	Any			Configuration			Meson<BR>
	0.01+		-4			1: needle/wedge		-3<BR>
	0.1+		-3			2: cone			-2<BR>
	1+		-2			3: cylinder			-2<BR>
	10+		-1			4: close			-1<BR>
	100+		+0			5: sphere			-0<BR>
	1,000+		+1			6: flattened sphere		-1<BR>
	10,000+	+2			7: dispersed			-4<BR>
	100,000+	+3			8: planetoid			-0<BR>
	1,000,000+	+4			9: buffered planetoid	-3<BR>
<BR>
	beam laser: +1<BR>
	particle accelerator barbette: -1<BR>
	evading: -(Pilot/Ship's Boat skill) or -(Maneuver drive), whichever is lower<BR>
	meson screen: -(USP) for mesons only<BR>
	TL 13+: +1<BR>
<BR>
Damage<BR>
	Hits/ep		surface	interior	radiation<BR>
	Pulse Laser		1**<BR>
	Beam Laser		1<BR>
	Plasma Gun		1.5<BR>
	Fusion Gun		1.5<BR>
	Particle Accelerator	2				2<BR>
	Meson Gun				2***		2***<BR>
<BR>
	** -1 on armour roll (see below)<BR>
	*** Ignore armour<BR>
<BR>
	Note that I consider a HG2 "battery" of "30 lasers" to be one large turret.<BR>
<BR>
Missiles:<BR>
	Missiles mass 50-500 kg depending on the turret (battery) size, doing<BR>
	1D to 10D hits.  50-ton missile bays launch three 1,000 kg missiles which<BR>
	do 20D (2Dx10) hits, 100-ton bays launch three 2,000-ton missiles which<BR>
	do 40D (4Dx10) hits (bays hold 24 missiles).  These are standard homing<BR>
	missiles which accelerate at 12G for 8 turns.  Naturally, there are variants<BR>
	(e.g. 50 kg Sprint: 18G for 3 turns causing 1 hit, Smart: 12G for 4 turns<BR>
	causing 1 hit but ignoring ECM, Long Range: 6G for 32 turns causing 1<BR>
	hit, Heavy: 6G for 8 turns causing 2D hits, Nuclear: 12G for 8 turns	<BR>
	causing 2Dx100 hits).<BR>
<BR>
Surface Damage<BR>
	2D	Location		Hull		Hold			1D	Computer<BR>
	2	power plant		air lock	100%			1	computer<BR>
	3	maneuver drive	locker		96%			2	sensors<BR>
	4	jump drive		frame		88%			3	sensors<BR>
	5	computer		bridge		76%			4	radio<BR>
	6	hull			lounge		61%			5	batteries<BR>
	7	hull			stateroom	45%			6	controls<BR>
	8	hold/vehicle		engineering	27%<BR>
	9	fuel			hall		15%<BR>
	10	turret/spinal weapon	fresher	7%<BR>
	11	turret/bay weapon	fire control	2%<BR>
	12	turret/screen		life support	0%<BR>
<BR>
	 Missiles get -4<BR>
	Roll for location, then roll again for Hull, Hold, or Computer<BR>
	If the Hold is hit and it is 88% full, roll 4+ to damage the cargo.<BR>
<BR>
Armour	2D:<BR>
	USP	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12<BR>
	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	2	5<BR>
	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	2	5	10<BR>
	3	0	0	0	0	0	0	1	2	5	10	20<BR>
	4	0	0	0	0	0	1	2	5	10	20	50<BR>
	5	0	0	0	0	1	2	5	10	20	50	100<BR>
	6	0	0	0	1	2	5	10	20	50	100	200<BR>
	7	0	0	1	2	5	10	20	50	100	200	500<BR>
	8	0	1	2	5	10	20	50	100	200	500	1000<BR>
	9	1	2	5	10	20	50	100	200	500	1000	1500<BR>
	10	2	5	10	20	50	100	200	500	1000	1500	2000<BR>
	11	5	10	20	50	100	200	500	1000	1500	2000	2500<BR>
	12	10	20	50	100	200	500	1000	1500	2000	2500	3000<BR>
	13	20	50	100	200	500	1000	1500	2000	2500	3000	3500<BR>
	14	50	100	200	500	1000	1500	2000	2500	3000	3500	4000<BR>
	15	100	200	500	1000	1500	2000	2500	3000	3500	4000	4500<BR>
<BR>
	Result is amount damage is reduced (e.g. USP 7 armour with a roll of 10<BR>
reduces<BR>
	damage by 100 hits).<BR>
<BR>
Internal Damage<BR>
	2D	Location		Hull		Hold		1D	Computer<BR>
	2	maneuver drive	air lock	100%		1	computer<BR>
	3	power plant		locker		96%		2	sensors<BR>
	4	jump drive		frame		88%		3	sensors<BR>
	5	computer		bridge		76%		4	radio<BR>
	6	hull			lounge		61%		5	batteries<BR>
	7	hold/vehicle		stateroom	45%		6	controls<BR>
	8	hold/vehicle		engineering	27%<BR>
	9	fuel			hall		15%<BR>
	10	fuel			fresher	7%<BR>
	11	weapon			fire control	2%<BR>
	12	weapon/screen		life support	0%<BR>
<BR>
Radiation Damage<BR>
	2D	Location		Hull		Hold		1D	Computer<BR>
	2	maneuver/jump drive	air lock	100%		1	computer<BR>
	3	power plant		locker		96%		2	sensors<BR>
	4	computer		frame		88%		3	sensors<BR>
	5	computer		bridge		76%		4	radio<BR>
	6	computer		lounge		61%		5	batteries<BR>
	7	computer		stateroom	45%		6	controls<BR>
	8	crew			engineering	27%<BR>
	9	crew			hall		15%<BR>
	10	hull			fresher		7%<BR>
	11	weapon/screen	fire control	2%<BR>
	12	hold/vehicle		life support	0%<BR>
<BR>
	 (hits/10) crew take (hits/10)D damage<BR>
		crew wearing a vacc suit or protective suit take half damage<BR>
		crew wearing combat armour or battle dress take quarter damage<BR>
<BR>
Whenever a hull hit affects a compartment with a character in it, roll to<BR>
hit the character:<BR>
	Weapon		to hit	armour DM for			damage<BR>
	laser		7+	PGMP-12			8D<BR>
	missile	7+	RAM HE				6D<BR>
	energy		8+	FGMP-15			10D<BR>
	PA		7+	Fusion Support Weapon	12D<BR>
	meson		6+	Fusion Support Weapon	14D<BR>
<BR>
Software<BR>
	program	space	effect<BR>
	Target		1	tracks one target for offensive weapons<BR>
	Multitarget	1	when combined with Target, tracks additional target (stackable)<BR>
	Launch		1	required for missile launchers and sandcasters<BR>
	Predict 1	1	+1 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Predict 2	2	+2 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Predict 3	4	+3 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Predict 4	8	+4 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Predict 5	16	+5 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Predict 6	32	+6 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Scramble 1	2	-1 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Scramble 2	4	-2 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Scramble 3	8	-3 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Scramble 4	16	-4 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
	Scramble 5	32	-5 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
	ECM 1		1	detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 12 on 2D<BR>
	ECM 2		2	detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 10+ on 2D<BR>
	ECM 3		3	detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 7+ on 2D<BR>
	ECM 4		9	detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 6+ on 2D<BR>
	ECM 5		27	detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 5+ on 2D<BR>
<BR>
A salvo of missiles fired at the same time from one ship may be considered<BR>
"one target" for the purposes of software targeting programs.  A single<BR>
turret may only engage one target at a time.<BR>
<BR>
One "hit" of damage is sufficient to drop a LBB2 drive one letter, or<BR>
effectively reduce the tonnage of a HG2 drive by:<BR>
	TL			7-8	9-12	13-14	15<BR>
	Power Plant:		8 tons	6 tons	4 tons	2 tons<BR>
	Maneuver:	6 tons<BR>
	Jump:		2 tons<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
	Constructive comments are welcome.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 09:51:45 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Starship density<BR>
<BR>
Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
<BR>
> More importantly, the mass/volume ratio of ships is hugely variable from <BR>
> type to type. Even among warships, an J-0, PP-20 SDB is far denser (20% LH2<BR>
> by volume) than a typical Imperial fleet unit that's J-4, PP-10 (50% LH2 by<BR>
>  volume). Thus, under High Guard, maneuver drive as percentage of volume<BR>
> is  a joke.<BR>
<BR>
Unless one assumes that all the later design systems are confused, and that manuever drives, like jump drives, are in fact a volume-based phenomenon rather than a mass-based phenomenon ;)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:55:58 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
<<snip>><BR>
> <BR>
> We have agreed at least that ships of ~5,000 dtons and less are "PC-scale",<BR>
> whether there are larger ships or not (if there is a dissenting voice,<BR>
> please speak up).<BR>
<BR>
I agree that ships of this size are the largest that a PC group will<BR>
likely own.  However, I would point out that command of larger ships (or<BR>
even fleets of such ships) in the service of subsector or Imperial naval<BR>
forces can also be a rewarding roleplaying experience.<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2876<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (rly-zc01.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.1]) by air-zc04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:55:56 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zc01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 12:55:18 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id MAA21311;<BR>
	Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:55:10 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:54:59 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id MAA21263<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:54:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:54:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008031654.MAA21263@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2876<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2877</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/3/00 1:45:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, August 3 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2877<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Ship sizes<BR>
Traveller Font Resource<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2876<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2876<BR>
Re: Ship sizes<BR>
Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
RE: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
RE: Native Morans<BR>
Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
RE: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
My Thoughts on FFS3<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:11:09 -0400<BR>
From: Kurt Feltenberger <kurt@blazenet.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
At 07:57 AM 08/03/2000 -0800, you wrote:<BR>
>Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> wrote<BR>
><BR>
> > There has been a lot of discussion as to how big modern ships are in<BR>
> > Traveller terms.  The largest ship is<BR>
> > the supertanker Jahre Viking (ex Happy Giant, ex Seawise Giant). She has<BR>
> > a deadweight tonnage of 564,763 (which I believe means she can carry that<BR>
> > much cargo). This means that the Jahre Viking has at least 564,763 cu m<BR>
> > below the waterline. That about 40,000 dTons. Taking reverse boyancy and<BR>
> > other displacement into account, I think its safe to put the Jahre <BR>
> Viking in<BR>
> > the 70,000 to 80,000 dTon range, maybe more. If we can build self<BR>
> > supporting structures this big at TL8, I don't think 1,000,000 dTons at <BR>
> TL15<BR>
> > is unreasonable.<BR>
><BR>
>Supertankers are _not_ self supporting they are partially<BR>
>supported by the water. If you were to pick up a supertanker<BR>
>and place it on dry land it would have structural problems. [1]<BR>
<BR>
If they are not self supporting, then how were they built and how do you <BR>
drydock one for repairs?<BR>
<BR>
Just curious...<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger<BR>
<BR>
"To our Country! In her intercourse with foreign nations,<BR>
    may she always be in the right, but our country, right or wrong!"<BR>
      ~Stephen Decatur<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
mailto:kurt@blazenet.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:23:12 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Merc <merc@qvlinc.com><BR>
Subject: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
<BR>
Just in case there are still others looking for this font for their own<BR>
projects, Jesse DeGraff already has it available at the following web<BR>
address. I've now looked at 4 different sets of fonts claiming to be<BR>
Optima and this is the best and most complete (i.e. it has Normal, Bold,<BR>
Italic, and Bold Italic versions).  He also has the Vilani font available.<BR>
<BR>
The quick route is this URL<BR>
<BR>
http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/resources/index.htm<BR>
<BR>
Thanks Jesse, finding these made my day!<BR>
<BR>
Coy Krill<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 10:15:02 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
> I suggest that, before going overboard in defense of large ships, you<BR>
> determine whether they are even practical given the progress of material<BR>
> technologies in Traveller. I repeat: a 5,000-dton ship is large even for a<BR>
> surface ship by current standards, and surface ships are poor analogies for<BR>
> spacecraft architecture. <BR>
> <BR>
> Remember the Saturn V? 600 dtons -- that's all. If that was the practical<BR>
> engineering limit at TL6, the best ships at TL15* would be ~50,000 dtons<BR>
> (at 4g). I can live with that if I have to, and play at a lower TL.<BR>
<BR>
Saturn V had to be built on the ground; I think you can contemplate much <BR>
larger structures if they're built in free-fall.[1] <BR>
<BR>
> Kiss<BR>
> /Tigress/ goodbye, however.<BR>
<BR>
I'd settle for making Tigress and other big ships _expensive out of <BR>
proportion to their size_, rather than simply impossible to build.<BR>
<BR>
High Guard makes ship cost and capability nearly linear with ship <BR>
displacement. If we can make cost increase faster, and capability increase<BR>
slower, then by adjusting the economic assumptions in YTU, you can make<BR>
a firm (but not rigid, absolute, table-driven, or arbitrary) upper limit <BR>
on practical ship size -- without giving up the space-opera aspect of <BR>
being able to build a mile-long battleship or a "that's no moon" space <BR>
station for dramatic effect.[2]<BR>
<BR>
There's a lot of precedent for governments building impractically- or <BR>
inefficiently-large constructs just for the bragging rights. <BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
[1] I'm not neglecting the fact that the ship has to be able to withstand<BR>
G-stresses when it's *done*; I'm simply pointing out that fact that at any <BR>
given point in construction, it need not be particularly sturdy.<BR>
<BR>
[2] In fact, such dramatic effect may be heightened. A single 500Kdton ship<BR>
should mean a lot more to players if it's the only one in the sector, rather <BR>
than one of a BatRon.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 10:19:18 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2876<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
>  Thus, under High Guard, maneuver drive as percentage of volume<BR>
> > is  a joke.<BR>
> <BR>
> Unless one assumes that all the later design systems are confused, and <BR>
> that manuever drives, like jump drives, are in fact a volume-based <BR>
> phenomenon rather than a mass-based phenomenon ;)<BR>
<BR>
Never mind the design system; that would imply that _physicists_ are confused.<BR>
*grin*<BR>
<BR>
- -RB<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:20:35 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
At 10:56 -0400 3/8/00, pengebos@nmsu.edu wrote:<BR>
>I hated the rebellion.  If you didn't have a big big big ship you couldn't<BR>
>do anything but stay far away.<BR>
<BR>
You certainly didn't want to get near fighting...<BR>
<BR>
>Now Hard Times made for interesting role-playing.<BR>
<BR>
Probably the best Traveller Supplement, ever.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:19:22 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 10:56 -0400 3/8/00, "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <BR>
<a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> wrote:<BR>
> Sure limit the QSDS to 5,000 ton, not a<BR>
>problem, actually a darn good idea; keep the megamonsters out of the<BR>
>roleplaying game (an even better idea); keep the fighters (plenty of<BR>
>specialised niches for them). But don't prohibit the existence of those<BR>
>megamonsters and don't give me all powerful starfighters al la Starwars or<BR>
>Battlestar Galatica. That's not the Traveller I know and love.<BR>
<BR>
'Hear! Hear!'<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:08:47 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
At 21:50 -0400 2/8/00, Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com> wrote:<BR>
>Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
>nomenclature came from.<BR>
<BR>
HG2 says 'hulls are identified by their mass *displacement* <BR>
(expressed as *tons*; one ton equals 14m3)...'<BR>
<BR>
I'm not sure whether displacement tons are explicitly referred to <BR>
anywhere as 'displacement tons'. However, I've always used that <BR>
phrase when talking about it to avoid confusion with mass tons/tonnes.<BR>
<BR>
It really becomes an issue with MT onwards where mass was distinct <BR>
from volume (dTs).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Checking MT's Ref's Manual p62.<BR>
<BR>
The Hull Size has a UCP figure.<BR>
<BR>
"UCP is 'Universal Craft Profile' displacement tonnage."<BR>
<BR>
Hence Displacement Tons as this figure is the same as CT's tons.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:00:22 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
At 21:50 -0400 2/8/00, "Michael.Scanlon" <BR>
<Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net> wrote:<BR>
>Does the same entry appear in the reprints?<BR>
> > > CT Book 2 Starships p13, line 6 (printing 1981 from BFB compilation)<BR>
<BR>
BFB = Big Floppy Book = CT reprints<BR>
LBB = Little Black Books (CT)<BR>
LWB = Little White Books (BITS)<BR>
<BR>
That was the Reprints I was refering to.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 12:29:34 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:55:58 -0500<BR>
> From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
> <BR>
> > We have agreed at least that ships of ~5,000 dtons and less are "PC-scale",<BR>
> > whether there are larger ships or not (if there is a dissenting voice,<BR>
> > please speak up).<BR>
> <BR>
> I agree that ships of this size are the largest that a PC group will<BR>
> likely own.  However, I would point out that command of larger ships (or<BR>
> even fleets of such ships) in the service of subsector or Imperial naval<BR>
> forces can also be a rewarding roleplaying experience.<BR>
<BR>
Without any disrespect at all, I forget that some people really see this<BR>
as enjoyable. It's very close to what I do for a living, though, and I<BR>
can't imagine it being very much fun to roleplay. Unless you are the<BR>
Officer in Tactical Command (the senior officer eligible for command "at<BR>
sea" present within communications range), you have very little autonomy<BR>
to make decisions or take action. The Navy is (at least on paper) better<BR>
about this than the Army, so perhaps it is different there. <BR>
<BR>
Don't let me spoil your fun, but remember: nobody writes adventure stories<BR>
about the guy that defied orders and turned out to be *wrong*.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:35:41 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
<BR>
Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
> Saturn V had to be built on the ground; I think you can contemplate much <BR>
> larger structures if they're built in free-fall.[1] <BR>
<BR>
Not if they're also going to actually move under acceleration.  However, I<BR>
doubt that a saturn V is really the biggest vehicle you can build at TL 7<BR>
anyway, the problem is that it also needed to include a very low fraction of<BR>
its total mass as frame.  Traveller ships being massively overpowered, this<BR>
is less of a factor for them.  A more realistic upper limit is probably a<BR>
skyscraper, which suggests that the maximum viable length is around 400/Gs meters with structural steel; I'd probably halve this for any vehicle which wants to actually manuever without breaking in half.  At TL 15, the maximum<BR>
length for a combat vehicle is thus probably around 1000/Gs, allowing a Tigress as long as it doesn't move faster than around 3 Gs.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:37:14 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2876<BR>
<BR>
Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
<BR>
> > Unless one assumes that all the later design systems are confused, and <BR>
> > that manuever drives, like jump drives, are in fact a volume-based <BR>
> > phenomenon rather than a mass-based phenomenon ;)<BR>
> <BR>
> Never mind the design system; that would imply that _physicists_ are<BR>
> confused. *grin*<BR>
<BR>
Not at all.  It merely implies that manuever drives aren't reaction drives, which we already knew.  Perhaps they create an artificial gravity well surrounding the ship, and the ship just 'falls' in whatever direction its<BR>
supposed to accelerate in.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 10:38:56 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
Kurt Feltenberger writes:<BR>
<BR>
> >Supertankers are _not_ self supporting they are partially<BR>
> >supported by the water. If you were to pick up a supertanker<BR>
> >and place it on dry land it would have structural problems. [1]<BR>
> <BR>
> If they are not self supporting, then how were they built and how do you <BR>
> drydock one for repairs?<BR>
 <BR>
You surround them with a scaffolding which supports their weight.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 11:10:54 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
<BR>
Well I've obtained Adobe's Optima. I'll have to compare the two.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Merc" <merc@qvlinc.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 10:23 AM<BR>
Subject: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Just in case there are still others looking for this font for their own<BR>
> projects, Jesse DeGraff already has it available at the following web<BR>
> address. I've now looked at 4 different sets of fonts claiming to be<BR>
> Optima and this is the best and most complete (i.e. it has Normal, Bold,<BR>
> Italic, and Bold Italic versions).  He also has the Vilani font available.<BR>
><BR>
> The quick route is this URL<BR>
><BR>
> http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/resources/index.htm<BR>
><BR>
> Thanks Jesse, finding these made my day!<BR>
><BR>
> Coy Krill<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:07:10 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
> > Saturn V had to be built on the ground; I think you can contemplate much<BR>
> > larger structures if they're built in free-fall.[1]<BR>
> <BR>
> Not if they're also going to actually move under acceleration.  However, I<BR>
> doubt that a saturn V is really the biggest vehicle you can build at TL 7<BR>
> anyway, the problem is that it also needed to include a very low fraction of<BR>
> its total mass as frame.  Traveller ships being massively overpowered, this<BR>
> is less of a factor for them.  A more realistic upper limit is probably a<BR>
> skyscraper, which suggests that the maximum viable length is around 400/Gs meters with structural steel; I'd probably halve this for any vehicle which wants to actually manuever without breaking in half.  At TL 15, the maximum<BR>
> length for a combat vehicle is thus probably around 1000/Gs, allowing a Tigress as long as it doesn't move faster than around 3 Gs.<BR>
<BR>
OTOH, I would expect that at least part of the power requirements for<BR>
G-comp goes to helping the hull maintain structural integrity under<BR>
acceleration.  This would mean that your rule-of thumb formula becomes:<BR>
1000 / (Gs - G-comp).  Where (Gs - G-comp) < 0.57, the divisor would be<BR>
0.57 instead.  Note that a 1,000,000 dton ship with a Needle hullform<BR>
has an overall length of 1749.3 meters, which closely approximates<BR>
1000/0.57 = 1754.4.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 14:58:47 +0100<BR>
From: "Mark Preston" <mark@mpreston.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
Well, despite not actually working in the field, I did train as one of<BR>
those geneticist things (for my sins) and so I suppose that I am<BR>
actually qualified to give you my interpretation - for what it's<BR>
worth. So here we go then.<BR>
<BR>
There is a vast amount of the 'junk' DNA that the story is based on in<BR>
our genome - about 40 to 60% according to recent papers. Of what's<BR>
left, we understand what around 10% of it does (thats around 5% of the<BR>
total DNA that we have mapped to date). Of that 5% we understand, only<BR>
4% of it is different from equivalent chimp DNA and probably accounts<BR>
for why we are what we are (instead of chimps). A quick bit of maths<BR>
and you can see that our entire 'human' evolution - as far as we<BR>
understand it so far - depends on a massive 0.2% of our genome. At<BR>
least 200 times more of it is what the story is all about. That gives<BR>
you an idea of the scale of the plot - it is easily feasible in that<BR>
respect.<BR>
<BR>
Retroviruses most definately do fiddle around with the genome, but<BR>
generally operate on a tiny scale, even compared to the scales we are<BR>
looking at. However, there _is_ some suggestion that they may really<BR>
be involved in evolutionary stages in punctuated equilibrium of<BR>
species. So much so, in fact, that there is even a strong suggestion<BR>
that our view of species as such may be wrong and there may be no<BR>
'true' species in the objective sense. In other words, that too is<BR>
feasible.<BR>
<BR>
Genome and virus responses to ecological stress are well documented -<BR>
the Peppered Moth is a superb example (as well as a traditional<BR>
teaching reference, so you should find it easily). All of which adds<BR>
up to the story being quite reasonable.<BR>
<BR>
Unfortunately, where it breaks down is his understanding of human<BR>
evolution. We did _not_ evolve from Homo Neanderthalis at all - far<BR>
from it, we even co-existed and almost certainly interbred for several<BR>
thousand years. It seems that human evolution has actually only had a<BR>
small number of 'steps' and that each step was followed by a long<BR>
period of interbreeding, competition and development. What that means<BR>
in practice is that the story, though feasible, _should_ have involved<BR>
the development of _several_ new 'human species' at the same time.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Mark A. Preston, The Magpie's Nest, Lancashire, UK<BR>
Email     : mark@mpreston.demon.co.uk<BR>
Website : www.mpreston.demon.co.uk<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of<BR>
> Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
> Sent: 02 August 2000 20:39<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> I suppose that of the active listmembers, this is most<BR>
> directed to Robert<BR>
> O'Connor, but anyone who's read it and feels they're<BR>
> qualified to comment<BR>
> should by all means feel free...<BR>
><BR>
> In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus<BR>
> that activates<BR>
> some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes<BR>
> apparently trigger<BR>
> the 'next step' in evolution.  Part of the story involves a<BR>
> suggestion that<BR>
> this was also the cause of the progression from H. Sap.<BR>
> Neanderthalensis to<BR>
> H. Sap. Sapiens.  Is this plausible?  (And can anyone think<BR>
> of a way to<BR>
> turn it into a good Traveller adventure [which would be<BR>
> guaranteed a home<BR>
> at Freelance Traveller]?)<BR>
> --<BR>
> Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
> jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 13:19:33 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
At 2:39 AM -0800 8/3/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  > No.  I'm saying the same photons at the same energy.  At this<BR>
>  > point I just want to get past the idea that it has to be<BR>
>  > a fin radiating by black body radiation....<BR>
><BR>
>I give up. You aren't listening.<BR>
><BR>
>I'll just note as my *final* commebt that it *can't* be the same energy<BR>
>photons, because if it was then it *would* be black body radiation.<BR>
><BR>
>  >>THEY AREN'T EMITTING THE SAME PHOTONS!!!!!!<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > They are, that is what I'm saying.  You are trying to address<BR>
>  > issues you think I'm working on rather than the ones I am<BR>
>  > working on.  I'm trying to get someone on this while avoiding<BR>
>  > everyone jumping to what they think the final answer is.<BR>
><BR>
>No, I'm trying to point out that you are ignoring entropy.<BR>
><BR>
>But since you won't accept that, there's no point in your replying to<BR>
>this message.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'm sorry, but it is frustrating to try and explain a point<BR>
to someone who mostly just asserts an answer and when I try<BR>
and work up from first principals to test what he says, keeps<BR>
asserting what he sees as the final answer.  I most certainly<BR>
don't ignore entropy (entropy is not the only fact and you<BR>
can have processes where you use heat to drive reaction, otherwise<BR>
assembly of molecules such as DNA would be impossible), I<BR>
set up a situation to test if you are right<BR>
(and to address such issues like whether radiation can't be<BR>
focused and requires large radiator).  The response I get<BR>
when set up a postulated situation is simply to assert that<BR>
the postulated situation isn't what I said it is (which, by<BR>
definition, it is).  Then I'm accused of "not listening"<BR>
ever after I have gone over a post and pointed out where it<BR>
wasn't addressing what I was saying....<BR>
<BR>
Now you have no obligation to explain your position, but at<BR>
this point I must say that I (as someone who has a decent<BR>
background in chemical thermodynamics at least) see the<BR>
position as merely one that has been asserted.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 13:27:46 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Native Morans<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
<BR>
>Thought: If a native of Mora is a Moran, what is a native of Moran <BR>
>(Mora2924) called? :)<BR>
<BR>
Those are the Moranians.  They're very touchy about it.  So are the<BR>
Morans, actually.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:44:38 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:08:55 -0400 (EDT), trentfs@ix.netcom.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Eris wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>>"Scanners Live in Vain" wasn't by Cordwainder Smith?  Wasn't *all*<BR>
>>of the Instrumentality of Man stuff by Cordwainder Smith...I'm<BR>
>>either seriously misremembering, or there's a pseudonym in there<BR>
>>somewhere.   But, no I haven't considered using his stuff in<BR>
>>Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
>You've failed your "Fan: SF" test.  Dr. Paul Linebarger is Cordwainer<BR>
>Smith's real name.  However, don't feel bad; by referring to him in this<BR>
>way, Jeff Zeitlen has placed himself in same the ostentatious company as my<BR>
>old lit-professors who insisted on referring to Mark Twain as Samuel<BR>
>Clemens, mauch to everyone's annoyance. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, I do it not to be ostentatious (although I think you may actually<BR>
be looking for a phrase involving the term "erudite" or "erudition"), but<BR>
because too often, I've said "Cordwainer Smith" and people have immediately<BR>
insisted on retching, and not addressing the question at hand.  He has a<BR>
very difficult style, but once you get past it, his work often addresses<BR>
some potentially controversial and always thought-provoking issues.  He's<BR>
also the only one I know that could really write human aliens.  By using<BR>
his real name rather than the better-known pseudonym, I had hoped to focus<BR>
more on the content of his writing rather than provoking knee-jerk<BR>
reactions to the style associated with the name.  Doesn't seem to have<BR>
completely worked, does it? :)<BR>
<BR>
Incidentally, it's "Zeitlin" - but don't feel bad; most people aren't even<BR>
that close when writing it from memory.<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:44:41 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 19:04:56 -0400 (EDT), "Tod Glenn"<BR>
<webmaster@travellercentral.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> You've failed your "Fan: SF" test.  Dr. Paul Linebarger is Cordwainer<BR>
>>Smith's real name.  However, don't feel bad; by referring to him in this<BR>
>>way, Jeff Zeitlen has placed himself in same the ostentatious company as my<BR>
>>old lit-professors who insisted on referring to Mark Twain as Samuel<BR>
>>Clemens, mauch to everyone's annoyance.<BR>
<BR>
>Charles Dodgson for Lewis Carroll?<BR>
<BR>
This one I knew.<BR>
<BR>
>Aurore Dudevant for George Sand?<BR>
<BR>
This one I didn't.<BR>
<BR>
>etc, etc, etc. Come one now, some of our favorite SF writers have lot's of<BR>
>pen names.  Going to the trouble to seek out an author's real name<BR>
>(especially if he decides to try to keep it private) smacks of obsession.<BR>
>Oh well.  Fan--from Fanatic.  Just remember that.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, Dr. Linebarger never really tried to keep it private; if asked,<BR>
he never denied that he was Cordwainer Smith.  He just never said "Lookie<BR>
here, I'm writing under a pseudo!".  An intro to a couple of posthumous<BR>
printings of some of his work specifically called out his real name (which<BR>
is where I learned it).<BR>
<BR>
But see my reply to Trent, this packet, for why I avoided the pseudo.<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:44:33 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000 18:08:55 -0400 (EDT), eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>"Scanners Live in Vain" wasn't by Cordwainder Smith?  Wasn't *all*<BR>
>of the Instrumentality of Man stuff by Cordwainder Smith...I'm<BR>
>either seriously misremembering, or there's a pseudonym in there<BR>
>somewhere.  <g> But, no I haven't considered using his stuff in<BR>
>Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, "Cordwainer Smith" _was_ the pseudonym of Dr. Paul Linebarger.<BR>
It seems that most of the administration at the school that Dr. Linebarger<BR>
worked at during his writing years did not have a very good opinion of SF<BR>
(this is not a surprise), so he and his editor (Campbell?) cooked up this<BR>
pseudo.<BR>
<BR>
Just for the record, I do not refer to the author of the "Lucky Starr"<BR>
series as "Paul French", either.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:44:53 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 06:04:38 -0400 (EDT), "Frank G. Pitt"<BR>
<frankie@mundens.gen.nz> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>I think the Instrumentality would be another possible take on SolSec.<BR>
>After all, they did uplift dolphins and chimps.<BR>
<BR>
>I happen to really like "C'mell" and "The Crime & Glory of Commander<BR>
>Suzdal", but the tech involved is a bit high in the bio sciences to fit into<BR>
>the classic Traveller milieu.<BR>
<BR>
Is it really?  Or is my perception biased due to reality outstripping<BR>
fiction?  Currently, we are experimenting - with a pretty good rate of<BR>
success - with transgenic technology: splicing genes into plants from<BR>
species that normally would have no chance of getting into the genes<BR>
(excuse me; the pun is irresistible) of the plants in question.  A first<BR>
cut at TBoLC, TC&GoCS, ARB, and other stories where the undermen/beastmen<BR>
appear would seem to suggest that their creation is merely an extension of<BR>
that technology.  On the Imperial side, it's also possible that a couple of<BR>
early decisions indicated that while technology may have been up to<BR>
creating beastmen as they appear in the Instrumentality stories, it could<BR>
not have been economical to do so; the beastmen during much of the<BR>
Instrumentality's existence were slaves, and the Imperium, by forbidding<BR>
slavery, basically has told the companies that might otherwise have<BR>
invested in them, "You can create them, but you can't really control them."<BR>
That's not entirely correct; there are other arrangements that are nearly<BR>
as binding as chattel slavery without meeting the Imperial definition<BR>
thereof.<BR>
<BR>
I can see it as more likely to occur in the Solomani Confederation; but<BR>
even there, I wonder just how likely it is - remember, for the first<BR>
700-odd years of Imperial history, there was no separate Solomani polity;<BR>
instead, the Solomani were the dominant arm of the Imperial nobility -<BR>
which strongly suggests that the anti-slavery attitude was fairly strong<BR>
among Solomani, regardless of how the Vilani or other species felt about<BR>
it.<BR>
<BR>
As to the Instrumentality as a polity, this is definitely something that<BR>
would be more likely in the Confederation than in the Imperium - and a<BR>
world or polity that had this government structure would likely be in the<BR>
orthodox wing of the Party, maybe to the point that they supply the Party<BR>
with some of its highest and most doctrinaire officials.  Change wouldn't<BR>
be impossible, any more than it was in the Instrumentality (remember, in<BR>
the late stories, the beastmen were being granted rights in some ways<BR>
similar to those of True Men), but, as in the Instrumentality, it would be<BR>
slow in coming.<BR>
<BR>
What about Scanners and Habermen?  Is the medical technology needed for<BR>
them higher or lower than that needed for the beastmen?  My gut reaction is<BR>
to say 'lower', but that would seemingly place me in disagreement with<BR>
Smith/Linebarger; in 'Scanners Live In Vain', we have no mention (that I<BR>
can recall) of any sort of beastmen, but the Vomacts are prominent (a<BR>
Vomact is the chief Scanner in SLIV), suggesting that it takes place after<BR>
'Mark Elf' and 'Queen of the Afternoon' (which the published timelines<BR>
confirm) and the beastmen are definitely well established at that earlier<BR>
point in time - but True Men are living either in the ruins of the<BR>
Instrumentality of the Jwindz, or under the IotJ itself, and perhaps do not<BR>
use technology that they may have.<BR>
<BR>
In any case, presuming that the technology exists, would there be a reason<BR>
for the existence of Scanners and Habermen in a Traveller milieu?  And who<BR>
would be most likely to use such methods and technology?<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:44:58 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: My Thoughts on FFS3<BR>
<BR>
While I'm not formally part of the FFS3 project, I'd like to throw my two<BR>
cents in on what I think the final product should be.<BR>
<BR>
The short form is that it should be all things to all people.  Granted,<BR>
that's a little unrealistic, but a little more detail should give a better<BR>
idea...<BR>
<BR>
(1) I'm not a gearhead.  If FFS3 were a computer reference, I'd want to be<BR>
able to punch in some mission parameters, and have it spit back a list of<BR>
components, adjusted for tech level, that would end up giving me a small<BR>
number of possible solutions for the mission: "I want a vehicle that can<BR>
transport four people and 20 cubic feet of cargo" should give me components<BR>
for a "typical" horse-and-carriage for preindustrial technology, for a<BR>
"typical" Toyota Corolla for industrial technology, and for a "typical"<BR>
air-raft for TL9+.  Plus maybe a couple of variations on each.  "I want a<BR>
weapon that can kill an unarmored human at a range of thus-and-so-many<BR>
yards, man-portable" should give me bow-and-arrow and/or sling and/or<BR>
slingshot and/or crossbow at pre-metallurgy, black-powder through modern<BR>
cartridge handguns and rifles at metallurgy, and appropriate laser, gauss,<BR>
and/or plasma weapons at appropriate energy tech.  And so on.  This may be<BR>
more a Central Supply Catalog than a Fire, Fusion, and Steel, but perhaps<BR>
with an odd arrangement.<BR>
<BR>
(2) I'm a mild gearhead.  I want to be able to fine-tune designs, but still<BR>
have most of the work done 'automatically'.  I want to be able to get a<BR>
list of standard components and instructions on how to modify their<BR>
operational parameters based on available materials technology for a TL,<BR>
and how to make them work with other components that they might not<BR>
normally work with.  At this level, I should be able to get (for example) a<BR>
crossbow that fires explosive bolts, a 'duo' (non-grav road + air vehicle),<BR>
and so on.<BR>
<BR>
(3) I am a Gearhead, with a capital G. I'm not interested in standard<BR>
components; I want to engineer things from the ground up.  At most, I'll<BR>
need a list of what subsystems I'll have to design.  Give me the rules to<BR>
design those subsystems, and put them together, then get out of my way.<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2877<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (rly-yh05.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.37]) by air-yh01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:45:45 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yh05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:44:53 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA30530;<BR>
	Thu, 3 Aug 2000 16:44:45 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 3 Aug 2000 16:43:38 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA30469<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 16:43:37 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 16:43:37 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008032043.QAA30469@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2877<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2878</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/3/00 4:23:03 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, August 3 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2878<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: Spinal mount trivia and Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Spinal mount trivia and Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Native Morans<BR>
Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:47:07 +0100 <BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Spinal mount trivia and Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Russell B wrote:<BR>
> Peter Trevor wrote:<BR>
> > IIRC (its been a long time since I last read HG)  for  every  USP<BR>
> > factor over 9 of a spinal mount meson gun you  get  an  automatic<BR>
> > critical if you hit.  That ment that for a factor L meson gun  (I<BR>
> > think) you had a statistically probable mission  kill  with  each<BR>
> > shot that hit regardless of the size of  the  target.<BR>
><BR>
> IIRC, it's one critical per factor that the spinal gun exceeds the <BR>
> ship size USP of the target, which means that truly huge ships are<BR>
> less vulnerable to spinal criticals; if you can guarantee that<BR>
> your battleship's size USP is no less than the USP of the biggest <BR>
> spinal mount your opponent can field, you are immune to auto crits.<BR>
<BR>
Okay, I went back and looked  it  up.  I  was  getting  a  little<BR>
muddled: its not the Critical  Hits  rule  that  is  ...  er  ...<BR>
critical, its the Spinal Mounts rule (immediately above it on p41<BR>
of HG).<BR>
<BR>
    "All spinal mpunt weapons which hit and penetrate inflict<BR>
    one extra damage roll (on  each  appropriate  table)  for<BR>
    each letter by which their size exceeds 9."<BR>
<BR>
This rule is  *not*  affected  by  the  target's  size  like  the<BR>
Critical Hits rule!<BR>
<BR>
Now meson gun spinal mounts get to roll an unmodified 2D  on  the<BR>
Radiation Damage table, and an  unmodified  2D  on  the  Interior<BR>
Explosion table.  A factor J meson gun would get 10 rolls on each<BR>
... which makes it a statistical probability of  getting  one  of<BR>
the 'kill' results (this  assumes  that  "Fuel  Tanks  Shattered"<BR>
counts as a 'kill' result).  Since the basic unit of naval  fleet<BR>
strength is  the  squadron  (built  for  TCr1)  the  most  combat<BR>
effective squadron is the one with the most J+  meson  guns.  And<BR>
to achieve this you want your ships as cheap  as  possible  while<BR>
still fulfilling all their other requirements.<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:09:17 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Spinal mount trivia and Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
"Trevor, Peter" wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Russell B wrote:<BR>
> > Peter Trevor wrote:<BR>
> > > IIRC (its been a long time since I last read HG)  for  every  USP<BR>
> > > factor over 9 of a spinal mount meson gun you  get  an  automatic<BR>
> > > critical if you hit.  That ment that for a factor L meson gun  (I<BR>
> > > think) you had a statistically probable mission  kill  with  each<BR>
> > > shot that hit regardless of the size of  the  target.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > IIRC, it's one critical per factor that the spinal gun exceeds the<BR>
> > ship size USP of the target, which means that truly huge ships are<BR>
> > less vulnerable to spinal criticals; if you can guarantee that<BR>
> > your battleship's size USP is no less than the USP of the biggest<BR>
> > spinal mount your opponent can field, you are immune to auto crits.<BR>
> <BR>
> Okay, I went back and looked  it  up.  I  was  getting  a  little<BR>
> muddled: its not the Critical  Hits  rule  that  is  ...  er  ...<BR>
> critical, its the Spinal Mounts rule (immediately above it on p41<BR>
> of HG).<BR>
> <BR>
>     "All spinal mpunt weapons which hit and penetrate inflict<BR>
>     one extra damage roll (on  each  appropriate  table)  for<BR>
>     each letter by which their size exceeds 9."<BR>
> <BR>
> This rule is  *not*  affected  by  the  target's  size  like  the<BR>
> Critical Hits rule!<BR>
> <BR>
> Now meson gun spinal mounts get to roll an unmodified 2D  on  the<BR>
> Radiation Damage table, and an  unmodified  2D  on  the  Interior<BR>
> Explosion table.  A factor J meson gun would get 10 rolls on each<BR>
> ... which makes it a statistical probability of  getting  one  of<BR>
> the 'kill' results (this  assumes  that  "Fuel  Tanks  Shattered"<BR>
> counts as a 'kill' result).  Since the basic unit of naval  fleet<BR>
> strength is  the  squadron  (built  for  TCr1)  the  most  combat<BR>
> effective squadron is the one with the most J+  meson  guns.  And<BR>
> to achieve this you want your ships as cheap  as  possible  while<BR>
> still fulfilling all their other requirements.<BR>
<BR>
OTOH, meson guns in HG have problems penetrating screens and certain<BR>
configurations (such as Needle/Wedge) to hit at all.  They are also less<BR>
accurate than PAWs (even with the +2 at short range), at least in the<BR>
larger spinal configurations.<BR>
<BR>
On the gripping hand, PAWs are affected by armor; thus, while PAWs will<BR>
hit more often than meson guns, they will do less damage per hit.<BR>
<BR>
At any rate, we at AuricTech prefer PAWs, for esthetic reasons if<BR>
nothing else.  YPMV.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 16:08:22 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
> Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:07:10 -0500<BR>
> From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
> Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
> <BR>
> OTOH, I would expect that at least part of the power requirements for<BR>
> G-comp goes to helping the hull maintain structural integrity under<BR>
> acceleration.  This would mean that your rule-of thumb formula becomes:<BR>
> 1000 / (Gs - G-comp).  Where (Gs - G-comp) < 0.57, the divisor would be<BR>
> 0.57 instead.  Note that a 1,000,000 dton ship with a Needle hullform<BR>
> has an overall length of 1749.3 meters, which closely approximates<BR>
> 1000/0.57 = 1754.4.<BR>
<BR>
Congratulations! You have entered the Star Trek Zone. (I knew someone<BR>
would bring this up sooner or later.)<BR>
<BR>
Let us be clear: "structural integrity fields" are Treknology. They have<BR>
never been mentioned in Traveller heretofore, except in the very limited<BR>
sense of superdense and bonded superdense materials.<BR>
<BR>
"Gravitic compensation" exists, all right, but so far it affects the<BR>
contents of a vessel, *not* its structure.<BR>
<BR>
Beware of unintended consequences: don't make the cure worse than the<BR>
disease.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:14:36 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 11:55:58 -0500<BR>
> > From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
> > Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
> ><BR>
> > > We have agreed at least that ships of ~5,000 dtons and less are "PC-scale",<BR>
> > > whether there are larger ships or not (if there is a dissenting voice,<BR>
> > > please speak up).<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I agree that ships of this size are the largest that a PC group will<BR>
> > likely own.  However, I would point out that command of larger ships (or<BR>
> > even fleets of such ships) in the service of subsector or Imperial naval<BR>
> > forces can also be a rewarding roleplaying experience.<BR>
> <BR>
> Without any disrespect at all, I forget that some people really see this<BR>
> as enjoyable. It's very close to what I do for a living, though, and I<BR>
> can't imagine it being very much fun to roleplay.<BR>
<BR>
I can sympathize with that.  While I truly love being an Army<BR>
interrogator, when I roleplay, I prefer to let someone else question the<BR>
prisoners.<BR>
<BR>
<<snip>><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:28:52 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 13:07:10 -0500<BR>
> > From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
> > Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2874<BR>
> ><BR>
> > OTOH, I would expect that at least part of the power requirements for<BR>
> > G-comp goes to helping the hull maintain structural integrity under<BR>
> > acceleration.  This would mean that your rule-of thumb formula becomes:<BR>
> > 1000 / (Gs - G-comp).  Where (Gs - G-comp) < 0.57, the divisor would be<BR>
> > 0.57 instead.  Note that a 1,000,000 dton ship with a Needle hullform<BR>
> > has an overall length of 1749.3 meters, which closely approximates<BR>
> > 1000/0.57 = 1754.4.<BR>
> <BR>
> Congratulations! You have entered the Star Trek Zone. (I knew someone<BR>
> would bring this up sooner or later.)<BR>
<BR>
Well, you don't have to be _insulting_ about it.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Since I wasn't really in favor of the original rule-of-thumb, I withdraw<BR>
the point.<BR>
<BR>
At any rate, I will go on designing ships larger than 5000 dtons, as I<BR>
see fit.  Similarly, nobody will force these designs down anybody's<BR>
throat.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:45:11 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 18:13:00 -0500<BR>
>From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Tim, I suspect that a lot of the Huge Ship Contingent aren't<BR>
>interested in deckplans, or in using their monsters in roleplaying<BR>
>gmaes. <BR>
<BR>
I take it you've never played the Star Wars RPG then ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Absolutely huge warships are a great tool for the GM to use in<BR>
designing a scenario, because the players just *know* they stand no<BR>
chance whatsoever of fighting them.  Their only chance is to escape,<BR>
and fast.  You can then build the tension with remarks like "They'll<BR>
be in firing range for their spinal mount in 17 minutes.  Do you want<BR>
to make another Engineering roll to see if you can fix that problem<BR>
with the jump drive? And by the way, make that 16 minutes..."<BR>
<BR>
As for deckplans, I always thought they cheated with the AHL by making<BR>
the deckplans modular ("for decks 12-20 use Deck Plan B" etc), but<BR>
hey, it works...<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:45:19 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2000 22:15:40 -0700<BR>
>From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
>Subject: Re: I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
><BR>
>>I can't think of any action against a 'real' navy where a merchant ship<BR>
>>carried the day against a reasonably equipped and crewed naval vessel.Can<BR>
>>anyone think of an example?<BR>
><BR>
>Jack Aubrey's successful defence of the Company's China Fleet in<BR>
>1805 - one frigate (HMS Surprise) and a line of battle composed of<BR>
>the indiamen (snip)<BR>
<BR>
Yes, but the East India Company at this time controlled most of India,<BR>
making it wealthier than most nation states of the period, so its<BR>
fleet of Indiamen could hardly be compared to most ordinary merchant<BR>
ships...<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:52:47 -0700<BR>
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 8/2/00 7:00 PM, von_rammen@email.msn.com issued<BR>
forth:<BR>
<BR>
> Yes, but what I was alluding to in my original post was what might happen<BR>
> when ships designed under a simpler system come up against ships designed<BR>
> under a more complex system. It seems to me that the modular ships aren't<BR>
> just going to lose, they're going to get reamed, which is just penalizing<BR>
> people for not wanting to take the time to totally immerse themselves in<BR>
> FFS3.<BR>
<BR>
If nobody in a campaign will immerse themselves in FFSx to design these<BR>
ships, how will they ever encounter them?<BR>
<BR>
> That's what I meant by making *all* the systems have to use a modular<BR>
> design, or something else to level the playing field somewhat. I chose<BR>
> modules, because then you can allow people to use the full FFS rules to<BR>
> create more advanced, custom modules, that anyone could use without having<BR>
> to do the design work themselves.<BR>
<BR>
Doesn't that put you back at "square one"?<BR>
<BR>
> This levels out the playing field. Of<BR>
> course, if it's possible to design FFS so that the big custom jobbies don't<BR>
> have an overwhelming advantage over the Chevy Novas, I don't have as big an<BR>
> objection.<BR>
<BR>
If what you have is an off the shelf Chevy Nova, and your opponent has a<BR>
souped up dragster, you /should/ be at an enormous disadvantage.<BR>
<BR>
> I'm just looking out for nightmare scenarios like the GM isn't a<BR>
> gearhead and a player *is*...<BR>
<BR>
This is a whole 'nother kettle of fish, and I suspect is the "real" reason<BR>
for your concerns. I usually arbitrate fantasy games and am not strong in<BR>
the "hard" sciences, so this is a situation I could well encounter when<BR>
running a Traveller game. Especially with Stryder, a player in my group who<BR>
can be a ferocious rules-lawyer. One solution is to give said player a copy<BR>
of FFSx and assign him the task of creating some modules for the Imperial<BR>
Shipyards, a few custom craft for high tech polities and such, maybe a few<BR>
experimental vessels for the IN, IISS, Darrian Navy, etc. And of course any<BR>
designs he later came up with "go into the books" as possible designs for<BR>
the rest of the Universe.<BR>
<BR>
Another option might be to allow FFSx as a design system, but only to build<BR>
modules that must be approved by the arbiter.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 14:58:43 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
VonRammen wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> I wrote:<BR>
<BR>
snippo stuff about QSDS, SSDS, and FFS<BR>
<BR>
> This was the dream. <<<<BR>
> <BR>
> Yes, but what I was alluding to in my original post was what might happen<BR>
> when ships designed under a simpler system come up against ships designed<BR>
> under a more complex system. It seems to me that the modular ships aren't<BR>
> just going to lose, they're going to get reamed, which is just penalizing<BR>
> people for not wanting to take the time to totally immerse themselves in<BR>
> FFS3.<BR>
<BR>
Why? Modular .NE. Underperforming, after all. <BR>
<BR>
The modules in QSDS were pretty optimized, it's just that the parts were<BR>
all of set sizes. What this really affected (after all, ALL staterooms<BR>
are of set sizes, and a Bridge is a Bridge, even under FFS) were power<BR>
plants and fuel purification.<BR>
<BR>
The typical effect of this was to make the usual QSDS ship a bit over or<BR>
under powered, and have less cargo space than could be squeezed out of a<BR>
FFS design. OTOH, the QSDS 25% discount really counted on paying down<BR>
those starship mortgages.<BR>
<BR>
I sort of oversimplified my example. Under QSDS I could build a<BR>
Nova-like sedan with a big engine. It will perform probably just as well<BR>
as the FFS designed Chevy hot rod. The FFS one may have a few percent<BR>
more power, and a lot more trunk space, but this doesn't automagically<BR>
mean that a QSDS ship will automatically lose.<BR>
<BR>
More to the point, when you can build a fleet of QSDS ships for 75% the<BR>
cost, you get to buy more of 'em...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:00:25 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Native Morans<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
> <BR>
> >Thought: If a native of Mora is a Moran, what is a native of Moran<BR>
> >(Mora2924) called? :)<BR>
> <BR>
> Those are the Moranians.  They're very touchy about it.  So are the<BR>
> Morans, actually.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
The Less-ons.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:01:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Viktor Haag <vhaag@rim.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn writes:<BR>
 > Well I've obtained Adobe's Optima. I'll have to compare the<BR>
 > two.<BR>
<BR>
Well, presumably the Type 1 version of Optima is the one that<BR>
Marc used in the later "official" Traveller books, unless there<BR>
was a version of it built as a TeX font...<BR>
<BR>
Early books (like the original LBBs) were probably typeset using<BR>
the original Linotype Hell fonts on a typesetter, I should<BR>
imagine.<BR>
<BR>
As far as I know, Adobe's Type 1 version is the closest you can<BR>
get to the original foundry design, other than getting it from<BR>
Linotype Hell directly...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Viktor Haag                           Senior Technical Writer, RIM<BR>
'79 99, '89 9000T, '00 9-3 SE         My opinions are my own, only.<BR>
tc++ ru ge(+) !3i c jt- au(-) pi+ he(+)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 23:11:28 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
<BR>
hahahahaaha,  sorry but I just had to laugh : )))))))<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: <trentfs@ix.netcom.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 9:02 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Jerry Paul Sanders wrote:<BR>
> > Another item from GDW was a black plastic three-ring notebook binder<BR>
with<BR>
> > the Traveller logo on it. These were sold directly from GDW in the very<BR>
> > early 80's.<BR>
><BR>
> I got one of these from Marc himself (I believe) at GenCon circa 1989<BR>
(they'd found a few in their warehouse or some such).  It's just too cool<BR>
looking!  Unfortunately, as a binder, it's not so hot (only 1" thick, you<BR>
have to stretch the inside-cover pockets to fit anything inside).<BR>
Nevertheless, I keep my essential Trav-papers in it and impress all my<BR>
friends.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Trent<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 15:27:45 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
<BR>
Prelude: With the relatively recent exception of some of Adobe's fonts<BR>
(Typefaces, to be even pickier), fonts are not patented, copywritten or<BR>
trademarked. <BR>
<BR>
Font NAMES on the other hand have been jealously and vigorously guarded<BR>
licensable trademarks. <BR>
<BR>
This is why, for instance, that Windows comes with Times New Roman and<BR>
Arial, instead of Times and Helvetica, which those Windows fonts are<BR>
physical copies of (in the sense that the letterforms have been<BR>
duplicated).<BR>
<BR>
Some font names have passed into the public domain, such as Garamond.<BR>
<BR>
Want to see a designer blanch? Tell 'em you set such and such in<BR>
Garamond...without telling them _which_ of the (literally) hundreds of<BR>
Garamonds you used.<BR>
<BR>
ON to this 'Optima':<BR>
<BR>
1) It is Adobe's Optima font converted to TrueType. In this case it's<BR>
pirated software. (not ok legally)<BR>
<BR>
2)It is a lookalike font (ok, legally) using Adobe's (or the copyright<BR>
holders) name for that particular font (not ok legally)<BR>
<BR>
In either of these cases, Adobe has been known to get nasty about it<BR>
being posted on the web.<BR>
<BR>
Close examination of the font (via the simple expedient of dropping it<BR>
on Notepad and looking through the bits for words) seems to indicate<BR>
that this is, in fact, the Optima clone 'Ottowa' that has been renamed<BR>
'Optima' via the use of some font utility. <BR>
<BR>
Now the owner of _that_ font could indeed have a legal beef with whoever<BR>
renamed their font 'Optima' and pirated their font software.<BR>
<BR>
On a practical note, Ottowa is not exactly Optima. For the uses here<BR>
(display type in small amounts) it likely doesn't matter. <BR>
<BR>
Body copy set in the two will break differently.<BR>
<BR>
(No, I am not yelling at Jesse, btw)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Well I've obtained Adobe's Optima. I'll have to compare the two.<BR>
> <BR>
> Tod<BR>
> ----- Original Message -----<BR>
> From: "Merc" <merc@qvlinc.com><BR>
> To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 10:23 AM<BR>
> Subject: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
> <BR>
> > Just in case there are still others looking for this font for their own<BR>
> > projects, Jesse DeGraff already has it available at the following web<BR>
> > address. I've now looked at 4 different sets of fonts claiming to be<BR>
> > Optima and this is the best and most complete (i.e. it has Normal, Bold,<BR>
> > Italic, and Bold Italic versions).  He also has the Vilani font available.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > The quick route is this URL<BR>
> ><BR>
> > http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/resources/index.htm<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Thanks Jesse, finding these made my day!<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Coy Krill<BR>
> ><BR>
> ><BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:38:26 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
<BR>
> ON to this 'Optima':<BR>
><BR>
> 1) It is Adobe's Optima font converted to TrueType. In this case it's<BR>
> pirated software. (not ok legally)<BR>
><BR>
> 2)It is a lookalike font (ok, legally) using Adobe's (or the copyright<BR>
> holders) name for that particular font (not ok legally)<BR>
<BR>
You left out 3)<BR>
This is a legal copy of the Adobe PostScript font.<BR>
Referring to the copy I have, which was not obtained from the web, BTW.<BR>
<BR>
Just trying to make the large format Traveller maps look right.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
><BR>
> Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Well I've obtained Adobe's Optima. I'll have to compare the two.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Tod<BR>
> > ----- Original Message -----<BR>
> > From: "Merc" <merc@qvlinc.com><BR>
> > To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 10:23 AM<BR>
> > Subject: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
> ><BR>
> > > Just in case there are still others looking for this font for their<BR>
own<BR>
> > > projects, Jesse DeGraff already has it available at the following web<BR>
> > > address. I've now looked at 4 different sets of fonts claiming to be<BR>
> > > Optima and this is the best and most complete (i.e. it has Normal,<BR>
Bold,<BR>
> > > Italic, and Bold Italic versions).  He also has the Vilani font<BR>
available.<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > The quick route is this URL<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > ><BR>
http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/resources/index.htm<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > Thanks Jesse, finding these made my day!<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > > Coy Krill<BR>
> > ><BR>
> > ><BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> Bruce Johnson<BR>
> University of Arizona<BR>
> College of Pharmacy<BR>
> Information Technology Group<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 19:02:05 -0400<BR>
From: trentfs@ix.netcom.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net wrote:<BR>
> hahahahaaha,  sorry but I just had to laugh : )))))))<BR>
(apropos my beautiful-if-nigh-useless Official Traveller binder)<BR>
<BR>
Hrumph!  May you pinch a finger but good the next time you attempt to close the teeth on a 3-ring binder -- then we'll see who's laughing, Mr. Funny Guy!<BR>
<BR>
Trent<BR>
 <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 16:02:13 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: The Solomani Sphere & Conditioned Reflex Infantry (LONG)<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
<BR>
>Excellent point, though while I'd opt for 'show trails', I like the idea<BR>
>of reformation for _Solomani_.  Now as for those who are not TrueMen...<BR>
>I'll have to think about this, as you ideas have some real merit, IMHO. <BR>
>Nothing like a good show trial.<BR>
<BR>
The Prosecutor:  "... and the evidence will also show, Honor Sirs, that<BR>
this man [pointing to the dock] is in fact one-eighth Vilani!  [Gasps from<BR>
the gallery.]  And not only that, Honor Sirs, the State will present<BR>
evidence that this man [pointing to the dock] actually bears the genes of<BR>
... Vargr ancestors!"<BR>
<BR>
[Eruption of noise from the gallery; defense counsel come to their feet.]<BR>
<BR>
Chief Judge [banging gavel]:  "Order! Order! We will have order in this<BR>
Court or I shall hold everyone in contempt! Order!"<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 14:34:09 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I agree with this:<BR>
><BR>
> I wish that they had left PP's into GT Modular Ship Design. It is kinda odd<BR>
> to design a ship that incorprates PP slices into a turret weapon.. I just<BR>
> cannot grok that :)<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, that makes it impossible to design a ship that saves power by<BR>
shutting down "non-essential" systems during combat, or in other<BR>
situations. *Very* unrealistic.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 14:49:57 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Fire in Zero g / Decompression (Urgent Help Please)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I'm a little late in posting so this might be on no use, but IIRC I<BR>
> think the Captain of the rescue ship in the film Event Horizon describes<BR>
> a Zero G fire in one of the scenes. I don't know if this is true to the<BR>
> real world but I think he describes it as a ball of flames coming on in<BR>
> waves. I'd be interested to know if this was true to life if anyone knows.<BR>
<BR>
Not unless it's being driven by a leak of both fuel *and* oxidizer,<BR>
both under some pressure. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:15:45 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> IIRC SOpM states that Jump exit and initiation have the same energy<BR>
> release. A brilliant flash of light that subsides quickly leaving the<BR>
> faint blueish glow of the jump grid on the hull which soon fades. Entry<BR>
> to Jump is the reverse, a build up of charge in the jump grid, then a<BR>
> sudden flash that quickly fades.<BR>
><BR>
> IIRC there is mention in HG as to how many EP are required to jump.<BR>
> Assuming half this energy is released in the Initialisation system, and<BR>
> half is 'carried' through to the exit system, we now have a value for<BR>
> the energy of the point source of the jumping ship. It should be easy<BR>
> enough to calculate how far away this energy will be passively<BR>
> detectable at each TL. <BR>
><BR>
> Personally, I dislike the idea that the flash is readily detectable at<BR>
> system-wide distances, and IMTU it is barely noticeable over background<BR>
> radiation beyond a million km or so unless you were specifically looking<BR>
> at that exact spot with the intention of detecting a jump exit. <BR>
<BR>
The *real* detection nightmare is that having that much mass "go away"<BR>
or "appear out of nowhere" will create gravity waves. Ones that are<BR>
detectable a long ways off. <BR>
<BR>
Any of the professionals here know how to calculate that?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 14:59:38 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>> <BR>
>> In mail you write:<BR>
>> <BR>
>>> On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> Well, as I've pointed out many times, it's perfectly possible to jump<BR>
>>>> into the system at some random location out of weapons range of the<BR>
>>>> mainworld, and days away at max accel.<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> That means you can make observations for a few days and jump out again<BR>
>>>> before they can get a ship anywhere near you.<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>> So I expect that there will be a lot of small, not at all stealthy<BR>
>>>> ships that can do two jumps without refueling and have *enormous*<BR>
>>>> folding sensor arrays.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> This is quite true, but there's one serious problem with "peek-and-scoot"<BR>
>>> spy vessels: the enemy knows that he's under observation, and will<BR>
>>> respond accordingly.  "Peek-and-scoot" vessels would, furthermore, be<BR>
>>> unsuitable for other espionage tasks, like dropping off and picking up<BR>
>>> agents in unfriendly star systems.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> The thing is, it's canonical that you can't hide jump exit. At any<BR>
>> range worth dealing with, it's too visible. If you jump in far enough<BR>
>> out to maybe be unnoticed, and come in stealthily, it'll take *years*<BR>
>> to get near the planet.<BR>
><BR>
> I know that jump _exit_ is extremely unsubtle.  The question is, how<BR>
> obvious is jump _initiation_?  If jump initiation is difficult to<BR>
> detect, then there is a mission for ELINT ships such as the AuricTech<BR>
> _Pueblo_ series of ELINT collection platforms.  Very stealthy, with<BR>
> endurance of at least one standard year.  It jumps in with several other<BR>
> ships (warships, Type S scout/couriers, whatever), and remains<BR>
> on-station once the other ships jump out.<BR>
<BR>
The good news is that it doesn't *matter* if they can detect jump<BR>
initiation because you'll be gone. :-)<BR>
<BR>
The bad news is that you can't hid your jump exit that way. Remember,<BR>
even ships jumping in as a group arrive spread over several hours. <BR>
<BR>
> If, OTOH, jump initiation has a significant signature, then one solution<BR>
> would be to have a largish ELINT ship jump in around the Oort cloud,<BR>
> deposit one or more smaller jump-capable ELINT ship(s) (with heavy<BR>
> stealthing and fairly high acceleration), then jump out shortly before<BR>
> the enemy engages.  One hopes that the daughter ship(s) can remain<BR>
> undetected for a while (having never jumped in itself/themselves),<BR>
> allowing useful ELINT collection.<BR>
<BR>
It'll take a week for the enemy to reach you out in the Oort. That's if<BR>
they use a "microjump". <BR>
<BR>
If they don't, at 6 g it takes 11.5 *days* to reach 100 AU (assuminf<BR>
constant boost to 50 AU, then flip and constant decel). To reach 1000<BR>
AU takes 36.6 days. Well, actually, it takes longer. Since peak<BR>
velocity of such a trip is 31% of c, you have to make corrections for<BR>
relativity. <BR>
<BR>
And your high acceleration ships would be easy to spot, regardless of<BR>
any stealthing, because at the speeds they'd reach before turnover, the<BR>
stray atoms and dust they hit will make them a rather noticeable source<BR>
of high energy radiation. <BR>
<BR>
I forget the exact details, but it *is* a rather noticable effect.<BR>
Someone on the list pointed it out to me when I what'd to build a huge<BR>
mass driver out in the Oort and use it to throw 1 ton "rocks" at 1% of<BR>
c at a planet.<BR>
<BR>
FWIW, both jump entrance and exit are going to produce gravity waves.<BR>
Those should be detectable at quite a distance, even with the crude<BR>
detectors we have right now!<BR>
<BR>
Hundreds of tons disappearing or appearing *will* cause "ripples" :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2878<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za03.mx.aol.com (rly-za03.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.99]) by air-za01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 19:23:03 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 19:22:24 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id TAA36923;<BR>
	Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:22:22 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:22:06 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id TAA36807<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:22:06 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:22:06 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008032322.TAA36807@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2878<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2879</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/3/00 6:35:04 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, August 3 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2879<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
Re: Ship sizes<BR>
Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2878<BR>
Roc: Miniatures Question<BR>
Privateers vs warships<BR>
Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
Re: Privateers vs warships<BR>
FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
Re: Jump emitted ripples<BR>
Maps<BR>
RE: Ship Size Limits<BR>
RE: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:28:47 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Bear in mind that in RL TL7 space flight, the heat build up from the<BR>
> launch engines is pretty much disposed of by disposing of the engines<BR>
> (booster rockets mainly) and the exhaust.<BR>
<BR>
Actually "all" the heat generated by the engine goes out the exhaust.<BR>
They cool them by running the liquid hydrogen thru a network of tubes<BR>
that are part of the walls of the combustion chamber and nozzle. This<BR>
"preheats" the fuel before it reaches the combustion chamber. <BR>
<BR>
> The actual space vehicles<BR>
> themselves have relatively tiny power plants, and are only a few dtons<BR>
> total volume in any case. Probably only a few m2 of radiators can<BR>
> dispose of the heat built up from day-to-day orbital activity.<BR>
<BR>
The heat radiators for the Shuttle cover the inside surface of the<BR>
cargo bay doors. That's more than "a few m^2". :-)<BR>
<BR>
I don't have a reference, but I'd not be at all surprised to find that<BR>
the Shuttle uses several kW of power, even in orbit. I *do* know that<BR>
they have to be careful about using too much power at any given time.<BR>
Heat load *is* an important part of experimental plans and of the<BR>
overall mission plan.<BR>
<BR>
Oh yeah, from a recent article, I find that current space suits are<BR>
cooled by controlled evaporation of water into the vacuum. In fact,<BR>
that's *probably* the limiting factor on the time you can spend wearing<BR>
them. That and "certain bodily functions" (the disposable diapers<BR>
aren't something you want to use if you can avoid it). <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:20:23 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> The trouble, Andrew, is that surface ships are *not* self-supporting --<BR>
> they *float*. They are supported by bouyancy over every square meter of<BR>
> submerged hull area, from stem to stern. At best, they are designed to<BR>
> resist a certain amount "hogging" and "sagging" (being supported only on<BR>
> some portions of the hull), but the bigger the ship becomes, the less this<BR>
> is a factor in her design (LOA >> expected range of wavelengths). Ships in<BR>
> drydock have to be carefully supported all along their length (and beam,<BR>
> for ships with a block coefficient near 1), because otherwise they will <BR>
> crack.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, they learned the hard way that they had to make supertankers<BR>
stronger. They had a few mysterious losses and then they had a ship<BR>
that was either "only" badly damaged, or that went down, but had<BR>
survivors picked up. <BR>
<BR>
Seems that in storms, the "Cape rollers" were big enough and far enough<BR>
apart that the tankers had each end held up by a wave crest, with the<BR>
middle hanging in mid-air. Crunch!<BR>
<BR>
I seem to recall that the reverse situation isn't as bad, because the<BR>
hull sinks so much deeper into the water of the wave crest then. But<BR>
it's still not good.<BR>
<BR>
> The largest mobile, self-supporting structure I know of was the Saturn V,<BR>
> at 600 dtons.* At 3,250 stons, it had a density midway between the 10<BR>
> ston/dton figure from FF&S, and the 3 ston/dton average I get for ships in<BR>
> GT, so that's about right. Saturn V was streamlined, and designed to a<BR>
> nominal 3.98g. Assuming that an increase X in tensile strength<BR>
> ("toughness") permits a corresponding increase in volume (and mass) of<BR>
> X^3/2, the largest equivalent ship at TL15 should be (47.1/2.43)^3/2 * 600<BR>
> = 51,200 dtons.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, the Saturn *wasn't* "self supporting" in the normal sense.<BR>
Much of the weight was supported by the internal pressure in the fuel<BR>
tanks (after all the tanks *were* the structure!). Gas pressure before<BR>
the tanks were filled, and pressure of the liquid fuel afterwards.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 16:27:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Merc <merc@qvlinc.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
<BR>
The foundry entry says it's from 2Rebels, but 2Rebels doesn't list it in <BR>
their web catalog.  I've sent them an email but haven't heard back from<BR>
them on it yet.<BR>
<BR>
I didn't buy the Adobe Font because it's not quite right either. I'm still<BR>
looking for the one that's on my original boxed set.  I'm hoping that<BR>
Linotype Hell has it available, but so far I can't get their online store<BR>
to work with Netscape.  Guess I'll have to bow to Microsoft and go use one<BR>
of the Windows machines around here...<BR>
<BR>
Coy<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 16:24:38 -0700<BR>
From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2878<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Prelude: With the relatively recent exception of some of Adobe's fonts<BR>
> (Typefaces, to be even pickier), fonts are not patented, copywritten or<BR>
> trademarked. <BR>
<BR>
To clarify, a software version of a font, that is to say, the .TTF files <BR>
on your hard disk, can be copywritten; the letterforms themselves cannot. <BR>
It's not legal for me to pass around those .TTFs, but if I can create an<BR>
indistinguishable clone in Fontographer or another tool, it's legal.<BR>
<BR>
I assume you knew that already.<BR>
<BR>
- -Russell B<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:42:22 +1000<BR>
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au><BR>
Subject: Roc: Miniatures Question<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Frank G. Pitt <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 8:13:pm<BR>
Subject: RE: Miniatures Question<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Just a data point, I still have the cardboard cut-outs from the back cover<BR>
> of Judges Guild "Tancred" scenario pack.<BR>
><BR>
> While very simple '2D' cut-outs, with movable "turrets", they worked great<BR>
> with SJG's cardboard figures, and had enough detail to help tactical<BR>
> decisions and player visualization.<BR>
><BR>
> They had a "top down" view printed on one side, and a "mao view" on the<BR>
> other side like the standard Traveller deck plans, so you just flipped the<BR>
> cut-out when you wanted to know where people were in the vehicle.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Wow, I just had a nice nostalgia trip then :^)<BR>
<BR>
I still have a handful of photocopies of these that were never used<BR>
somewhere... My players had a load of fun with these in some games we<BR>
played, they spent one game session just colouring them!  My, my... thanks<BR>
for that mate, it brought back some nice memories :^)<BR>
<BR>
- -- The Roc<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:58:30 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Privateers vs warships<BR>
<BR>
Couple of points.<BR>
<BR>
Firstly, the further you go back in time, the less relevant 'warship' is as<BR>
a concept.<BR>
<BR>
A good example is probably the brutal job that a group of unescorted<BR>
Venetian roundships did on a group of Turkish military galleys in 1570,<BR>
during a relief of Cyprus (ref Braudel, Med, p1085). It's a bitch when you<BR>
are on the wrong side in a revolution in miltary affairs ...<BR>
<BR>
Secondly, before the dreadnough revolution, ships were cheap, and men were<BR>
expensive.<BR>
<BR>
Any Traveller design system has cheap men and expensive equipment<BR>
(incidentally, if you allow skills to be important, then an ex-naval captain<BR>
with Ship Tactics-4 is going to be able to write their own ticket on an<BR>
Exploratory Trader. By this, I'm thinking a salary in the megacredits).<BR>
<BR>
Thirdly, if you want a weak and ineffective Imperium, then firstly we are<BR>
going to need to scale down the size of Imperial naval bases, and secondly,<BR>
we are going to need a mechanic to stop the "Planetary Navies" of places<BR>
like Mora and Trin from acting as de facto Imperial Navies. I dont want to<BR>
re-ignite the P!r!cy debate, but if a ship is taken in a backwater system,<BR>
then I bet that one or both of ship or cargo is own by a commercial interest<BR>
on the nearest big world.<BR>
<BR>
At minimum, I think big worlds would act the way Australia does in<BR>
Micronesia - no overt military action without specific requests, but a<BR>
capability to destroy the economy of any given microstate does wonders ...<BR>
<BR>
At maximum ... well, the words 'From the Halls of Montezuma to the Shores of<BR>
Tripoli' didnt get onto the US Marine Corps anthem by accident. How many<BR>
interventions did the US pull in the Caribbean before it became a world<BR>
power in about, say, 1930 anyway ?<BR>
<BR>
Finally, even with a weak Imperium, the Spinward Marches are still going to<BR>
be pretty militarised. I dont see the Sword Worlds as spending less than 8%<BR>
of GWP on defense, and that will push up military budgets in the Rimward<BR>
part of the Marches. As for the actual frontier, well, I guess we can get an<BR>
OB out of Fifth Frontier War.<BR>
<BR>
The Marches is one of the few places where most sensor operators would<BR>
recognise a Tigress' signature ...<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:06:49 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
<BR>
> From: Victor Abraham Delnore <vad9m@unix.mail.virginia.edu><BR>
> Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
> But who's paying for the subsector and imperial navies?  In fact, how do<BR>
> the subsector and imperial (I'm lower-casing because I mean the<BR>
> generic imperial government of Traveller, the rules, and not<BR>
> the Third Imperium of Traveller, the universe) governments pay for<BR>
> anything?  You're assuming that the planetary government takes the largest<BR>
> chunk out of everybody's paycheck.  What if it doesn't?  What if the<BR>
> imperium takes the big money and the planet's share is more like a<BR>
> twentieth-century city government's?  Then "big" planetary navies really<BR>
> do become something like two escorts, a dozen SBDs, and a bunch of small<BR>
> craft.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I kinda assume the Imperium invoices planetary governments, and owns a chunk<BR>
of each meagcorporation. Let them sort out how they find the money. You<BR>
could also have the Imperium running starports for profit.<BR>
<BR>
Having the navies be mostly Imperial or subsector doesnt work as a solution.<BR>
There are still just as many military ships floating around. An example<BR>
would be City- and County- level police forces in Australia. We dont have<BR>
them. But there are still cops ...<BR>
<BR>
> By the way, I don't have any of the modules, but doesn't it stand to<BR>
> reason that MT sourcebooks dealing with the Rebellion would say something<BR>
> detailed about planetary navies in that setting?<BR>
<BR>
Mostly because the various factions shanghaid them (and anything else with a<BR>
hull and a jump drive) into their regular navies. The idea of planetary<BR>
soveriegnty did not last too long in the Second Civil War, I think ...<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 11:49:49 +1200<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Spy Ships (was: "Re: FFS3: POLL")<BR>
<BR>
On 3 Aug 2000, at 14:59, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> FWIW, both jump entrance and exit are going to produce gravity waves.<BR>
> Those should be detectable at quite a distance, even with the crude<BR>
> detectors we have right now!<BR>
> <BR>
> Hundreds of tons disappearing or appearing *will* cause "ripples" :-)<BR>
<BR>
I've been saying this for years, apparently to empty space.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 11:56:13 +1200<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Privateers vs warships<BR>
<BR>
On 3 Aug 2000, at 21:58, Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Finally, even with a weak Imperium, the Spinward Marches are still going to be<BR>
> pretty militarised. I dont see the Sword Worlds as spending less than 8% of GWP<BR>
> on defense, and that will push up military budgets in the Rimward part of the<BR>
> Marches. As for the actual frontier, well, I guess we can get an OB out of Fifth<BR>
> Frontier War.<BR>
> <BR>
> The Marches is one of the few places where most sensor operators would<BR>
> recognise a Tigress' signature ...<BR>
<BR>
I got the impression from Fighting Ships (Book 9?) that this was roughly the <BR>
situation in canon at that point, and that the Spinward Marches had quite a <BR>
strong Imperial Navy presence by the 3I's standards, which would be more <BR>
obvious because of the relatively small size of most planetary navies there <BR>
(due to the SM small average population/TL).<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:57:11 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
<BR>
I thought if might be good to present "the way things are now."  I<BR>
think I got this correct, someone might want to double check me,<BR>
though.  IAC, the next 150+ lines are just to build a hull...<BR>
<BR>
The Hull<BR>
<BR>
1.  Beginning constraints:<BR>
    <BR>
    A. Hull volume in dtons.<BR>
    <BR>
    B. Maximum g's at which the hull will be stressed.  This is at<BR>
       least the maximum acceleration.<BR>
       <BR>
    C. Hull Configuration.  Below is a partial, undetailed, list.<BR>
       See FFS2, Table 160, p 104.<BR>
    <BR>
        Cylinder<BR>
        Rounded Cylinder<BR>
        Box<BR>
        Cone<BR>
        Wedge<BR>
        etc   <BR>
        <BR>
    D. Streamlining required.  Below is an undetailed list.  See<BR>
       FFS2, Table 161, p 104.<BR>
        <BR>
        Unstreamlined<BR>
        Streamlined<BR>
        AirFrame        <BR>
        <BR>
        1.  AirFrame Speed Regime. See FFS2, Table 162, p 104.<BR>
        <BR>
    E.  Stealthing desired.<BR>
    <BR>
    F.  Amount and type of Armor desired.<BR>
    <BR>
2.  Design Sequence.<BR>
<BR>
    A. Hull Size.<BR>
    <BR>
        1.  Volume in cubic meters, Vol = dtons * 14<BR>
        <BR>
        2.  Diameter, D = (6 * Vol / pi)^(1/3)<BR>
        <BR>
        3.  Spherical Area, SArea = pi * Dia^2<BR>
        <BR>
        4.  Structural Factor, SF = (Vol^3 / 225,000)^(1/2)<BR>
        <BR>
    B.  Hull Configuration<BR>
    <BR>
        1.  Available Surface Area, Area = SArea * Surface Modifier<BR>
                                                    (from table 160)<BR>
                                                    <BR>
        2.  Dimensions.  (from Table 160)<BR>
                Length = Dia * Length    <BR>
                Width = Dia * Width<BR>
                Height = Dia * Height<BR>
                <BR>
    C.  Steamlining Modifications<BR>
    <BR>
        1.  Wings.  If the configuration is AirFrame (AF) modify<BR>
            Area to accommodate the wings, and calculate the wingspan<BR>
            of the vehicle.<BR>
            <BR>
            WingArea = Area * 0.3<BR>
            <BR>
            Wingspan for supersonic and above = 2 * (WingArea)^(1/2)<BR>
            <BR>
            Wingspan for slower vehicles = 3 * (WingArea)^(1/2)<BR>
            <BR>
            New AREA = Area + WingArea<BR>
            <BR>
            New WIDTH = Width + Wingspan<BR>
            <BR>
        2.  Waste Volume and Waste Area.  Hulls larger than 1,000<BR>
            cubic meters use 1,000 cubic meters for this<BR>
            calculation, otherwise use the actual volume.  The Waste<BR>
            Volume and Waste Area factors are found on Table 161.<BR>
            <BR>
            Waste Volume = Vol * Waste Volume Factor<BR>
            <BR>
            Waste Area = Vol * Waste Area Factor<BR>
        <BR>
        3.  Price Multiplier.  Streamlining Cost modifier is on<BR>
            Table 161 and the Speed Regime Cost modifier is on Table<BR>
            162.<BR>
            <BR>
            Final Streamlining Cost Mod = Streamlining Cost Mod *<BR>
                                          Speed Regime Cost Mod<BR>
                                          <BR>
        4.  Minimum Speed.  If the hull has wings the stall speed is<BR>
            taken from Table 162.<BR>
            <BR>
        5.  Maximum Speed.  If the hull has wings the maximum speed<BR>
            is taken from Table 161 or 162.<BR>
            <BR>
        6.  Thrust Efficiency.<BR>
        <BR>
            For AF take from Table 162.<BR>
            For SL take from Table 161.<BR>
            <BR>
    D.  Armor.  AV is Armor rating.  Toughness, Density, and Price<BR>
        for your chosen material come from Table 158.<BR>
    <BR>
        1.  Armor Thickness = AV / Toughness.<BR>
        <BR>
        2.  Armor Volume = Area * (Armor Thickness) / 100<BR>
        <BR>
        3.  Armor Mass = Armor Volume * Density<BR>
        <BR>
        4.  Armor Cost = Armor Volume * Price<BR>
        <BR>
    E.  Internal Structure.  Toughness, Density and Price from Table<BR>
        158.<BR>
    <BR>
        1. Structure Volume = SF * Max G's / Toughness<BR>
        <BR>
        2. Structure Mass = Structure Vol * Density<BR>
        <BR>
        3. Structure Price = Structure Vol * Price<BR>
        <BR>
    F.  Stealth. For each level of stealth multiply Armor Cost by 5.<BR>
    <BR>
        Final Armor Cost  = Armor Cost * Stealth Level * 5<BR>
        <BR>
        If any Stealthing is used, then all components placed on the<BR>
        hull's surface have their Volume multiplied by 1.1 and their<BR>
        Area multiplied by 1.25.<BR>
        <BR>
    G.  Hull Coatings<BR>
    <BR>
        1.  Bare Metal:  Hull Cost reduced by 0.01 Mcr per sq meter<BR>
                        (at TL 8 & 9 bare metal gets no discount)<BR>
<BR>
        2.  Black Paint @ TL 8 & 9:  increase Hull Cost by 0.01 Mcr<BR>
                                     per sq meter<BR>
<BR>
        3.  Color Changing @ TL 10: no cost effects.<BR>
        <BR>
        4.  Military Black @ TL11+:  increase Hull Cost by 0.01 Mcr<BR>
                                     per sq meter<BR>
                                     <BR>
        5.  Ultrablack @ TL13+:  increase Hull cost by 0.1 Mcr per<BR>
                                 sq meter<BR>
                                 <BR>
    H.  Final Hull Stats.<BR>
    <BR>
        1.  Final Hull Volume = Vol - Waste Vol - Structure Vol<BR>
        <BR>
        2.  Final Hull Area = Area + Wingspan (if any)<BR>
        <BR>
        3.  Final Hull Mass = Armor Mass + Structure Mass<BR>
        <BR>
        4.  Final Hull Cost = Armor Cost + Structure Cost + (Final<BR>
                              Hull Area * any Hull coating Mod)<BR>
                                       <BR>
Eris        <BR>
  ps. Why was the division 225,000 for SF picked? Does anyone know?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 01:00:33 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
<BR>
I'm impressed, but just could not hold the grin,,,,no offence intended,<BR>
though surely taken....<BR>
....there goes the green eyed monster, right on down the hallway, and down<BR>
the fire escape....<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: <trentfs@ix.netcom.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 12:02 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller 3-ring binder<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net wrote:<BR>
> > hahahahaaha,  sorry but I just had to laugh : )))))))<BR>
> (apropos my beautiful-if-nigh-useless Official Traveller binder)<BR>
><BR>
> Hrumph!  May you pinch a finger but good the next time you attempt to<BR>
close the teeth on a 3-ring binder -- then we'll see who's laughing, Mr.<BR>
Funny Guy!<BR>
><BR>
> Trent<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 17:06:20 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
 <BR>
> Yeah, that makes it impossible to design a ship that saves power by<BR>
> shutting down "non-essential" systems during combat, or in other<BR>
> situations. *Very* unrealistic.<BR>
<BR>
Though in practice not all that important.  GT ships _have_ no significant power requirements other than active sensors, weapons, and drives, and the <BR>
only thing you could turn off which would save you enough power to be noticeable is the jump drive.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 20:03:58 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
<BR>
The Traveller source material mentions somewhere that Imperial revenue is<BR>
derived primarily from tariffs/taxes which are built into the price<BR>
structure of goods.  The 3I taxes the trade it makes possible.<BR>
<BR>
I also believe that the 3I essentially owns all of the other planets and<BR>
stars that aren't official "worlds."  These can also be used to generate<BR>
revenueby leasing and allowing corporate resource exploitation.  Also, there<BR>
are a lot more than 11,000 stars in the tract of space covered by the 3I. I<BR>
think Traveller tries to ignore this fact.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 8:06 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > From: Victor Abraham Delnore <vad9m@unix.mail.virginia.edu><BR>
> > Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
> > But who's paying for the subsector and imperial navies?  In fact, how do<BR>
> > the subsector and imperial (I'm lower-casing because I mean the<BR>
> > generic imperial government of Traveller, the rules, and not<BR>
> > the Third Imperium of Traveller, the universe) governments pay for<BR>
> > anything?  You're assuming that the planetary government takes the<BR>
largest<BR>
> > chunk out of everybody's paycheck.  What if it doesn't?  What if the<BR>
> > imperium takes the big money and the planet's share is more like a<BR>
> > twentieth-century city government's?  Then "big" planetary navies really<BR>
> > do become something like two escorts, a dozen SBDs, and a bunch of small<BR>
> > craft.<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> I kinda assume the Imperium invoices planetary governments, and owns a<BR>
chunk<BR>
> of each meagcorporation. Let them sort out how they find the money. You<BR>
> could also have the Imperium running starports for profit.<BR>
><BR>
> Having the navies be mostly Imperial or subsector doesnt work as a<BR>
solution.<BR>
> There are still just as many military ships floating around. An example<BR>
> would be City- and County- level police forces in Australia. We dont have<BR>
> them. But there are still cops ...<BR>
><BR>
> > By the way, I don't have any of the modules, but doesn't it stand to<BR>
> > reason that MT sourcebooks dealing with the Rebellion would say<BR>
something<BR>
> > detailed about planetary navies in that setting?<BR>
><BR>
> Mostly because the various factions shanghaid them (and anything else with<BR>
a<BR>
> hull and a jump drive) into their regular navies. The idea of planetary<BR>
> soveriegnty did not last too long in the Second Civil War, I think ...<BR>
><BR>
> Ian Whitchurch<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 17:31:41 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
<BR>
Dan Lane writes:<BR>
> The Traveller source material mentions somewhere that Imperial revenue is<BR>
> derived primarily from tariffs/taxes which are built into the price<BR>
> structure of goods.  The 3I taxes the trade it makes possible.<BR>
> <BR>
> I also believe that the 3I essentially owns all of the other planets and<BR>
> stars that aren't official "worlds."  These can also be used to generate<BR>
> revenueby leasing and allowing corporate resource exploitation.  Also,<BR>
> there are a lot more than 11,000 stars in the tract of space covered by<BR>
> the 3I. I think Traveller tries to ignore this fact.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, there's only around 9,000 systems on the map.  Of course, the maps only make sense if the traveller map is a 2d slice about 5 parsecs thick.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 01:34:16 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Jump emitted ripples<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0CD7_01BFFDB4.1A277F80<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
<BR>
How about a jump drive emitting ripple bonk. Something that creates a<BR>
duplicate effect to cancel out the other's effect. Will cause a sudden<BR>
crack, but no ripple.....<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0CD7_01BFFDB4.1A277F80<BR>
Content-Type: text/x-vcard;<BR>
	name="traveller@lists.imagiconline.com.vcf"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<BR>
	filename="traveller@lists.imagiconline.com.vcf"<BR>
<BR>
BEGIN:VCARD<BR>
VERSION:2.1<BR>
N:;traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
FN:traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
REV:20000804T003416Z<BR>
END:VCARD<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0CD7_01BFFDB4.1A277F80--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 01:53:57 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Maps<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0CEC_01BFFDB6.D9FEE8A0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
<BR>
I was wondering to whom ever it may concern, ....<BR>
....how are those maps getting on?<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0CEC_01BFFDB6.D9FEE8A0<BR>
Content-Type: text/x-vcard;<BR>
	name="traveller@lists.imagiconline.com.vcf"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit<BR>
Content-Disposition: attachment;<BR>
	filename="traveller@lists.imagiconline.com.vcf"<BR>
<BR>
BEGIN:VCARD<BR>
VERSION:2.1<BR>
N:;traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
FN:traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
REV:20000804T005357Z<BR>
END:VCARD<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0CEC_01BFFDB6.D9FEE8A0--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:18:08 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
David P. Summers wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >No, I'm trying to point out that you are ignoring entropy.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >But since you won't accept that, there's no point in your replying to<BR>
> >this message.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> I'm sorry, but it is frustrating to try and explain a point<BR>
> to someone who mostly just asserts an answer and when I try<BR>
> and work up from first principals to test what he says, keeps<BR>
> asserting what he sees as the final answer.  I most certainly<BR>
> don't ignore entropy (entropy is not the only fact and you<BR>
> can have processes where you use heat to drive reaction, otherwise<BR>
> assembly of molecules such as DNA would be impossible), I<BR>
> set up a situation to test if you are right<BR>
> (and to address such issues like whether radiation can't be<BR>
> focused and requires large radiator).  The response I get<BR>
> when set up a postulated situation is simply to assert that<BR>
> the postulated situation isn't what I said it is (which, by<BR>
> definition, it is).  Then I'm accused of "not listening"<BR>
> ever after I have gone over a post and pointed out where it<BR>
> wasn't addressing what I was saying....<BR>
<BR>
From the work of Hawking and Berkenstein (1975), we know that gravity can<BR>
cause funny thermodynamic effects, apparently even causing non-unitary<BR>
transformations on the state of a system. We all accept that grav technology<BR>
is very advanced in the Traveller universe, so why not just devise a<BR>
schedule of heat processing ability by tech level which creates the desired<BR>
design limitations for ships, and use the grav technology as a handwave to<BR>
explain it?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:33:52 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
I agree - one of the most memorable traveller games that I ever ran was the<BR>
stuff straight out of that book..<BR>
<BR>
heheheh..<BR>
<BR>
they even shot at a Reistojet (sp?) propelled asteriod which was armed with<BR>
20mm autocannons and one ship to ship missle rack.<BR>
<BR>
Needless to say the PC's 400 ton armed trader (Wolf class by the way)<BR>
trashed it.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of SD Mooney<BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 10:21 AM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
At 10:56 -0400 3/8/00, pengebos@nmsu.edu wrote:<BR>
>I hated the rebellion.  If you didn't have a big big big ship you couldn't<BR>
>do anything but stay far away.<BR>
<BR>
You certainly didn't want to get near fighting...<BR>
<BR>
>Now Hard Times made for interesting role-playing.<BR>
<BR>
Probably the best Traveller Supplement, ever.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2879<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (rly-zd02.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.226]) by air-zd01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:35:04 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:34:29 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id VAA42023;<BR>
	Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:34:16 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:34:10 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id VAA41981<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:34:10 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:34:10 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008040134.VAA41981@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2879<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2880</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/3/00 7:59:38 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Thursday, August 3 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2880<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
TML Roster<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
Re: Maps<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Maps<BR>
Re: TML Roster<BR>
Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Ship Sizes<BR>
Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
Re : Soliton pulse lasers<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2876<BR>
Re: Sickbay power requirements<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: TML Roster<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
GT Starship Modules (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re:  sensors)<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 20:40:27 -0500<BR>
From: "Pat Connaughton" <pconn@i1.net><BR>
Subject: TML Roster<BR>
<BR>
Please advise who is maintaining the TML Roster?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
Pat Connaughton <BR>
ICQ # 2535086<BR>
pconn@i1.net<BR>
"He who knows not how to dissemble knows not<BR>
how to reign"<BR>
Tiberius, Emperator and Princips of Rome<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:42:22 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
<BR>
- -----<BR>
I kinda assume the Imperium invoices planetary governments, and owns a chunk<BR>
of each meagcorporation. Let them sort out how they find the money. You<BR>
could also have the Imperium running starports for profit.<BR>
- ----<BR>
I thot that they were? (I have always thot that they were - a combo of taxes<BR>
everyman and starport fees should make a dton of cash...)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 18:45:06 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Maps<BR>
<BR>
on 8/3/00 5:53 PM, Michael.Scanlon at Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I was wondering to whom ever it may concern, ....<BR>
> ....how are those maps getting on?<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
If you are referring to the large format sector maps (a la Traveller deluxe)<BR>
I'm still working on them.  I'm hoping to have a proof of Spinward Marches<BR>
and Solomani rim in about 2 weeks. Darn work keeps interfering, plus my<BR>
players expect me to have a game ready.<BR>
<BR>
I'm still working with the 17x22 layout, but once that's done, a 24x36" will<BR>
be cake.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:45:31 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Not true -<BR>
<BR>
Commo takes power, AG takes power, Life Support takes power, the track<BR>
lighting in the captians cabin takes power...<BR>
<BR>
I think that the awneser is just that the GT system is is QDDS and VE2 (with<BR>
some specific tweaks) is the FFS.<BR>
<BR>
Hmm.. gotta try that for my next ship..<BR>
<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Anthony<BR>
Jackson<BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 5:06 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson writes:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Yeah, that makes it impossible to design a ship that saves power by<BR>
> shutting down "non-essential" systems during combat, or in other<BR>
> situations. *Very* unrealistic.<BR>
<BR>
Though in practice not all that important.  GT ships _have_ no significant<BR>
power requirements other than active sensors, weapons, and drives, and the<BR>
only thing you could turn off which would save you enough power to be<BR>
noticeable is the jump drive.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:51:49 +0100<BR>
From: "Michael.Scanlon" <Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Maps<BR>
<BR>
OK thanks : )<BR>
<BR>
Michael.Scanlon@Bmthonline.net<BR>
ICQ#27333894<BR>
<BR>
"Nothing that God in biomechanics wouldn't let you in Heaven for...."<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 2:45 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Maps<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> on 8/3/00 5:53 PM, Michael.Scanlon at Michael.Scanlon@bmthonline.net<BR>
wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > I was wondering to whom ever it may concern, ....<BR>
> > ....how are those maps getting on?<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> If you are referring to the large format sector maps (a la Traveller<BR>
deluxe)<BR>
> I'm still working on them.  I'm hoping to have a proof of Spinward Marches<BR>
> and Solomani rim in about 2 weeks. Darn work keeps interfering, plus my<BR>
> players expect me to have a game ready.<BR>
><BR>
> I'm still working with the 17x22 layout, but once that's done, a 24x36"<BR>
will<BR>
> be cake.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
> --<BR>
> "SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
> --<BR>
> Tod Glenn<BR>
> webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
> webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
> --<BR>
> http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
> http://www.solsec.org<BR>
> http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 20:50:04 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: TML Roster<BR>
<BR>
On 08/03/00 at 08:40 PM,  "Pat Connaughton" <pconn@i1.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Please advise who is maintaining the TML Roster?<BR>
<BR>
I am Pat. I've been swampped the last few days, but I'll get your name added as soon as I can.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:02:06 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
>OK-<BR>
><BR>
>The biggest RW ship anyone has mentioned is the Montana, which<BR>
>weighs in at around 8,000 dtons.  How big (in dtons) is the largest<BR>
>aircraft carrier anyone has ever built?<BR>
<BR>
>On possible suggestion.  How about we take that figure, up it by<BR>
>maybe a factor of 5 and say that is the largest normal ship anyone<BR>
>is ever likely to see in the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
This would seem to be technological conservatism; ship sizes have<BR>
already gone up a factor of 5 from TL6 to TL8...<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:03:43 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
>But it does sound like we could use a "resolves X meters at 100,000 km"<BR>
>entry on the sensor tables to answer questions like the above two.<BR>
<BR>
There were supposed to be entries like this in FFS2's sensor<BR>
tables. Dunno if they actually  made it. There might be a clever way to<BR>
make at table that would let you convert sensor sensitivity and range<BR>
into "resolvable size" to save people who don't want to do multiplication...<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:04:44 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Sizes<BR>
<BR>
>(1) The Alien Modules are the only sources in CT for the Imperium's<BR>
>principle military adversaries and allies.<BR>
<BR>
The K'Kree Alien Module certainly talks about giant ships (the only<BR>
kind the K'Kree use.)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:10:28 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
<BR>
>Actually, david pulver wrote the ship design section, and the ranges could<BR>
>easily be upped without rules changes, it would just make bridges a bit<BR>
>larger and considerably more expensive.  However, there are scaling problems<BR>
>with large sensors in GT.<BR>
<BR>
My memory is that they scale so size is linear with range; so a big warship<BR>
in GT can have an incredibly long-ranged sensor. Good thing no-one has ever<BR>
desinged a big warship for GT.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:12:10 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re : Soliton pulse lasers<BR>
<BR>
>Thanks for the info. It looks like we're stuck with gravitic soliton<BR>
>focussing then. No big drama.<BR>
Although dramatic license could allow for near-misses where<BR>
the grav focus pulse brushes against the hull, causing it to ring and<BR>
rattle a little...<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:01:22 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2876<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Russell Bornschlegel writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> > Unless one assumes that all the later design systems are confused, and <BR>
>> > that manuever drives, like jump drives, are in fact a volume-based <BR>
>> > phenomenon rather than a mass-based phenomenon ;)<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Never mind the design system; that would imply that _physicists_ are<BR>
>> confused. *grin*<BR>
><BR>
> Not at all.  It merely implies that manuever drives aren't reaction drives, <BR>
> which we already knew.  Perhaps they create an artificial gravity well <BR>
> surrounding the ship, and the ship just 'falls' in whatever direction its<BR>
> supposed to accelerate in.<BR>
<BR>
In which case you wouldn't *need* g-comp. Instead, you'd be in free<BR>
fall whenever the artifical gravity cut out.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:04:32 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Sickbay power requirements<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> In a message dated 8/2/00 7:54:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>
> owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> Sickbay Power Requirements<BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  In mail you write:<BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  > Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
>>  >> For sickbay, I say we inquire and find out how much power an individual<BR>
>>  >> "bed" in a modern ICU requires. And if it seems a bit low, double it. <BR>
>>  ><BR>
>>  > Your upper bound here is going to be a kilowatt :-<BR>
>>  > (looks around 'the office') :-<BR>
>>  > ventilator 200W<BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  Funny, that's what *my* "ventilator" (a CPAP unit) draws... :-)<BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  > dialysis 100W<BR>
>>  > cooling/warming blankets 200W<BR>
>>  > intra-aortic balloon pump 200W<BR>
>>  > monitoring equipment 100W<BR>
>>  > lighting, airconditioning, etc.<BR>
>>  ><BR>
>>  > Note that not everyone is on all the gadgets listed above. For long,<BR>
>>  > anyway...<BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  Yeah. Oddly enough, my off the top of my head guess last night would<BR>
>>  have been a kW...<BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  I say we adopt that figure. 1 kW per "bed", plus another for each<BR>
>>  "workstation". <BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  Because of the "special needs" (stuff like pure O2, special air<BR>
>>  filtering for surgery, etc), I'd say that each bed in sickbay costs<BR>
>>  *two* people worth of life support costs for the ship. With the "bonus"<BR>
>>  that in an emergency, two people *can* use that life support. That<BR>
>>  refers to ambulatory patients, not folks who need the "bed's" life<BR>
>>  support. <BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  And the lifesupport/power for the sick bay is at least *partially*<BR>
>>  independent of the rest of the ship.<BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  Sound good?<BR>
><BR>
> I'd double it for added equipment (x-ray or equivalent, neural scanner and <BR>
> probably a few other nifty items.).<BR>
<BR>
Just make them count as a "workstation".<BR>
<BR>
BTW, shielding an X-ray is easy if you have superdense. On the other<BR>
hand, you want that MRI unit as far from engineering, control, and any<BR>
other critical systems as you can get it! And even then, you need heavy<BR>
sheilding, or the passengers will complain about what it does to stuff<BR>
in nearby cabins. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 18:29:53 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I'm sorry, but it is frustrating to try and explain a point<BR>
> to someone who mostly just asserts an answer and when I try<BR>
> and work up from first principals to test what he says, keeps<BR>
> asserting what he sees as the final answer.<BR>
<BR>
Part of the problem is that you *aren't* working from first principles.<BR>
<BR>
*You* are asserting that you can somehow get X amount of energy emitted<BR>
in a NON-THERMAL spectrum, without accounting for how you *get* from<BR>
"raw heat" (thermal spectrum) to your narrowband emissions.<BR>
Specifically, not accounting for the *required* entropy increase in the<BR>
system doing the emission DUE TO the conversion.<BR>
<BR>
> I most certainly don't ignore entropy (entropy is not the only fact<BR>
> and you can have processes where you use heat to drive reaction,<BR>
> otherwise assembly of molecules such as DNA would be impossible),<BR>
<BR>
Sure, but that's *not* the same thing. And in fact, *viewing* it as at<BR>
all similar is part of the problem, more on that below.<BR>
<BR>
Heat can be used to do work. But you either have a heat sink, or you<BR>
wind up with more heat in the end.<BR>
<BR>
> I set up a situation to test if you are right (and to address such<BR>
> issues like whether radiation can't be focused and requires large<BR>
> radiator).  The response I get when set up a postulated situation is<BR>
> simply to assert that the postulated situation isn't what I said it<BR>
> is (which, by definition, it is).<BR>
<BR>
The problem is that you are setting up *results*, not situations.<BR>
<BR>
> Then I'm accused of "not listening" ever after I have gone over a<BR>
> post and pointed out where it wasn't addressing what I was saying....<BR>
<BR>
> Now you have no obligation to explain your position, but at<BR>
> this point I must say that I (as someone who has a decent<BR>
> background in chemical thermodynamics at least) see the<BR>
> position as merely one that has been asserted.<BR>
<BR>
And that background is the problem. You are using "state" to mean<BR>
something that doesn't apply in the sort of situation we are<BR>
discussing. <BR>
<BR>
The energy difference between a set of reactants and a set of reaction<BR>
products *is* indepenent of what reactions are involved in getting<BR>
between those two states. <BR>
<BR>
But the energy inputs and outputs associated with actually getting from<BR>
one to the other *do* depend on the reaction path. Otherwise catalysts<BR>
would be unnecessary.<BR>
<BR>
And that's where the stumbling block here is. We aren't dealing with<BR>
chemical reactions. Merely with different types of energy. And<BR>
converting heat to *any* other form of energy requires an energy<BR>
*input*. So does moving heat against a temperature gradient. <BR>
<BR>
You are making the same sort of error that a chemistry student makes<BR>
when he notes that a reaction is energetically favorable, but ignores<BR>
the fact that the activation energy(?) is so high that the reaction<BR>
proceeds at a useless rate without a catalyst.<BR>
<BR>
Basicly, in *chemical* thermodynamics, you deal with states. In<BR>
*physical* thermodynamics you deal with *systems*.<BR>
<BR>
Alas, I can't find the equations in the references I have handy, so I<BR>
can't "prove" that you are wrong. The best I can do is point out that<BR>
by converting your X watts of non-thermal energy into thermal energy, I<BR>
can do work. Which means that you had to have done work to get from<BR>
thermal energy to non-thermal energy. And that work would have wound up<BR>
as heat. <BR>
<BR>
Thus if it takes Ew of work to get rid of Eh of heat energy, your<BR>
system will have gotten hotter by ??? (Eh converted to heat). Or to put<BR>
it a different way, you'll have only gotten rid of Ew-Eh of heat energy<BR>
from the system.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, radiating Eh of heat from a radiator gets rid it at<BR>
*no* added energy cost. <BR>
<BR>
And if the radiator is at a higher temp than the ship, then you have to<BR>
use *non-thermal* energy to pump the heat into the radiator (use the<BR>
equation for the work you can extract from a temp difference, except<BR>
that the answer is the work you had to *put in* to get from the low<BR>
temp to the high temp, and that's assuming a *perfect* system).<BR>
<BR>
Again, in that case the work done *adds* to the heat energy that needs<BR>
to be disposed of.<BR>
<BR>
Just as in chemical thermodyynamic, it doesn't matter *how* you get<BR>
from state A to state B, in physical thermodynamics, the above are<BR>
absolutes. A system *can't* break those rules.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:20:12 -0500<BR>
From: "Pat Connaughton" <pconn@i1.net><BR>
Subject: Re: TML Roster<BR>
<BR>
Thanks - was curious to know if there was any other TML's in the area other<BR>
than our fine brother of the Medieval Starship fame?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: <eris@pcola.gulf.net><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 8:50 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: TML Roster<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> On 08/03/00 at 08:40 PM,  "Pat Connaughton" <pconn@i1.net> said:<BR>
><BR>
> >Please advise who is maintaining the TML Roster?<BR>
><BR>
> I am Pat. I've been swampped the last few days, but I'll get your name<BR>
added as soon as I can.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Eris<BR>
> --<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
> http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:31:28 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
I think the point, if I may be so bold as to answer for the<BR>
other poster, is that these things don't take enough power to<BR>
be worth tracking.  Unless you want to recalc your maneuver<BR>
drive (or weapon damage or whatever) every round based on which<BR>
of the big three you used just to save a small bit in the ship,<BR>
it isn't worth worrying about....<BR>
<BR>
At 6:45 PM -0700 8/3/00, Tsykoduk wrote:<BR>
>Not true -<BR>
><BR>
>Commo takes power, AG takes power, Life Support takes power, the track<BR>
>lighting in the captians cabin takes power...<BR>
><BR>
>I think that the awneser is just that the GT system is is QDDS and VE2 (with<BR>
>some specific tweaks) is the FFS.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>-----Original Message-----<BR>
>From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
>[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Anthony<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>Though in practice not all that important.  GT ships _have_ no significant<BR>
>power requirements other than active sensors, weapons, and drives, and the<BR>
>only thing you could turn off which would save you enough power to be<BR>
>noticeable is the jump drive.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:31:16 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
On 08/03/00 at 07:03 PM,  "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>>But it does sound like we could use a "resolves X meters at 100,000 km"<BR>
>>entry on the sensor tables to answer questions like the above two.<BR>
<BR>
>There were supposed to be entries like this in FFS2's sensor tables.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce there is a Resolves at 50,000 km column, but as I wrote<BR>
earlier, that's not all that helpful when you don't know how to<BR>
use that to answer, "What can I resolve at 32,000 km?" or "Can I see<BR>
that 4 sq meter hatch from here?"<BR>
<BR>
>Dunno if they actually  made it. There might be a clever way to make at<BR>
>table that would let you convert sensor sensitivity and range into<BR>
>"resolvable size" to save people who don't want to do multiplication...<BR>
<BR>
It would have helped if explanation of *how* to do the required<BR>
multiplication had been included.  This isn't my field, and I<BR>
figured there was some funcky log or exponential function involved<BR>
in it.<BR>
<BR>
The "...but everyone knows that" syndrome strikes again. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:36:11 -0400<BR>
From: Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
> From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
> Subject: FFS3: POLL<BR>
> <BR>
> Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment and consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
> <BR>
> Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible arguments<BR>
> against large ships could include<BR>
><BR>
	Discourage: No. I like the ability to build larger ships. If the<BR>
technical accuracy requirements make it harder to build larger ships,<BR>
OK, but don't adjust the design system just to make it harder to build<BR>
larger ships. <BR>
<BR>
>    *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
>    *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
>    *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
>    *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
>         defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
> Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
><BR>
	I think there should be a role for fighters, but not as capital ship<BR>
killers. Having them be dangerous to anything up to about 1000 dTons<BR>
would be good. <BR>
<BR>
>    *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
> How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  DSR-style sensors are<BR>
>    sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
>    system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a bit<BR>
>    less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either one<BR>
>    can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>    there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved pretty<BR>
>    easily too).<BR>
> What is the relative importance of<BR>
>    *Completeness.<BR>
>    *Technical accuracy.<BR>
>    *Quickness of use.<BR>
<BR>
	I would order this as:<BR>
1) Quickness 2) Completeness 3) Accuracy. <BR>
	<BR>
	In this way I agree with Dom. I want a quick, simple and straight<BR>
forward method of building starships, vehicles and everthing else.<BR>
Traveller is a background, and a space opera one. Knowing the designers<BR>
understand the concept that spaceships need radiators to eliminate the<BR>
waste heat is good. Requiring me as vehicle designer to understand it<BR>
may be passable. Making radiator maintenance the center of starship life<BR>
for the characters is bad. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
    Thomas Jones-Low<BR>
    tjoneslo@together.net<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:49:47 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: GT Starship Modules (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/03/00 at 02:34 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> I agree with this:<BR>
>><BR>
>> I wish that they had left PP's into GT Modular Ship Design. It is kinda odd<BR>
>> to design a ship that incorprates PP slices into a turret weapon.. I just<BR>
>> cannot grok that :)<BR>
<BR>
>Yeah, that makes it impossible to design a ship that saves power by<BR>
>shutting down "non-essential" systems during combat, or in other<BR>
>situations. *Very* unrealistic.<BR>
<BR>
So...<BR>
<BR>
Are there any GURPS gearheads who would be willing to reverse engineer the Modules in GT, backing the power slices out of them?  I don't know Ve2 well enough to do it myself.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:54:06 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re:  sensors)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
<<snip>><BR>
> <BR>
> My memory is that they scale so size is linear with range; so a big warship<BR>
> in GT can have an incredibly long-ranged sensor. Good thing no-one has ever<BR>
> desinged a big warship for GT.<BR>
<BR>
Sounds like a challenge.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:57:45 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>  > I'm sorry, but it is frustrating to try and explain a point<BR>
>  > to someone who mostly just asserts an answer and when I try<BR>
>  > and work up from first principals to test what he says, keeps<BR>
>  > asserting what he sees as the final answer.<BR>
><BR>
>Part of the problem is that you *aren't* working from first principles.<BR>
><BR>
>*You* are asserting that you can somehow get X amount of energy emitted<BR>
>in a NON-THERMAL spectrum, without accounting for how you *get* from<BR>
>"raw heat" (thermal spectrum) to your narrowband emissions.<BR>
>Specifically, not accounting for the *required* entropy increase in the<BR>
>system doing the emission DUE TO the conversion.<BR>
<BR>
I am _not_ talking about narrow band emissions.   I have postulated<BR>
the same spectral distribution as thermal emmission (don't try and<BR>
guess that I'm going to narrow band emission, that is only part of <BR>
what I'm on about.  Read what I'm saying and not what you think I'm <BR>
going<BR>
to say).  At the<BR>
moment all I am pointing out is that when you diagram a heat engine,<BR>
the technology used to run it is irrelevant.  What thermodynamics<BR>
limits is the flow of heat.  But we can't seem to get even that<BR>
little point and is getting a lot more difficult than it needs<BR>
to be....<BR>
<BR>
If you want to say starting with the same heat source and<BR>
going to the same photons (number and frequency distribution)<BR>
isn't going to the same state, then you will have explain what<BR>
is different.<BR>
<BR>
This is relevant because even doing the same emmision without<BR>
needing radiator fins and stuff is useful....<BR>
<BR>
>[stiff snipped]<BR>
>The energy difference between a set of reactants and a set of reaction<BR>
>products *is* indepenent of what reactions are involved in getting<BR>
>between those two states.<BR>
><BR>
>But the energy inputs and outputs associated with actually getting from<BR>
>one to the other *do* depend on the reaction path. Otherwise catalysts<BR>
>would be unnecessary.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
This is something I _know_.  Catalysts _don't_ affect the <BR>
thermodynamics of the reaction (you can get into the thermodynamics <BR>
of the transition states, but that only affects that mechanics and <BR>
has little to say about the overall reactions).  The affect the rate <BR>
of reaction, not whether the<BR>
reaction is possible.  No catalyst is going to make an unfavorable<BR>
reaction possible or a favorable reaction impoossible.  All they<BR>
do is help make sure that "possible" reaction do, in fact, go.<BR>
<BR>
>And that's where the stumbling block here is. We aren't dealing with<BR>
>chemical reactions. Merely with different types of energy. And<BR>
>converting heat to *any* other form of energy requires an energy<BR>
>*input*. So does moving heat against a temperature gradient.<BR>
><BR>
>You are making the same sort of error that a chemistry student makes<BR>
>when he notes that a reaction is energetically favorable, but ignores<BR>
>the fact that the activation energy(?) is so high that the reaction<BR>
>proceeds at a useless rate without a catalyst.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, the typical chemistry student error is to mistake<BR>
kinetics for thermodynamics.  Even if the rate is zero, the<BR>
reaction can be thermodynamically possible.  That is non-trivial<BR>
because it is only when a reaction is thermodynamically<BR>
possible that a catalyst can be used.  This is where the<BR>
distinction between kinetic control of products and thermodynamic<BR>
control of products comes from.<BR>
<BR>
The rest of this is snipped because it get ahead of itself....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2880<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (rly-zd05.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.229]) by air-zd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:59:38 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Thu, 03 Aug 2000 22:58:50 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA45492;<BR>
	Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:58:40 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:58:36 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA45458<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:58:35 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:58:35 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008040258.WAA45458@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2880<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2881</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/3/00 11:32:50 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, August 4 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2881<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Build from the ground up.<BR>
Next San Jose Meet<BR>
Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
RE: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re:  sensors)<BR>
Imperial Law?<BR>
Imperial (Course) Credits<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: dton<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
RE: Imperial Law?<BR>
RE: Imperial (Course) Credits<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 23:18:54 -0400<BR>
From: Mark Urbin <urbin@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: Build from the ground up.<BR>
<BR>
A good quick and dirty system should be based off detailed systems, not the <BR>
other way around.<BR>
<BR>
QSDS was built this way.  Very easy to use.  For an example, check out<BR>
<BR>
http://spacevermin.homepage.com/TRAV/GH/flyingsaucer.html<BR>
<BR>
>         I would order this as:<BR>
>1) Quickness 2) Completeness 3) Accuracy.<BR>
><BR>
>         In this way I agree with Dom. I want a quick, simple and straight<BR>
>forward method of building starships, vehicles and everthing else.<BR>
<BR>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
urbin@bigfoot.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.<BR>
It was a typical net.exercise -- a screaming mob pounding on a greasy spot<BR>
on the pavement, where used to lie the carcass of a dead horse.<BR>
                  http://www.bigfoot.com/~urbin/<BR>
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 20:54:48 -0700<BR>
From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com><BR>
Subject: Next San Jose Meet<BR>
<BR>
The next San Jose Traveller Meet will be 26th August.<BR>
<BR>
Events:<BR>
- -miniature painting (bring your paints, brushes, sprays and miniatures)<BR>
- -swap meet<BR>
- -Striker equipment design and unit organization<BR>
- -The Barbeque<BR>
- -Snapshot<BR>
- -surprise guest of honor<BR>
<BR>
Email travellerne@3rd-imperium.com for directions and details.<BR>
<BR>
Kristian<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:09:04 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
I don't think anybody is going to convince anybody that any position is <BR>
"right" and this will be my final comment. The argument seems to be "An <BR>
Impeium where ships are restricted in size to somewhere between 5,000 <BR>
tons and 50,000 tons would be more fun to roleplay in, so lets make the <BR>
design rules enforce this". If you want a small ship Imperium, more power <BR>
to you. Write it up and send it to JTAS (if Chris Trash writes it to his usual <BR>
standards, I'll probably rate it a 4 or 5). However, please do not enforce this <BR>
choice on those of us who do choose the big ship Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:16:47 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
I agree - the big three are MD, Weapons and Electronics<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
However, sometimes when I used to play BL that extra erg of power from<BR>
shutting down the third aux short ranged radio comm came in handy ;)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of David P.<BR>
Summers<BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 7:31 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I think the point, if I may be so bold as to answer for the<BR>
other poster, is that these things don't take enough power to<BR>
be worth tracking.  Unless you want to recalc your maneuver<BR>
drive (or weapon damage or whatever) every round based on which<BR>
of the big three you used just to save a small bit in the ship,<BR>
it isn't worth worrying about....<BR>
<BR>
At 6:45 PM -0700 8/3/00, Tsykoduk wrote:<BR>
>Not true -<BR>
><BR>
>Commo takes power, AG takes power, Life Support takes power, the track<BR>
>lighting in the captians cabin takes power...<BR>
><BR>
>I think that the awneser is just that the GT system is is QDDS and VE2<BR>
(with<BR>
>some specific tweaks) is the FFS.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>-----Original Message-----<BR>
>From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
>[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Anthony<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>Though in practice not all that important.  GT ships _have_ no significant<BR>
>power requirements other than active sensors, weapons, and drives, and the<BR>
>only thing you could turn off which would save you enough power to be<BR>
>noticeable is the jump drive.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in<BR>
California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:17:55 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re:  sensors)<BR>
<BR>
My thought Exactly -<BR>
<BR>
and I guess the 90kt Troll Class GTL-9 battle cruser I did does not count<BR>
(hey, ya might run into on in the varger extents!) :)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of John Groth<BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 7:54 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal<BR>
(Re: sensors)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
><BR>
<<snip>><BR>
><BR>
> My memory is that they scale so size is linear with range; so a big<BR>
warship<BR>
> in GT can have an incredibly long-ranged sensor. Good thing no-one has<BR>
ever<BR>
> desinged a big warship for GT.<BR>
<BR>
Sounds like a challenge.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:21:08 -0700<BR>
From: Justice Hypercleats <eris@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
What is the meaning of the term "Imperial Client State?" Is this any world<BR>
that is aligned with the Imperium? Is this only a subset of "Imperial"<BR>
worlds? In what ways are Client States treated differently than other<BR>
Imperial worlds?<BR>
<BR>
Is a world that is owned and governed by a Megacorporation a "client state?"<BR>
Can a world populated with Solomani and other humans (but has less than 1%<BR>
Vilani population) be an "Imperial World?" Does the ethnicity of the<BR>
majority of the population have any bearing on the Imperium's policy toward<BR>
that world?<BR>
<BR>
Does the Imperium colonize newly discovered, uninhabited worlds directly? Do<BR>
they 'contract it out' to planetary governments and Megacorps, or does it<BR>
happen "in the Emperor's Name?" (If the latter, what government type is the<BR>
world? Feudal, like the Imperium? What government types are given for<BR>
Imperial fiefs and noble fiefs? Is that all Feudal?)<BR>
<BR>
I notice that many worlds within Imperial Borders have government types and<BR>
law levels (and cultures) that are radically different than, say, Core --<BR>
from the 'standard' Imperial (Vilani) norm. Yet they are on the X-boat<BR>
route, they often have Imperial Naval bases and Scout bases. I take that to<BR>
mean that pretty much all are welcome, regardless of government. Or are<BR>
there certain boundaries they must stay within in order to be rewarded with<BR>
Imperial status, diplomacy, trade, protection? Does the Imperium have a<BR>
'Bill of Rights' of any kind? Or an expectation of basic civil rights? Are<BR>
planets that are ruled by extremist dictators, theocrats, oligarchies who<BR>
enslave their population, hold them at a very low tech-level (while<BR>
equipping their police/military with their highest tech they have), prevent<BR>
them from ever leaving the planet, prevent free speech, prevent any info<BR>
from outside their world to be heard by their 'subjects,' segregate and<BR>
commit acts of genocide, fund and foment revolutionary movements and<BR>
terrorism in other nearby Imperial worlds, force their population (including<BR>
children), against their will, to work at subsistence level to make and sell<BR>
products for trade, the profits from which will only go to the government's<BR>
leaders -- does the Imperium do business with such worlds? Do they allow<BR>
speculative traders who are Imperial Citizens to do business with such<BR>
planets?  How about Megacorps?<BR>
<BR>
Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of an<BR>
Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? Would it matter if the<BR>
slaves were Vilani or not? Would it matter if the subjugation and control of<BR>
the slaves were facilitated by the use of psioncs?<BR>
<BR>
Does the Imperium allow people from an oppressive government to request<BR>
asylum? Is there any method of redress if Megacorps commit acts of piracy,<BR>
slavery, theft, carpet nuking a rival's world, or a plantet that will not<BR>
trade with them, etc..?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 23:33:20 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Imperial (Course) Credits<BR>
<BR>
I just wanted to let the TML know that my research paper on "The Problem<BR>
of Cultural Unity in _Traveller's_ Third Imperium Setting" helped me<BR>
earn an "A" in my Sociology 200 course.  Special thanks go to my<BR>
sources:<BR>
<BR>
Thad Coons<BR>
MJ Dougherty<BR>
Neil Frier<BR>
Marc Miller<BR>
David Nilsen<BR>
Loren Wiseman<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 21:37:10 -0700<BR>
From: "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
I too have wondered about such things. At the end of Survival Margin, when<BR>
the TNS is ordered to shut down, they were appealing the order on the basis<BR>
of media freedom, or something similiar.<BR>
<BR>
Jeffrey Yin<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Justice Hypercleats" <eris@sierratel.com><BR>
To: "~TML" <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 9:21 PM<BR>
Subject: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> What is the meaning of the term "Imperial Client State?" Is this any world<BR>
> that is aligned with the Imperium? Is this only a subset of "Imperial"<BR>
> worlds? In what ways are Client States treated differently than other<BR>
> Imperial worlds?<BR>
><BR>
> Is a world that is owned and governed by a Megacorporation a "client<BR>
state?"<BR>
> Can a world populated with Solomani and other humans (but has less than 1%<BR>
> Vilani population) be an "Imperial World?" Does the ethnicity of the<BR>
> majority of the population have any bearing on the Imperium's policy<BR>
toward<BR>
> that world?<BR>
><BR>
> Does the Imperium colonize newly discovered, uninhabited worlds directly?<BR>
Do<BR>
> they 'contract it out' to planetary governments and Megacorps, or does it<BR>
> happen "in the Emperor's Name?" (If the latter, what government type is<BR>
the<BR>
> world? Feudal, like the Imperium? What government types are given for<BR>
> Imperial fiefs and noble fiefs? Is that all Feudal?)<BR>
><BR>
> I notice that many worlds within Imperial Borders have government types<BR>
and<BR>
> law levels (and cultures) that are radically different than, say, Core --<BR>
> from the 'standard' Imperial (Vilani) norm. Yet they are on the X-boat<BR>
> route, they often have Imperial Naval bases and Scout bases. I take that<BR>
to<BR>
> mean that pretty much all are welcome, regardless of government. Or are<BR>
> there certain boundaries they must stay within in order to be rewarded<BR>
with<BR>
> Imperial status, diplomacy, trade, protection? Does the Imperium have a<BR>
> 'Bill of Rights' of any kind? Or an expectation of basic civil rights? Are<BR>
> planets that are ruled by extremist dictators, theocrats, oligarchies who<BR>
> enslave their population, hold them at a very low tech-level (while<BR>
> equipping their police/military with their highest tech they have),<BR>
prevent<BR>
> them from ever leaving the planet, prevent free speech, prevent any info<BR>
> from outside their world to be heard by their 'subjects,' segregate and<BR>
> commit acts of genocide, fund and foment revolutionary movements and<BR>
> terrorism in other nearby Imperial worlds, force their population<BR>
(including<BR>
> children), against their will, to work at subsistence level to make and<BR>
sell<BR>
> products for trade, the profits from which will only go to the<BR>
government's<BR>
> leaders -- does the Imperium do business with such worlds? Do they allow<BR>
> speculative traders who are Imperial Citizens to do business with such<BR>
> planets?  How about Megacorps?<BR>
><BR>
> Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of an<BR>
> Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? Would it matter if<BR>
the<BR>
> slaves were Vilani or not? Would it matter if the subjugation and control<BR>
of<BR>
> the slaves were facilitated by the use of psioncs?<BR>
><BR>
> Does the Imperium allow people from an oppressive government to request<BR>
> asylum? Is there any method of redress if Megacorps commit acts of piracy,<BR>
> slavery, theft, carpet nuking a rival's world, or a plantet that will not<BR>
> trade with them, etc..?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 00:08:52 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
Justice Hypercleats wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> What is the meaning of the term "Imperial Client State?" Is this any world<BR>
> that is aligned with the Imperium? Is this only a subset of "Imperial"<BR>
> worlds? In what ways are Client States treated differently than other<BR>
> Imperial worlds?<BR>
<BR>
As I interpret it, "Imperial client states" are roughly equivalent to<BR>
the various Warsaw Pact nations or the "banana republics":  They are<BR>
nominally independent nations, yet are beholden to their patron nation.<BR>
> <BR>
> Is a world that is owned and governed by a Megacorporation a "client state?"<BR>
<BR>
Megacorp-controlled worlds can range from worlds belonging to a<BR>
non-Imperial polity, through client states, to Imperial worlds.<BR>
<BR>
> Can a world populated with Solomani and other humans (but has less than 1%<BR>
> Vilani population) be an "Imperial World?" Does the ethnicity of the<BR>
> majority of the population have any bearing on the Imperium's policy toward<BR>
> that world?<BR>
<BR>
Ethnicity has no bearing on a world's status in the Third Imperium<BR>
("3I").<BR>
> <BR>
> Does the Imperium colonize newly discovered, uninhabited worlds directly? Do<BR>
> they 'contract it out' to planetary governments and Megacorps, or does it<BR>
> happen "in the Emperor's Name?" (If the latter, what government type is the<BR>
> world? Feudal, like the Imperium? What government types are given for<BR>
> Imperial fiefs and noble fiefs? Is that all Feudal?)<BR>
<BR>
When new worlds are colonized, the most likely answer is "all of the<BR>
above."<BR>
> <BR>
> I notice that many worlds within Imperial Borders have government types and<BR>
> law levels (and cultures) that are radically different than, say, Core --<BR>
> from the 'standard' Imperial (Vilani) norm. Yet they are on the X-boat<BR>
> route, they often have Imperial Naval bases and Scout bases. I take that to<BR>
> mean that pretty much all are welcome, regardless of government. Or are<BR>
> there certain boundaries they must stay within in order to be rewarded with<BR>
> Imperial status, diplomacy, trade, protection? Does the Imperium have a<BR>
> 'Bill of Rights' of any kind? Or an expectation of basic civil rights? Are<BR>
> planets that are ruled by extremist dictators, theocrats, oligarchies who<BR>
> enslave their population, hold them at a very low tech-level (while<BR>
> equipping their police/military with their highest tech they have), prevent<BR>
> them from ever leaving the planet, prevent free speech, prevent any info<BR>
> from outside their world to be heard by their 'subjects,' segregate and<BR>
> commit acts of genocide, fund and foment revolutionary movements and<BR>
> terrorism in other nearby Imperial worlds, force their population (including<BR>
> children), against their will, to work at subsistence level to make and sell<BR>
> products for trade, the profits from which will only go to the government's<BR>
> leaders -- does the Imperium do business with such worlds? Do they allow<BR>
> speculative traders who are Imperial Citizens to do business with such<BR>
> planets?  How about Megacorps?<BR>
<BR>
Overall, since the 3I primarily concerns itself with "the space between<BR>
worlds", member worlds are free to conduct their internal affairs as<BR>
they see fit.  However, any economic system that closely resembles<BR>
chattel slavery will draw Imperial attention, often in the form of<BR>
Imperial Navy, Marine, and/or Army assets.  I would expect that an<BR>
attempt to export unrest to Imperial worlds would also invite "Imperial<BR>
entanglements."<BR>
> <BR>
> Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of an<BR>
> Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? Would it matter if the<BR>
> slaves were Vilani or not? Would it matter if the subjugation and control of<BR>
> the slaves were facilitated by the use of psioncs?<BR>
<BR>
Again, ethnicity is not an issue in the 3I.  Chattel slavery, OTOH, is<BR>
expressly forbidden in the 3I.  Further, psionically-enforced servitude<BR>
would fall under the 3I's opposition to psionics, as demonstrated by the<BR>
Psionic Suppressions (beginning ca. IE 800).<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Does the Imperium allow people from an oppressive government to request<BR>
> asylum? Is there any method of redress if Megacorps commit acts of piracy,<BR>
> slavery, theft, carpet nuking a rival's world, or a plantet that will not<BR>
> trade with them, etc..?<BR>
<BR>
The use of weapons of mass destruction against planetary targets is one<BR>
sure way to invite Imperial intervention against the user.  Similarly,<BR>
the 3I will act to prevent chattel slavery.  Theft and piracy, OTOH, are<BR>
less likely to trigger Imperial intervention.  Unless, of course, the<BR>
victims of said theft and/or piracy have political clout within the<BR>
3I....<BR>
<BR>
Meanwhile, Imperial nobles are appointed to represent member worlds,<BR>
with the assumption that said nobles will act as spokesbeings for the<BR>
citizens of their worlds.  "Noblesse oblige."  Note that, according to<BR>
at least one analyst, the Rebellion happened because, by IE 1100,<BR>
"noblesse n'oblige plus."<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:50:54 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Absolutely huge warships are a great tool for the GM to use in<BR>
> designing a scenario, because the players just *know* they stand no<BR>
> chance whatsoever of fighting them.  Their only chance is to escape,<BR>
> and fast.  You can then build the tension with remarks like "They'll<BR>
> be in firing range for their spinal mount in 17 minutes.  Do you want<BR>
> to make another Engineering roll to see if you can fix that problem<BR>
> with the jump drive? And by the way, make that 16 minutes..."<BR>
<BR>
Or maybe they are in a system where the main world is inside the<BR>
*star's* jump limit. And it can intercept them before they get to where<BR>
they can jump. But they can make it to another world in system before<BR>
they can intercepted. <BR>
<BR>
Of course the ref wouldn't have anything special set up on that<BR>
world... <eg><BR>
<BR>
> As for deckplans, I always thought they cheated with the AHL by making<BR>
> the deckplans modular ("for decks 12-20 use Deck Plan B" etc), but<BR>
> hey, it works...<BR>
<BR>
Actually, that's *very* realistic. Ship designers don't want to work<BR>
any harder than they have to either. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 01:25:54 EDT<BR>
From: GypsyComet@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: dton<BR>
<BR>
>Les Howie wrote:<BR>
>> Did MT diffenetiate Mass and Volumne for ships? If so,<BR>
>> did it use the "dton" terminology?  If it did not, I<BR>
>> think it first surfaced in TNE.<BR>
><BR>
>MT used displacement tons to identify vehicle hull sizes but  for<BR>
>all componants used kiloliters (for volume)  and  kilograms  (for<BR>
>mass) in the design sequence.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
 Considering one of the old GEnie folks eventually turned into one of the <BR>
authors (pre-mangle) of FF&S2, the emergence of "dton" in T4 is hardly <BR>
surprising...<BR>
<BR>
GC<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 22:43:07 -0700<BR>
From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>I am _not_ talking about narrow band emissions.   I have postulated<BR>
>the same spectral distribution as thermal emmission<BR>
<BR>
However, emitting things in the same proportions as a blackbody<BR>
(ie the same ratio of 1 micron photons to 10 micron photons as a 100 K<BR>
blackbody) but not in the same amounts - emitting more photons per<BR>
m2 than the blackbody - isn't thermal emission; there's no simple way<BR>
to do it, and all the non-simple ways that can be imagined require work.<BR>
It's not a particularly natural state.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 23:48:56 -0600 (MDT)<BR>
From: pengebos@nmsu.edu<BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Andrew Moffatt-Vallance wrote:<BR>
> I don't think anybody is going to convince anybody that any position is <BR>
> "right" and this will be my final comment. The argument seems to be "An <BR>
> Impeium where ships are restricted in size to somewhere between 5,000 <BR>
> tons and 50,000 tons would be more fun to roleplay in, so lets make the <BR>
> design rules enforce this". If you want a small ship Imperium, more power <BR>
> to you. Write it up and send it to JTAS (if Chris Trash writes it to his usual <BR>
> standards, I'll probably rate it a 4 or 5). However, please do not enforce this <BR>
> choice on those of us who do choose the big ship Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
Shouldn't the big ship/bad for roleplaying people be writing the<BR>
alternative rules and sending them in?  Instead of imposing their ideas<BR>
on those of us that remeber that Traveller is a ROLE-PLAYING game?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Peter Engebos				<pengebos@nmsu.edu><BR>
T'Sarith, Lord deGaalth			<degaalth@prodigy.net><BR>
		http://www.geocities.com/degaalth/<BR>
<BR>
	"Traveller is a Role-Playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a Role-Playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a Role-Playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a Role-Playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a Role-Playing game"<BR>
	"Traveller is a Role-Playing game"<BR>
		- Lone voice crying in the wilderness<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:09:49 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
>Is a world that is owned and governed by a Megacorporation a "client<BR>
state?"<BR>
>Can a world populated with Solomani and other humans (but has less than 1%<BR>
>Vilani population) be an "Imperial World?" Does the ethnicity of the<BR>
>majority of the population have any bearing on the Imperium's policy toward<BR>
>that world?<BR>
><BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
Keep in mind that the Third Imperium sees its roots both in the First<BR>
(Vilani) Imperium and the Second (Solomani) Imperium. It is neither a<BR>
restored Ziru Sirka nor a restored Rule of Man. In theory it is neither, but<BR>
also both. The actual number of Vilani will vary from place to place, as<BR>
will their cultural and biological purity, as will the influence of those<BR>
with some sort of Vilani-based agenda.<BR>
<BR>
In the earliest Traveller materials, racial distinctions within the Imperium<BR>
were downplayed considerably. This had both advantages and disadvantages, as<BR>
far as the setting itself goes. One of the big advantages was that it<BR>
pointed to the absurdity of the Solomani Confederation's claims that they,<BR>
and they alone, were fit to rule the stars. After all, the Imperium was a<BR>
melting pot in which Solomani, Vilani and any number of minor human races<BR>
lived, worked and thrived. One disadvantage was that, to a small extent, it<BR>
lessened some of the potential of role-playing a truly "alien" human. Of<BR>
course, I have my suspicions that this was initially seen as an advantage,<BR>
and I guess, after a fashion, it still can be seen as such.<BR>
<BR>
With the release of MegaTraveller, and especially with the heavy influence<BR>
of DGP, the Imperium became much more Vilani-centric. Personally, I think<BR>
that this was something of a mistake. When I read the bit I quoted above, I<BR>
parsed it as assuming that there was some distinct advantage to being<BR>
Vilani, some special intrinsic characteristic which offered special<BR>
opportunities within the Imperium. I don't believe that this is the case.<BR>
Indeed, if you disregard the source material released after the demise of<BR>
Classic Traveller, the importance of the Vilani language, customs and so on<BR>
drops considerably. If you happen to have the second CT Imperial<BR>
encyclopedia volume as well as the MegaTraveller encyclopedia volume, there<BR>
is a very slight change in wording which has huge implications.<BR>
<BR>
For the most part, I suspect that the further and further you get from<BR>
Vland, the similarities between individual Vilani groups will begin to<BR>
lessen. The descendants of the Vilani in Daibei, might not be all that much<BR>
like the descendants of Vilani in Core. In turn, neither of them might be<BR>
anything like those on Vland itself. Since the period of the First Imperium<BR>
there have been a number of major upheavals which would have changed the<BR>
face of the cultures of individual worlds.<BR>
<BR>
Traditionally, in the Third Imperium setting, Vilani has been a cultural<BR>
label.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:13:54 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Imperial (Course) Credits<BR>
<BR>
>I just wanted to let the TML know that my research paper on "The Problem<BR>
>of Cultural Unity in _Traveller's_ Third Imperium Setting" helped me<BR>
>earn an "A" in my Sociology 200 course.  Special thanks go to my<BR>
>sources:<BR>
<BR>
Hi John. Would you mind if others took a look at the fruits of your labor?<BR>
The title alone has me interested.<BR>
<BR>
Oh yeah, before I forget, congratulations on your A.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:27:12 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
On 08/03/00 at 09:21 PM,  Justice Hypercleats <eris@sierratel.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>What is the meaning of the term "Imperial Client State?" Is this any<BR>
>world that is aligned with the Imperium? Is this only a subset of<BR>
>"Imperial" worlds? In what ways are Client States treated differently<BR>
>than other Imperial worlds?<BR>
<BR>
A client state is a world that is not part of the Imperium (or other<BR>
major polity), but is aligned with and dependent on the major<BR>
polity.  In earth terms, think of post WWII Eastern Europe and the<BR>
Soviet Union.  Offically, states like Poland were independent,<BR>
self-governing, and could do whatever they wanted, but they in<BR>
reality they were economically, militarily, and politically depended<BR>
upon their large neighbor.<BR>
<BR>
>Is a world that is owned and governed by a Megacorporation a "client<BR>
>state?"<BR>
<BR>
Could be, but probably not owned by an Imperial charterd corporation.<BR>
<BR>
>Can a world populated with Solomani and other humans (but has<BR>
>less than 1% Vilani population) be an "Imperial World?" Does the<BR>
>ethnicity of the majority of the population have any bearing on the<BR>
>Imperium's policy toward that world?<BR>
<BR>
From here on down, this is my opinion about the Imperium.  Other<BR>
people may have other ideas, so YMMV.<BR>
<BR>
Vilani doesn't have anything to do with Imperialness.  There are<BR>
probably *many* worlds in the Imperium that have less than 1% Vilani<BR>
population.  There *might* be some racial preferences and<BR>
discriminations in the Imperium, but they if there are we don't hear<BR>
much about them.<BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium colonize newly discovered, uninhabited worlds<BR>
>directly? <BR>
<BR>
Doubtful.  The Imperium is a weak government that only controls "the<BR>
space between the stars."  Think of the Imperium as the UN with a<BR>
navy.  It doesn't run its member states, they govern themselves.  It<BR>
concentrates on providing protection from external threats,<BR>
encouraging and protecting trade among its member states, and<BR>
rationalizing conflicts among its members.  This rationalization is<BR>
aimed at preventing major internal conflicts among member states and<BR>
could include armed intervention, but usually just involves<BR>
diplomatic and economic pressure.  For the most part, the Imperium<BR>
leaves the member states alone if they pay their taxes, don't<BR>
disrupt trade, or cause *too* much trouble in their area.<BR>
<BR>
Colonizing is mostly done by member worlds and corporations.  The<BR>
Imperium probably gets involved if there are conflicts over who gets<BR>
to colonize what, but there is a lot of land to go around so that<BR>
isn't such a big deal.<BR>
<BR>
>Do they 'contract it out' to planetary governments and Megacorps, or does<BR>
>it happen "in the Emperor's Name?" (If the latter, what government type<BR>
>is the world? Feudal, like the Imperium? What government types are given<BR>
>for Imperial fiefs and noble fiefs? Is that all Feudal?)<BR>
<BR>
Imperial fiefs aren't exactly *ownership* of a planet.  The noble is<BR>
sort of the local Imperial overseer, tax collector, mediator, and<BR>
symbol.  That's not to say that a noble might not own a continent or<BR>
a big hunk of one, but that's not the norm.  For the most part<BR>
planets are owned by the people that live there and they have all<BR>
kinds of governments.  If it's a new colony, the settlers will set<BR>
up their government, or have it imposed on them by their employers<BR>
or home planet, but seldom is the Imperium directly involved.<BR>
<BR>
>I notice that many worlds within Imperial Borders have government types<BR>
>and law levels (and cultures) that are radically different than, say,<BR>
>Core --<BR>
>from the 'standard' Imperial (Vilani) norm. Yet they are on the X-boat<BR>
>route, they often have Imperial Naval bases and Scout bases. I take that<BR>
>to mean that pretty much all are welcome, regardless of government.<BR>
<BR>
Look at what I wrote above.  This isn't a Vilani Imperium, that was<BR>
the First Imperium and it died thousands of years ago.  Core is the<BR>
home of a different human race from the Vilani and the Emperors have<BR>
been mostly Solomani for centuries.  Mixed races are the norm and<BR>
racial distinctions aren't a big deal.  The central government is a<BR>
weak one, almost a confederacy, that doesn't impose itself on it's<BR>
members.<BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium have a 'Bill of Rights' of any kind?  Or an<BR>
>expectation of basic civil rights?<BR>
<BR>
Nope, not the Imperium.  There are some things you can't do..like<BR>
deal in slavery, but for the most part civil rights on member worlds<BR>
are up to the member states.<BR>
<BR>
>Are planets that are ruled by extremist dictators,<BR>
>theocrats, oligarchies who enslave their population, hold them at a very<BR>
>low tech-level (while equipping their police/military with their highest<BR>
>tech they have), prevent them from ever leaving the planet, prevent free<BR>
>speech, prevent any info from outside their world to be heard by their<BR>
>'subjects,' segregate and commit acts of genocide, fund and foment<BR>
>revolutionary movements and terrorism in other nearby Imperial worlds,<BR>
>force their population (including children), against their will, to work<BR>
>at subsistence level to make and sell products for trade, the profits<BR>
>from which will only go to the government's leaders -- does the Imperium<BR>
>do business with such worlds? <BR>
<BR>
Awfully long sentence there!  Let's see, yes dictators and such do<BR>
rule some worlds, some are downright awful to their own people, and<BR>
the Imperium leaves them alone.  If they start causing trouble with<BR>
other member states, especially disrupting trade and the collection<BR>
of taxes then the Imperium has a Marine Corps and a Navy that knows<BR>
how to handle such situations.  But, if they stay on their own world<BR>
the Imperium does business with them.  Sort of like the UN here on<BR>
Earth. <g><BR>
<BR>
>Do they allow speculative traders who are<BR>
>Imperial Citizens to do business with such planets?  How about Megacorps?<BR>
<BR>
Yes and Yes.<BR>
<BR>
>Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of<BR>
>an Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? Would it matter<BR>
>if the slaves were Vilani or not? Would it matter if the subjugation and<BR>
>control of the slaves were facilitated by the use of psioncs?<BR>
<BR>
Slavery is one of the few things the Imperium doesn't allow, psioncs<BR>
is another.  Expect a visit from a fleet if you get involved in<BR>
either.  OTOH, if some non-Imperium state has slaves and the goods<BR>
came from there then that wouldn't be the Imperium's business.<BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium allow people from an oppressive government to request<BR>
>asylum? <BR>
<BR>
Some of the member worlds do, I'm sure.  The Imperium isn't really<BR>
set up for such things.  Imagine some Ugandan, to pick a random<BR>
example, applying to the UN for asylum? <BR>
<BR>
>Is there any method of redress if Megacorps commit acts of<BR>
>piracy, slavery, theft, carpet nuking a rival's world, or a plantet that<BR>
>will not trade with them, etc..?<BR>
<BR>
Sure.  You've got several of the things that the Imperium doesn't<BR>
allow in that sentence.  Piracy and theft are disruptive of trade,<BR>
slavery is one of the few illegals, and there are *rules* for<BR>
corporate trade wars. If somebody is doing that sort of thing the<BR>
redress is a regiment of Imperial Marines and a squadron of warships.  <BR>
<BR>
BTW, there are rules for wars between member states too.  The<BR>
members aren't expected to not fight, but they have to fight<BR>
according to the rules and if they don't the Imperial<BR>
representatives on the scene, the nobles, break out the Impie stick.<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium is not some monolithic "Evil Empire", it's the UN with<BR>
some teeth, and an Emperor with personal representatives (nobles) to<BR>
hold it together.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2881<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (rly-yg03.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.3]) by air-yg05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 02:32:50 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 02:32:22 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id CAA53418;<BR>
	Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:32:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:32:08 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id CAA53366<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:32:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:32:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008040632.CAA53366@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2881<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2882</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/4/00 4:44:28 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, August 4 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2882<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
RE: Imperial Law?<BR>
Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
Re: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
RE: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship sizes<BR>
Re: GT Starship Modules<BR>
Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
Re: Ship sizes<BR>
Re: "Start Wrecked" and FFSx<BR>
Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
Re: Jump emitted ripples<BR>
RE: Ship sizes<BR>
FW: Ship sizes<BR>
RE: Reverse Engineering (was Re: GT Starship Modules )<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 01:30:57 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
On 08/03/00 at 09:37 PM,  "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
>I too have wondered about such things. At the end of Survival Margin,<BR>
>when the TNS is ordered to shut down, they were appealing the order on<BR>
>the basis of media freedom, or something similiar.<BR>
<BR>
And a fat lot of good that did them! <g><BR>
<BR>
They weren't appealing based on some Bill of Rights, they were<BR>
appealing on the grounds of tradition and precedence.  The Imperium<BR>
is a government of men, not laws.  Heck, do you know what the *only*<BR>
actual power of the Moot (Imperial assembly) is?  It's to disolve<BR>
the Imperium..that's it.  The only right it has is to disolve<BR>
itself.  <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:41:17 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
Justice Hypercleats wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of<BR>
an<BR>
>> Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? Would it matter if<BR>
the<BR>
>> slaves were Vilani or not? Would it matter if the subjugation and control<BR>
of<BR>
>> the slaves were facilitated by the use of psioncs?<BR>
<BR>
John Groth wrote, in response:<BR>
<BR>
>Again, ethnicity is not an issue in the 3I.  Chattel slavery, OTOH, is<BR>
>expressly forbidden in the 3I.  Further, psionically-enforced servitude<BR>
>would fall under the 3I's opposition to psionics, as demonstrated by the<BR>
>Psionic Suppressions (beginning ca. IE 800).<BR>
<BR>
Although chattel slavery is illegal in the Third Imperium, I don't think<BR>
that the Imperium would be able to police the sale of such goods. Justice<BR>
seemed to be asking whether or not it was acceptable for megacorps to sell<BR>
goods on an Imperial world which were manufactured by slave labor. I don't<BR>
think that the Imperium would even know, nor do I believe that they would do<BR>
anything about it if they found out. After all, if a megacorp had goods<BR>
which were produced through the use of slave labor, they were likely made on<BR>
a non-Imperial world. Unless the Imperium has a vested interest in said<BR>
world, there's nothing the Imperium can really do.<BR>
<BR>
However, it might cause popular support for the megacorp to decline if it<BR>
were leaked to the press on worlds where such products were sold. On the<BR>
other hand, if the PR people of the megacorp happened to be good enough,<BR>
only a very few on such a world would know or notice.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 23:57:58 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller and Paul Linebarger<BR>
<BR>
At 16:43 -0400 3/8/00, Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com> wrote:<BR>
>Actually, "Cordwainer Smith" _was_ the pseudonym of Dr. Paul Linebarger.<BR>
>It seems that most of the administration at the school that Dr. Linebarger<BR>
>worked at during his writing years did not have a very good opinion of SF<BR>
>(this is not a surprise), so he and his editor (Campbell?) cooked up this<BR>
>pseudo.<BR>
<BR>
A Cordwainer is a shoe maker, IIRC.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 02:08:05 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
<BR>
On 08/03/00 at 06:57 PM,  eris@pcola.gulf.net said:<BR>
<BR>
>I thought if might be good to present "the way things are now."  I think<BR>
>I got this correct, someone might want to double check me, though.  IAC,<BR>
>the next 150+ lines are just to build a hull...<BR>
<BR>
Does anyone see anything we can do to streamline the design sequence<BR>
from FFS2 I posted?  <BR>
<BR>
The inclusion of multiple configurations, multiple types of<BR>
streamlining and things like speed reqimes, stealth and coatings add<BR>
a lot of detail (?complexity?), but is it worth it?  I'm not sure if<BR>
the attempts to get the numbers exactly right for the different<BR>
configurations, streamlining and speed regimes are worth the effort.<BR>
<BR>
Oh, and I forgot to include the POWER requirements that some of the<BR>
materials have.  Well, so did the book, so I'm not so upset about<BR>
that, but if all that typing drops into the TML blackhole, I'm<BR>
really going to be depressed! <g><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 17:24:28 +0800<BR>
From: "Antony Farrell" <Skaran@bigpond.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Since the market for Traveller stuff is limited any rule set intended for<BR>
construction needs to be as versatile as possible. This means you have to be<BR>
able to design both weak and strong fighters, small and large ships etc. The<BR>
limitations should be placed by varying the technology available in the<BR>
milieu. Not by fiat. If you want fighters to be of use the defensive<BR>
capabilities available need to be toned down etc. This is what FFS1 tried to<BR>
do, and partly succeeded.<BR>
<BR>
Antony<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 05:37:47 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 19:04:44 -0700<BR>
>From: "Bruce Macintosh" <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net><BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship Sizes<BR>
><BR>
>>(1) The Alien Modules are the only sources in CT for the Imperium's<BR>
>>principle military adversaries and allies.<BR>
><BR>
>The K'Kree Alien Module certainly talks about giant ships (the only<BR>
>kind the K'Kree use.)<BR>
<BR>
You mean the two 6,000-ton and one 5,000-ton "giants" on p. 13, that I've<BR>
already cited once before? (These became 10,000-dton and 5,000-dton<BR>
designs, respectively, in GT: Alien Races 2, pp. 120-121, because the basic<BR>
GT design sequence doesn't explicitly support 6,000-dton hulls.)<BR>
<BR>
The text on pp. 11-13 and 27 does not mention ships any larger than these,<BR>
although it does explicitly use High Guard rules.<BR>
<BR>
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, but you should really be<BR>
more careful of your examples and your sources.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 05:37:42 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GT Starship Modules<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:49:47 -0500<BR>
>From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
>Subject: GT Starship Modules<BR>
><BR>
>Are there any GURPS gearheads who would be willing to reverse engineer the<BR>
Modules in GT, backing the power slices out of them?  I don't know Ve2 well<BR>
enough to do it myself.<BR>
<BR>
Use the modules from GURPS Space 3d ed., which are already (absent some<BR>
changes to the TL progression) what you're looking for. Anthony Jackson has<BR>
some no-power modules for Traveller-specific items like jump drives that he<BR>
might be willing to post here. That just leaves weapons, for which you can<BR>
either adapt from GS3/e, create your own, or bribe one of the GT gearheads:<BR>
Tom Bont, John Buston, or Robert Prior have the most material.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 05:37:37 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:09:04 +1200<BR>
>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
>Subject: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
><BR>
>I don't think anybody is going to convince anybody that any position is <BR>
>"right" and this will be my final comment. The argument seems to be "An <BR>
>Imperium where ships are restricted in size to somewhere between 5,000 <BR>
>tons and 50,000 tons would be more fun to roleplay in, so lets make the <BR>
>design rules enforce this". If you want a small ship Imperium, more power <BR>
>to you. Write it up and send it to JTAS (if Chris Thrash writes it to his<BR>
usual <BR>
>standards, I'll probably rate it a 4 or 5). However, please do not enforce<BR>
this <BR>
>choice on those of us who do choose the big ship Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, I am arguing two very different points in parallel, and I<BR>
apologize for not clearly distinguishing between them. <BR>
<BR>
(1) Large ships are not *necessary* in Traveller, and may be detrimental to<BR>
the role-playing setting. This is purely opinion on my part. I have tried<BR>
to demonstrate the advantages I see in a small-ship setting, but I concede<BR>
that mine is a minority opinion and certainly no basis for a restriction on<BR>
the design sequence. I will continue to address this as an alternate to<BR>
big-ship settings.<BR>
<BR>
(2) Large ships, however, may not even be *possible* given the assumptions<BR>
in the Traveller Technical Architecture as written. This is much the more<BR>
serious point, and one on which I will be totally inflexible -- there is,<BR>
in fact, a "right" answer somewhere. There are engineering design limits on<BR>
the size and capabilities of structures; these are well-known (to<BR>
engineers), and depend solely on the strength of the materials used. So far<BR>
as I know, no one has actually investigated this aspect before, so it<BR>
stands to reason that previous designers picked an arbitrary upper bound on<BR>
ship sizes (1 million dtons, say) and let it go at that.<BR>
<BR>
Does anyone doubt that the giant, multi-ton, robot Battlemechs in the FASA<BR>
game of the same title are not just silly or tactically suspect, but<BR>
*physically impossible*? They simply cannot be the size, shape, and weight<BR>
that is claimed for them and still be able to stand on anything other than<BR>
specially prepared reinforced concrete or bedrock, much less walk around.<BR>
They would literally sink into the ground, precisely like a building with a<BR>
poor foundation. The entire game is a cartoon fantasy because of this.<BR>
<BR>
I do not want to see Traveller become a cartoon fantasy (I would,<BR>
regretfully, have to stop playing at that very instant). This *must* mean<BR>
that, whatever departures we make from present day science in our<BR>
assumptions, the results are internally consistent. So we have never<BR>
considered engineering limits on design before; fine. But ignorance is no<BR>
longer an excuse: once the problem has been raised, it must be answered,<BR>
not wished away because we are uncomfortable with the implications.<BR>
<BR>
I have -- can have -- no opinion on what the right answer may be (though I<BR>
have some estimates that remain to be confirmed or denied by hard analysis,<BR>
rather than guesswork). If the answer turns out to really be one million<BR>
dtons, that's great. If it's 50,000 or 5,000 dtons, though, then the design<BR>
sequence should accurately reflect the restriction. It is then my _opinion_<BR>
that this would not be the tragedy that some others here seem to think.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 05:37:51 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2000 15:20:23 PST<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship sizes<BR>
><BR>
>Christopher Thrash writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> At best, they are designed to<BR>
>> resist a certain amount "hogging" and "sagging" (being supported only on<BR>
>> some portions of the hull), but the bigger the ship becomes, the less this<BR>
>> is a factor in her design (LOA >> expected range of wavelengths). <BR>
><BR>
>Actually, they learned the hard way that they had to make supertankers<BR>
>stronger. They had a few mysterious losses and then they had a ship<BR>
>that was either "only" badly damaged, or that went down, but had<BR>
>survivors picked up. <BR>
><BR>
>Seems that in storms, the "Cape rollers" were big enough and far enough<BR>
>apart that the tankers had each end held up by a wave crest, with the<BR>
>middle hanging in mid-air. Crunch!<BR>
><BR>
>I seem to recall that the reverse situation isn't as bad, because the<BR>
>hull sinks so much deeper into the water of the wave crest then. But<BR>
>it's still not good.<BR>
<BR>
Congratulations, Leonard: you have just redefined "hogging" (being<BR>
supported only on the ends) and "sagging" (being supported only in the<BR>
center) for the folks at home. I'm sorry that I wasn't more explicit the<BR>
first time, but it is still the case that large ships suffer less from<BR>
these effect than small ones.<BR>
<BR>
>> The largest mobile, self-supporting structure I know of was the Saturn V,<BR>
>> at 600 dtons.* At 3,250 stons, it had a density midway between the 10<BR>
>> ston/dton figure from FF&S, and the 3 ston/dton average I get for ships in<BR>
>> GT, so that's about right. Saturn V was streamlined, and designed to a<BR>
>> nominal 3.98g. Assuming that an increase X in tensile strength<BR>
>> ("toughness") permits a corresponding increase in volume (and mass) of<BR>
>> X^3/2, the largest equivalent ship at TL15 should be (47.1/2.43)^3/2 * 600<BR>
>> = 51,200 dtons.<BR>
><BR>
>Actually, the Saturn *wasn't* "self supporting" in the normal sense.<BR>
>Much of the weight was supported by the internal pressure in the fuel<BR>
>tanks (after all the tanks *were* the structure!). Gas pressure before<BR>
>the tanks were filled, and pressure of the liquid fuel afterwards.<BR>
<BR>
All pressurized spacecraft are essentially large tanks held up to a greater<BR>
or lesser degree by internal pressure, so this doesn't invalidate the<BR>
example: the support mechanism is carried internally to the vessel, not<BR>
inherent in the environment.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 09:53:04 GMT<BR>
From: "Jeff Rowse" <jeffrowse@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: "Start Wrecked" and FFSx<BR>
<BR>
<<Whinge On>><BR>
I *like* Star Trek, and Star Wars, and crateloads (literally!) of other <BR>
science fiction, and I get a *little* annoyed sometimes when someone says <BR>
"Such-and-such is rubbish, I dont know why they bother with it"...  They <BR>
bother because some people *do* like it!<BR>
<<Whinge Off>><BR>
<BR>
So not everybody likes certain SF backgrounds - how many of us can honestly <BR>
say that we like *all* the various Traveller incarnations?? - but that is no <BR>
excuse to poke fun at other people's enjoyment, is it?  I mean, I have a <BR>
better understanding of **20th/21st Century** science and technology than <BR>
Joe Public (partly due to the TML, for which I am grateful to all who <BR>
contribute - even those whose views I don't agree with!!), but who am I to <BR>
say that there *won't* be Structural Integrity Fields holding starships <BR>
together in the future.  Surely, anything that helps tell the story is good <BR>
- - *even if limited to that particular story*.<BR>
Personally, I quite like ST's pseudo-scientific bull's-droppings; how many <BR>
ways *can* Geordie-the-fraud freak the engines, and how long will it be <BR>
before Wesley Crusher ends up in the... er crusher?  How many girlfriends <BR>
can Worf steal before someone realises he's cloned himself?  (Councillor <BR>
Troi *and* Jadzia Dax?  I know he's a Klingon, but even so... >;)...<BR>
<BR>
What amuses me is the number of people (including my family:( !) who like <BR>
EITHER 'Star Wars' OR 'Star Trek' BUT not both, or those who say that they <BR>
like 'ST:Deep Space 9' but that 'ST:Voyager' is just plain impossible..??<BR>
<BR>
[[HERESY WARNING ON]]<BR>
One way I believe ST is better (sometimes) than Traveller is the way in <BR>
which FTL works - one starship *can* be quicker than another, and not just <BR>
due to the vagaries of jumpspace making a few hours' difference.  Having <BR>
said that, IMTU Jumpspace works as per canon.<BR>
[[HERESY WARNING OFF]]<BR>
<BR>
ObTrav:  The pc's are in town when two rival fan conventions are on.  Guess <BR>
who gets asked to decide which is the more accurate when compared to 'Real <BR>
Life'?<BR>
<BR>
Jeff (aka Captain Chicken, Leg-End in his own Lunchbox)<BR>
"We've lost the Warp Core?  So how do I power my cappucino maker now?"<BR>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:16:24 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size Limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I am _not_ talking about narrow band emissions.   I have postulated<BR>
> the same spectral distribution as thermal emmission (don't try and<BR>
> guess that I'm going to narrow band emission, that is only part of <BR>
> what I'm on about.  Read what I'm saying and not what you think I'm <BR>
> going to say).<BR>
<BR>
Ah. The problem was (or someone that I thought was you) *did* start out<BR>
by talking about messing with the frequency distribution. <BR>
<BR>
If you'd said "I *am* talking about thermal spectrum emmissions" or<BR>
something similar, then the argument would have ended right there. But<BR>
all your "same photons" came across as a typical (of some folks)<BR>
attempt to handwave around a problem. <BR>
<BR>
Sorry. But I trust that you *can* see how that could happen once the<BR>
initial misunderstanding happened?<BR>
<BR>
> At the moment all I am pointing out is that when you diagram a heat<BR>
> engine, the technology used to run it is irrelevant.<BR>
<BR>
Ok.<BR>
<BR>
> What thermodynamics limits is the flow of heat.<BR>
<BR>
Agreed. Though I have this nagging feeling that there are some<BR>
situations where it gets kinda complicated deciding what counts as<BR>
heat" (at least around this crowd).<BR>
<BR>
> If you want to say starting with the same heat source and<BR>
> going to the same photons (number and frequency distribution)<BR>
> isn't going to the same state, then you will have explain what<BR>
> is different.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, that's not different. <BR>
<BR>
> This is relevant because even doing the same emmision without<BR>
> needing radiator fins and stuff is useful....<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, but the question is (essentially) how you get the "emitter" to<BR>
emit more such photons per unit area *without* doing something that<BR>
makes things "non-thermal".<BR>
<BR>
In short, I'm kind skeptical that raising the energy per unit area of<BR>
the emissions *isn't* the same as raising the temp, in which case<BR>
either the spectral curve changes, or you're back to "non-thermal"<BR>
radiation.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, that reminds me of a thought I had. Anybody know anything about<BR>
"thermofluorescence"? I'm kinda wondering exactly *how* low energy<BR>
photons (or phonons, for that matter) get turned into higher energy<BR>
ones. <BR>
<BR>
>>[stiff snipped]<BR>
>>The energy difference between a set of reactants and a set of reaction<BR>
>>products *is* indepenent of what reactions are involved in getting<BR>
>>between those two states.<BR>
>><BR>
>>But the energy inputs and outputs associated with actually getting from<BR>
>>one to the other *do* depend on the reaction path. Otherwise catalysts<BR>
>>would be unnecessary.<BR>
><BR>
> This is something I _know_.  Catalysts _don't_ affect the <BR>
> thermodynamics of the reaction (you can get into the thermodynamics <BR>
> of the transition states, but that only affects that mechanics and <BR>
> has little to say about the overall reactions).  The affect the rate <BR>
> of reaction, not whether the<BR>
> reaction is possible.  No catalyst is going to make an unfavorable<BR>
> reaction possible or a favorable reaction impoossible.  All they<BR>
> do is help make sure that "possible" reaction do, in fact, go.<BR>
<BR>
Silly question. What would you think of some sort of field effect that<BR>
acted like a catalyst (or the reverse)? <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:35:17 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 08/03/00 at 07:03 PM,  "Bruce Macintosh" <BR>
> <bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net> said:<BR>
><BR>
>>>But it does sound like we could use a "resolves X meters at 100,000 km"<BR>
>>>entry on the sensor tables to answer questions like the above two.<BR>
><BR>
>>There were supposed to be entries like this in FFS2's sensor tables.<BR>
><BR>
> Bruce there is a Resolves at 50,000 km column, but as I wrote<BR>
> earlier, that's not all that helpful when you don't know how to<BR>
> use that to answer, "What can I resolve at 32,000 km?" or "Can I see<BR>
> that 4 sq meter hatch from here?"<BR>
<BR>
Simple. Divide the actual range by 50,000 km. Then muliply the resolved<BR>
size by that number.<BR>
<BR>
Using the figures from your previous post, a sensor that can resolve 2m<BR>
at 50,000 km can resolve objects 1.28 meters across at 32,000.<BR>
32/50 = .64 <BR>
2 * .62 = 1.28<BR>
<BR>
Simple.<BR>
<BR>
> It would have helped if explanation of *how* to do the required<BR>
> multiplication had been included.  This isn't my field, and I<BR>
> figured there was some funcky log or exponential function involved<BR>
> in it.<BR>
><BR>
> The "...but everyone knows that" syndrome strikes again. <g><BR>
<BR>
Actually, all you have to to is visualize a pair of linesfrom the<BR>
center of the sensor that are 2m (or whatever) apart at 50,000 km. At<BR>
half the distance, they are half as far apart. At twice the distance,<BR>
they are twice as far apart. <BR>
<BR>
Make a drawing to convince any players who think it can't be that<BR>
simple. :-)<BR>
<BR>
It's the same principle as "if your thumbnail at arm's length is the<BR>
same size as the moon, how big is the moon?" problem that I've seen in<BR>
many a textbook.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:47:10 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I notice that many worlds within Imperial Borders have government types and<BR>
> law levels (and cultures) that are radically different than, say, Core --<BR>
> from the 'standard' Imperial (Vilani) norm. Yet they are on the X-boat<BR>
> route, they often have Imperial Naval bases and Scout bases. I take that to<BR>
> mean that pretty much all are welcome, regardless of government. Or are<BR>
> there certain boundaries they must stay within in order to be rewarded with<BR>
> Imperial status, diplomacy, trade, protection? Does the Imperium have a<BR>
> 'Bill of Rights' of any kind? Or an expectation of basic civil rights? Are<BR>
> planets that are ruled by extremist dictators, theocrats, oligarchies who<BR>
> enslave their population, hold them at a very low tech-level (while<BR>
> equipping their police/military with their highest tech they have), prevent<BR>
> them from ever leaving the planet, prevent free speech, prevent any info<BR>
> from outside their world to be heard by their 'subjects,' segregate and<BR>
> commit acts of genocide, fund and foment revolutionary movements and<BR>
> terrorism in other nearby Imperial worlds, force their population (including<BR>
> children), against their will, to work at subsistence level to make and sell<BR>
> products for trade, the profits from which will only go to the government's<BR>
> leaders -- does the Imperium do business with such worlds? Do they allow<BR>
> speculative traders who are Imperial Citizens to do business with such<BR>
> planets?  How about Megacorps?<BR>
<BR>
Slavery is illegal. Specifically, the outright *owning* of another<BR>
person. Indentured servitude may be legal. <BR>
<BR>
The basic difference is that if you are an indentured servant, there's<BR>
a freely entered into contract, which sets the conditions of service,<BR>
as well as what will end them. And I suspect that any such contracts<BR>
would be required to be backed up by a local legal system that gives<BR>
you other rights besides those specifically list.<BR>
<BR>
A slave, being *property* has *no* rights whatsoever.<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium also gets upsewt about the use of nukes, and likely about<BR>
any other weapons of mass destruction.<BR>
<BR>
> Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of an<BR>
> Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? Would it matter if the<BR>
> slaves were Vilani or not? Would it matter if the subjugation and control of<BR>
> the slaves were facilitated by the use of psioncs?<BR>
<BR>
Since slavery is illegal, I'd say the answer to all of the above is no,<BR>
though it's possible that importation of slave produced materials from<BR>
non-imperial worlds may be legal. <BR>
<BR>
Slavery doesn't compete well with automated factories though.<BR>
<BR>
> Does the Imperium allow people from an oppressive government to request<BR>
> asylum?<BR>
<BR>
Unlikely. If the government qualified to join, then the Imperium isn't<BR>
likely to care much about individuals. On the other hand, if you get<BR>
offworld (or even into the starport or a consulate/embassy from another<BR>
Imperial world) the local government can't touch you. At least not<BR>
unless it has a treaty with the world in question allowing extradition<BR>
for whatever they claim you've done.<BR>
<BR>
In the case of the starport, I guess it'd have to be a treaty signed<BR>
with the Imperium when the world joined. And I rather expect that the<BR>
only sorts of crimes they'd had you back over for would be major<BR>
property crimes or murder/kidnapping. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, now that I think over a few official adventures, it's not<BR>
clear that they'd hand you over even then. <BR>
<BR>
> Is there any method of redress if Megacorps commit acts of piracy,<BR>
> slavery, theft, carpet nuking a rival's world, or a plantet that will not<BR>
> trade with them, etc..?<BR>
<BR>
Piracy carries the death penalty. So does enslaving people. Nuking<BR>
people does too. So if it can be *proven* that it wasn't just the "on<BR>
scene" folks getting carried away, then whoever gave the orders had<BR>
better do a *real* good job of hiding. <BR>
<BR>
I expect that turning in someone the Imperium wants for that sort of<BR>
thing is likely good for a pardon for any lesser crime (my opinion, not<BR>
based on any version of the rules). Which would make even the<BR>
underworld consider turning you in. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 03:05:12 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Jump emitted ripples<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> How about a jump drive emitting ripple bonk. Something that creates a<BR>
> duplicate effect to cancel out the other's effect. Will cause a sudden<BR>
> crack, but no ripple.....<BR>
<BR>
Can't be done.<BR>
<BR>
The "ripple" is spacetime reacting to the fact that there's now an<BR>
object with mass where there used to be empty space. <BR>
<BR>
To look at it another way, it's the wavefront of the graviton emissions<BR>
of the ship spreading thru the system. <BR>
<BR>
If you are familar with the "rubber sheet" model, where masses are<BR>
represented as dimples in a rubber sheet, this is like dropping in a<BR>
new weight on the sheet. it'll immediately push down the sheet to the<BR>
proper depth, but that gives a cylindrical "hole". The sides spread out<BR>
at some *finite* rate until the have the normal slope, and go a bit<BR>
past and rebound. that's the ripple.<BR>
<BR>
What makes it so detectable is that it's not a case of mass moving<BR>
around, like ordinary gravity waves. Instead it just appears.<BR>
<BR>
Consider a rope stretched between a couple of trees. One that has some<BR>
stretch to it. If you go out hand over hand, it'll stretch downwards.<BR>
And unless you move very slowly and carefully, there'll be some waves<BR>
along the rope as your weight shifts.<BR>
<BR>
Now consider that same rope. Only this time you climb a ladder at the<BR>
middle, get a good grip on the rope and step off the ladder. Your<BR>
weight just appeared out of nowhere, and the rope *has* to go down,<BR>
which changes the slope, even at the ends. No way around it if you are<BR>
going to hang from the rope. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 11:57:08 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Supertankers are _not_ self supporting they are partially <BR>
> supported by the water.<BR>
<BR>
Perfectly true. They do need to stand up to the pressure of all that water<BR>
pressing on the sides, but thats comparable to atmosphere pushing on the<BR>
snside of a starship, so we may as well ignore it.<BR>
> If you were to pick up a supertanker<BR>
> and place it on dry land it would have structural problems. [1]<BR>
> This does not mean that we could not build self supporting<BR>
> structures of that size at our TL but it does mean that<BR>
> supertankers aren't self supporting. A starship needs to be self<BR>
> supporting as canon starships (in CT, MT, & TNE) of _any_ size <BR>
> can land on a planet just fine (although unstreamlined ones will <BR>
> require a vacuum to do so). <BR>
<BR>
So noone builds huge megafrieghters because it's never been done before?<BR>
Agreed, they're non-canon, but surely soimething could exist which simpply<BR>
wasn't mentioned. It seems rather unlikely that the Gross Sector Product for<BR>
somwhere like the Solomani rim is supported entirley by Fat Traders or<BR>
smaller? Really Big Ships sound like the kind of thing the Solomani would<BR>
leap at:<BR>
<BR>
" Obviously the Confederation is superior to that mish-mash of subhumans in<BR>
the Three-Eye, look at the Solomani Rim megafrieghters! These 200,000 dton<BR>
wonders of engineering are a tribute to the spirit and ingenuity of SolCon.<BR>
Serving as the backbone of trade for known space, these vessels are so huge<BR>
they are designed to never land...as there are no downports with the<BR>
facilities to support them. What do you mean they can't support their own<BR>
weight! Perhaps you need reeducation, citizen, to help you understand<BR>
Solomani engineering methodology!" :) I don't mean to criticise or lecture,<BR>
because I'm no gearhead, but thats my Cr 0.02.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:38:55 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: FW: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
Reposting, 'cos I had server problems and I don't think this made it to the<BR>
list<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: Jones, Dean <BR>
Sent: 04 August 2000 11:57<BR>
To: 'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
Subject: RE: Ship sizes<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Supertankers are _not_ self supporting they are partially <BR>
> supported by the water.<BR>
<BR>
Perfectly true. They do need to stand up to the pressure of all that water<BR>
pressing on the sides, but thats comparable to atmosphere pushing on the<BR>
snside of a starship, so we may as well ignore it.<BR>
> If you were to pick up a supertanker<BR>
> and place it on dry land it would have structural problems. [1]<BR>
> This does not mean that we could not build self supporting<BR>
> structures of that size at our TL but it does mean that<BR>
> supertankers aren't self supporting. A starship needs to be self<BR>
> supporting as canon starships (in CT, MT, & TNE) of _any_ size <BR>
> can land on a planet just fine (although unstreamlined ones will <BR>
> require a vacuum to do so). <BR>
<BR>
So noone builds huge megafrieghters because it's never been done before?<BR>
Agreed, they're non-canon, but surely soimething could exist which simpply<BR>
wasn't mentioned. It seems rather unlikely that the Gross Sector Product for<BR>
somwhere like the Solomani rim is supported entirley by Fat Traders or<BR>
smaller? Really Big Ships sound like the kind of thing the Solomani would<BR>
leap at:<BR>
<BR>
" Obviously the Confederation is superior to that mish-mash of subhumans in<BR>
the Three-Eye, look at the Solomani Rim megafrieghters! These 200,000 dton<BR>
wonders of engineering are a tribute to the spirit and ingenuity of SolCon.<BR>
Serving as the backbone of trade for known space, these vessels are so huge<BR>
they are designed to never land...as there are no downports with the<BR>
facilities to support them. What do you mean they can't support their own<BR>
weight! Perhaps you need reeducation, citizen, to help you understand<BR>
Solomani engineering methodology!" :) I don't mean to criticise or lecture,<BR>
because I'm no gearhead, but thats my Cr 0.02.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:41:19 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Reverse Engineering (was Re: GT Starship Modules )<BR>
<BR>
I'll do it over the weekend and post it Monday<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: eris@pcola.gulf.net [mailto:eris@pcola.gulf.net]<BR>
> Sent: 04 August 2000 03:50<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: GT Starship Modules (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> On 08/03/00 at 02:34 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard <BR>
> Erickson) said:<BR>
> <BR>
> >In mail you write:<BR>
> <BR>
> >> I agree with this:<BR>
> >><BR>
> >> I wish that they had left PP's into GT Modular Ship <BR>
> Design. It is kinda odd<BR>
> >> to design a ship that incorprates PP slices into a turret <BR>
> weapon.. I just<BR>
> >> cannot grok that :)<BR>
> <BR>
> >Yeah, that makes it impossible to design a ship that saves power by<BR>
> >shutting down "non-essential" systems during combat, or in other<BR>
> >situations. *Very* unrealistic.<BR>
> <BR>
> So...<BR>
> <BR>
> Are there any GURPS gearheads who would be willing to reverse <BR>
> engineer the Modules in GT, backing the power slices out of <BR>
> them?  I don't know Ve2 well enough to do it myself.<BR>
> <BR>
> Eris<BR>
> -- <BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
> http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2882<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg02.mx.aol.com (rly-yg02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.2]) by air-yg05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 07:44:28 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 07:44:06 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id HAA64046;<BR>
	Fri, 4 Aug 2000 07:43:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 4 Aug 2000 07:43:52 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id HAA63993<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 07:43:52 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 07:43:52 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008041143.HAA63993@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2882<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2883</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/4/00 9:49:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, August 4 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2883<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: Ship Sizes<BR>
G:T Alien Races 4<BR>
Space Shuttle Power Levels (was FFS3 Heat rules)<BR>
Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
Beyond the Spinward Marches?<BR>
Re: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
Re: "Start Wrecked" and FFSx<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
RE: Beyond the Spinward Marches?<BR>
Re: TML Roster<BR>
RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (longish)<BR>
Re: Jumping and Gravity Waves<BR>
Re: Beyond the Spinward Marches?<BR>
Re: "Start Wrecked" and FFSx<BR>
Re: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
RE: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
Re: GT Starship Modules<BR>
Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
Anyone in So Cal?<BR>
Fw: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:49:10 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship Sizes<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, but if you insist on making the inside of your ship look like the<BR>
african savannah...:)<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Bruce Macintosh [mailto:bruce.macintosh@worldnet.att.net]<BR>
> Sent: 04 August 2000 03:05<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Re: Ship Sizes<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> >(1) The Alien Modules are the only sources in CT for the Imperium's<BR>
> >principle military adversaries and allies.<BR>
> <BR>
> The K'Kree Alien Module certainly talks about giant ships (the only<BR>
> kind the K'Kree use.)<BR>
> <BR>
> Bruce<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:01:07 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: G:T Alien Races 4<BR>
<BR>
I'm going to need some information about the Shalli and Ahetaowa.<BR>
Please contact me off-list.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:01:24 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Space Shuttle Power Levels (was FFS3 Heat rules)<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote :-<BR>
> The heat radiators for the Shuttle cover the inside surface of the<BR>
> cargo bay doors. That's more than "a few m^2". :-)<BR>
> <BR>
> I don't have a reference, but I'd not be at all surprised to find that<BR>
> the Shuttle uses several kW of power, even in orbit.<BR>
Would you believe 25 kW?<BR>
That's all ; the plan is to run the International Space Station<BR>
initially on 75kW and finally on 125kW once all the modules are up.<BR>
<BR>
Ref : Alario J. 'Space Station Thermal Management Systems'. Progress in<BR>
Astronautics and Aeronautics 1990.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:15:37 +1000<BR>
From: "Robert O'Connor" <robocon@ozemail.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash wrote :-<BR>
> There are engineering design limits on<BR>
> the size and capabilities of structures; these are well-known (to<BR>
> engineers), and depend solely on the strength of the materials used.<BR>
<BR>
??<BR>
i. beam theory - cantilevers, and simply supported beams<BR>
ii. torsional loading<BR>
<BR>
angular deflection = (torque X tube length)/(shear modulus X [torque/(2<BR>
X wall thickness X enclosed area)])<BR>
<BR>
- - for any continuous thin walled tube, a reasonable approximation for<BR>
our purposes?<BR>
<BR>
iii. compression loading<BR>
<BR>
critical load = (pi^2) X (Young's modulus X second moment of area of<BR>
cross section**) / (length^2)<BR>
<BR>
** a.k.a. 'moment of inertia'<BR>
<BR>
??<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Robert O'Connor<BR>
Medico, Gamer<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:25:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: "John P. Raynor" <john.raynor@yale.edu><BR>
Subject: Beyond the Spinward Marches?<BR>
<BR>
Does anyone know where I can find *canonical* information about what lies<BR>
just to spinward of the Spinward Marches?  I would be particularly<BR>
interested in the contents of the Fessor, Reidain, and Urnian Subsectors<BR>
(which I currently know only as names printed on the edge of the sector<BR>
map in "The Spinward Marches Campaign).  I am, y'see, trying to "play out"<BR>
an alternate history in which the Darrians *didn't* wipe themselves out<BR>
("Maghiz-free Darrians"), and I'm trying to map out the expansion of the<BR>
Darrian Confederation, from -924 to 60, or so.  Thus far, I've avoided the<BR>
issue of "what-lies-to-spinward?" by sending the first wave of Maghiz-free<BR>
Darrian expansion to trailing (through what would have been the Sword<BR>
World Subsector, and out to Carse, in the Lunion Subsector) and to rimward<BR>
(out to Karin, in the Five Sisters Subsector), but it's going to start<BR>
looking contrived if I don't plant a *few* Darrian colonies to spinward<BR>
soon...  Any help would be greatly appreciated!  Thanks in advance!<BR>
<BR>
                                                               - J. Raynor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 04:15:50 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 08/03/00 at 06:57 PM,  eris@pcola.gulf.net said:<BR>
><BR>
>>I thought if might be good to present "the way things are now."  I think<BR>
>>I got this correct, someone might want to double check me, though.  IAC,<BR>
>>the next 150+ lines are just to build a hull...<BR>
<BR>
> Does anyone see anything we can do to streamline the design sequence<BR>
> from FFS2 I posted?  <BR>
><BR>
> The inclusion of multiple configurations, multiple types of<BR>
> streamlining and things like speed reqimes, stealth and coatings add<BR>
> a lot of detail (?complexity?), but is it worth it?  I'm not sure if<BR>
> the attempts to get the numbers exactly right for the different<BR>
> configurations, streamlining and speed regimes are worth the effort.<BR>
<BR>
Well, the three types of "streamlining" are about the minimum we can<BR>
get away with.<BR>
<BR>
I think it may be possible to adjust the way hull shape and<BR>
streamlining interact. And frankly, I think it might be a lot easier to<BR>
have a couple pages of "basic shapes" with formulas for determining<BR>
their  volume and the area of the sides. And I mean *basic* shapes.<BR>
Cones, cylinders, polygonal pyramids, wedges, various ellipsoids, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Then let the designer slap those together to make the ship. I think<BR>
it'd work a *lot* better than trying to have tables with the "generic<BR>
adjustments" for shapes that we currently have. <BR>
<BR>
Of course, this would require noting which basic shapes counted as<BR>
streamlined and airframe, and simple (hah!) rules for determing if a<BR>
combo of shapes was streamlined/airframe.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 04:27:49 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: "Start Wrecked" and FFSx<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> I mean, I have a <BR>
> better understanding of **20th/21st Century** science and technology than <BR>
> Joe Public (partly due to the TML, for which I am grateful to all who <BR>
<BR>
Actually, I'd be surprised if you understand any 21st Century tech,<BR>
since the 20th Century doesn't end until midnight Dec 31st of this<BR>
year. (Remember, the *First* Century went from 1 to 100)<BR>
<BR>
The 1900s are over. But not the 20th century. :-)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> contribute - even those whose views I don't agree with!!), but who am I to <BR>
> say that there *won't* be Structural Integrity Fields holding starships <BR>
> together in the future. <BR>
<BR>
Well, it'd have *real* interesting implications for armor. :-)<BR>
<BR>
> [[HERESY WARNING ON]]<BR>
> One way I believe ST is better (sometimes) than Traveller is the way in <BR>
> which FTL works - one starship *can* be quicker than another, and not just <BR>
> due to the vagaries of jumpspace making a few hours' difference.  Having <BR>
> said that, IMTU Jumpspace works as per canon.<BR>
> [[HERESY WARNING OFF]]<BR>
<BR>
So use H. Beam Piper's version of hyperdrive. You still go into some<BR>
sort of "hyperspace", but how long you stay there depend on how far you<BR>
have to go, and (maybe) on how good your drive is. <BR>
<BR>
As long as ships still have to worry about the "100 diameter" limit,<BR>
are the fastest means of communication, and can't be affected by the<BR>
outside universe while in jump, any *other* changes are a "minor" heresy.<BR>
<BR>
Oh yeah, you *do* want to keep the speeds down to no more than 6<BR>
parsecs a week.<BR>
<BR>
It wouldn't be *that* hard to interpolate values from the tables for a<BR>
J3.578 drive. <BR>
<BR>
Though being able to "jump" a parsec in only 28 hours *is* going to<BR>
affect things noticeably. :-)<BR>
<BR>
> ObTrav:  The pc's are in town when two rival fan conventions are on.  Guess <BR>
> who gets asked to decide which is the more accurate when compared to 'Real <BR>
> Life'?<BR>
><BR>
> Jeff (aka Captain Chicken, Leg-End in his own Lunchbox)<BR>
> "We've lost the Warp Core?  So how do I power my cappucino maker now?"<BR>
> ________________________________________________________________________<BR>
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 07:01:05 -0700<BR>
From: "Pronto" <pronto_r031@telus.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Leonard Erickson" <shadow@krypton.rain.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Simple. Divide the actual range by 50,000 km. Then muliply the resolved<BR>
> size by that number.<BR>
><BR>
> Using the figures from your previous post, a sensor that can resolve 2m<BR>
> at 50,000 km can resolve objects 1.28 meters across at 32,000.<BR>
> 32/50 = .64<BR>
> 2 * .62 = 1.28<BR>
><BR>
> Simple.<BR>
><BR>
> > It would have helped if explanation of *how* to do the required<BR>
> > multiplication had been included.  This isn't my field, and I<BR>
> > figured there was some funcky log or exponential function involved<BR>
> > in it.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > The "...but everyone knows that" syndrome strikes again. <g><BR>
><BR>
> Actually, all you have to to is visualize a pair of linesfrom the<BR>
> center of the sensor that are 2m (or whatever) apart at 50,000 km. At<BR>
> half the distance, they are half as far apart. At twice the distance,<BR>
> they are twice as far apart.<BR>
><BR>
> Make a drawing to convince any players who think it can't be that<BR>
> simple. :-)<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
Thanks Leonard, you made me take my calculator out again. (It had dust on<BR>
it.)<BR>
You explained that well enough that even I understood it and the<BR>
visualization makes sure I can't forget.<BR>
Do more of that, math is fun when I get it!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --Often, when I am reading a good book,<BR>
- --I stop and thank my teacher.<BR>
- --That is, I used to, until she got an unlisted number.<BR>
<BR>
Pronto<BR>
AKA Brian Taylor<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 14:56:16 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Beyond the Spinward Marches?<BR>
<BR>
Not sure about canonicality, but check out Anthony Jackson's page at<BR>
<BR>
maps.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: John P. Raynor [mailto:john.raynor@yale.edu]<BR>
> Sent: 04 August 2000 14:26<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Beyond the Spinward Marches?<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> Does anyone know where I can find *canonical* information <BR>
> about what lies<BR>
> just to spinward of the Spinward Marches?  I would be particularly<BR>
> interested in the contents of the Fessor, Reidain, and Urnian <BR>
> Subsectors<BR>
> (which I currently know only as names printed on the edge of <BR>
> the sector<BR>
> map in "The Spinward Marches Campaign).  I am, y'see, trying <BR>
> to "play out"<BR>
> an alternate history in which the Darrians *didn't* wipe <BR>
> themselves out<BR>
> ("Maghiz-free Darrians"), and I'm trying to map out the <BR>
> expansion of the<BR>
> Darrian Confederation, from -924 to 60, or so.  Thus far, <BR>
> I've avoided the<BR>
> issue of "what-lies-to-spinward?" by sending the first wave <BR>
> of Maghiz-free<BR>
> Darrian expansion to trailing (through what would have been the Sword<BR>
> World Subsector, and out to Carse, in the Lunion Subsector) <BR>
> and to rimward<BR>
> (out to Karin, in the Five Sisters Subsector), but it's going to start<BR>
> looking contrived if I don't plant a *few* Darrian colonies <BR>
> to spinward<BR>
> soon...  Any help would be greatly appreciated!  Thanks in advance!<BR>
> <BR>
>                                                               <BR>
>  - J. Raynor<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 08:23:41 -0700<BR>
From: "Brian Jenkins" <Brian.Jenkins@grpwise1.westek.com><BR>
Subject: Re: TML Roster<BR>
<BR>
Where can I find the Roster?<BR>
<BR>
>>> "Pat Connaughton" <pconn@i1.net> 08/03/00 07:20PM >>><BR>
Thanks - was curious to know if there was any other TML's in the area other<BR>
than our fine brother of the Medieval Starship fame?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: <eris@pcola.gulf.net><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 8:50 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: TML Roster<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> On 08/03/00 at 08:40 PM,  "Pat Connaughton" <pconn@i1.net> said:<BR>
><BR>
> >Please advise who is maintaining the TML Roster?<BR>
><BR>
> I am Pat. I've been swampped the last few days, but I'll get your name<BR>
added as soon as I can.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Eris<BR>
> --<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
> http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr <BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 11:40:29 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (longish)<BR>
<BR>
Mark Preston writes:<BR>
<snipped><BR>
>There is a vast amount of the 'junk' DNA that the story is based on in<BR>
>our genome - about 40 to 60% according to recent papers. Of what's<BR>
>left, we understand what around 10% of it does (thats around 5% of the<BR>
>total DNA that we have mapped to date).<BR>
<BR>
	Current estimates are that about 10% of our total DNA are<BR>
	functional genes.  Such estimates are very approximate as we<BR>
	have not yet mapped or analysed the whole thing.  A lot of DNA<BR>
	that is not part of a gene is in spacers (segments separating<BR>
	genes), pseudogenes (degenerate copies of functonal genes), and<BR>
	repetitive sequences (pieces of DNA that seem to have copied<BR>
	themselves to various parts of the chomosomes, with as many as<BR>
	10^7 copies).<BR>
<BR>
>Of that 5% we understand, only<BR>
>4% of it is different from equivalent chimp DNA and probably accounts<BR>
>for why we are what we are (instead of chimps).<BR>
<BR>
	The relationship between closely related species may be estimated<BR>
	by comparing the sequences of DNA that are not part of any<BR>
	functional genes.  This is because functional genes may be changed<BR>
	by natural selection, but "non-coding" DNA is thought to change at<BR>
	random with time and therefore the bigger the difference between<BR>
	two species - the longer it has been since the species diverged.<BR>
	Looking at a hemoglobin pseudogene found in the primates, it was<BR>
	found that 98% of the sequence was the same in humans and chimps.<BR>
	This confirms that the two species are closely related, but does<BR>
	not give us much of an idea of just what makes humans human and<BR>
	chimpanzees chimps.  I am not aware of any estimate of how<BR>
	different the functional DNA is between these species.  Any such<BR>
	estimate would be hazardous until the entire genome of each species<BR>
	has been sequenced.<BR>
<BR>
>A quick bit of maths<BR>
>and you can see that our entire 'human' evolution - as far as we<BR>
>understand it so far - depends on a massive 0.2% of our genome. At<BR>
>least 200 times more of it is what the story is all about. That gives<BR>
>you an idea of the scale of the plot - it is easily feasible in that<BR>
>respect.<BR>
<BR>
	I assume that by 'human evolution' you mean evolution since<BR>
	our lineage diverged from that of chimps.  I have already<BR>
	explained why I think that the 0.2% value is probably not<BR>
	a good estimate of the functional difference between human<BR>
	and chimp DNA, but there is another point to consider.  That<BR>
	"200 times more" DNA would be expected to be subject to the<BR>
	kinds of random changes that generated the 2% difference in<BR>
	non-coding DNA between humans and chimps.  Such changes would<BR>
	tend to render any potential function 'hidden' in that DNA<BR>
	flawed or worse.  If there was some hidden mechanism that<BR>
	copied the special DNA much, much more accurately than the<BR>
	rest of the human DNA (insert magic here), then the sequence<BR>
	would stand out like a sore thumb as soon as the sequence<BR>
	was analysed by scientists ("Why is it that everyone on earth<BR>
	has this exact same non-coding sequence?").<BR>
<BR>
>Retroviruses most definately do fiddle around with the genome, but<BR>
>generally operate on a tiny scale, even compared to the scales we are<BR>
>looking at. However, there _is_ some suggestion that they may really<BR>
>be involved in evolutionary stages in punctuated equilibrium of<BR>
>species.<BR>
<BR>
	This is entirely new to me.  Could you point me to a source?<BR>
<BR>
>So much so, in fact, that there is even a strong suggestion<BR>
>that our view of species as such may be wrong and there may be no<BR>
>'true' species in the objective sense. In other words, that too is<BR>
>feasible.<BR>
<BR>
	Species were originally thought of as discrete, fundamental<BR>
	units.  However, biologists have long recognized that they<BR>
	are actually arbitrary units with indistinct edges.  That<BR>
	does not mean that the concept of species is not useful, but<BR>
	one must always be careful when using the term.<BR>
<BR>
>Genome and virus responses to ecological stress are well documented -<BR>
>the Peppered Moth is a superb example (as well as a traditional<BR>
>teaching reference, so you should find it easily). All of which adds<BR>
>up to the story being quite reasonable.<BR>
<BR>
	The Peppered Moth story is a classic case of evolution by<BR>
	natural selection, but I don't know of any involvement of<BR>
	any kind of virus.<BR>
<BR>
>Unfortunately, where it breaks down is his understanding of human<BR>
>evolution. We did _not_ evolve from Homo Neanderthalis at all - far<BR>
>from it, we even co-existed and almost certainly interbred for several<BR>
>thousand years. It seems that human evolution has actually only had a<BR>
>small number of 'steps' and that each step was followed by a long<BR>
>period of interbreeding, competition and development. What that means<BR>
>in practice is that the story, though feasible, _should_ have involved<BR>
>the development of _several_ new 'human species' at the same time.<BR>
<BR>
	As has been mentioned, this area is still a hotbed of research<BR>
	and controversy.  Stay tuned.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
Evolutionary Biologist<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:02:38 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Jumping and Gravity Waves<BR>
<BR>
Ships emerging from jump will cause gravity waves because of the suddenly<BR>
appearing mass. But, will these waves be minimized if the ship "phases in"<BR>
more or less gradually?  What sorts of time scales would be required to<BR>
minimize the grav waves?<BR>
<BR>
On a related point, would a ship jumping out produce gravity waves?  Using<BR>
the rubber sheet analogy it would be like quickly lifting up a mass from<BR>
the sheet, thus producing vibrations.  This would no longer be a "graviton<BR>
wave front", but the termination of a graviton signal (so to speak). <BR>
Would that be as easily detectable? <BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:12:55 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Beyond the Spinward Marches?<BR>
<BR>
Jones, Dean writes:<BR>
> Not sure about canonicality, but check out Anthony Jackson's page at<BR>
> <BR>
> maps.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
Foreven was declared by GDW to be fallow, not to be detailed; my map was <BR>
taken from the Zhodani Base at zho.berka.com.  If you want a link to what<BR>
canonical information there is, http://members.aol.com/dedly/traveller/sectors/foreven.html has <BR>
a nice explanation.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 11:16:10 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: "Start Wrecked" and FFSx<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Actually, I'd be surprised if you understand any 21st Century tech,<BR>
> since the 20th Century doesn't end until midnight Dec 31st of this<BR>
> year. (Remember, the *First* Century went from 1 to 100)<BR>
<BR>
And I'd be very surprised if there was enough of a leap in technology in<BR>
the next 5 months that someone who understands it today won't still<BR>
understand it when the 21st century rolls around.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:27:03 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
                                      <BR>
> Eris        <BR>
>   ps. Why was the division 225,000 for SF picked? Does anyone know?<BR>
<BR>
I think it was just a handwave for the maximum size they wanted, with no <BR>
solid information on what the real figure was.  Probably a more realistic<BR>
figure, assuming evasion is wanted, would be:<BR>
(length in meters)^2/(width in meters)*(thrust in tons)/(toughness*X).  For a<BR>
vehicle which does not need to evade, just use length * thrust / toughness * X.<BR>
For a vehicle intended for landing on a world, it should use weight or thrust,<BR>
whichever is more.  I don't know what a realistic figure for X should be, based<BR>
on skyscraper designs it's probably 5-10 thousand.<BR>
<BR>
Note that this formula is order 4/3 in volume, not order 3/2.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:34:44 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Tsykoduk writes:<BR>
> Not true -<BR>
> <BR>
> Commo takes power, AG takes power, Life Support takes power, the track<BR>
> lighting in the captians cabin takes power...<BR>
<BR>
A typical 100T scout ship (GT) with 3 lasers has the following reactor slices:<BR>
Lasers:          33 MW<BR>
Thrusters:       80 MW<BR>
Jump Drive:      30 MW<BR>
Art. Gravity:     2 MW<BR>
AESA:           2.5 MW<BR>
Everything Else:.01 MW or less (maybe .1 for a fuel processor).<BR>
<BR>
As you can see, the redundant power slices for weaponry and jump drive are in<BR>
fact a noticeable inefficiency; everything else can pretty much be ignored.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 09:20:39 -0700<BR>
From: Jesse DeGraff <jdegraff@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
<BR>
No prob :)<BR>
Jesse<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Merc<BR>
> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 10:23 AM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Traveller Font Resource<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Just in case there are still others looking for this font for their own<BR>
> projects, Jesse DeGraff already has it available at the following web<BR>
> address. I've now looked at 4 different sets of fonts claiming to be<BR>
> Optima and this is the best and most complete (i.e. it has Normal, Bold,<BR>
> Italic, and Bold Italic versions).  He also has the Vilani font available.<BR>
><BR>
> The quick route is this URL<BR>
><BR>
> http://www.vision-forge-graphics.com/jesse/traveller/resources/index.htm<BR>
><BR>
> Thanks Jesse, finding these made my day!<BR>
><BR>
> Coy Krill<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:43:21 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GT Starship Modules<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Use the modules from GURPS Space 3d ed., which are already (absent some<BR>
> changes to the TL progression) what you're looking for. Anthony Jackson has<BR>
> some no-power modules for Traveller-specific items like jump drives that he<BR>
> might be willing to post here. That just leaves weapons, for which you can<BR>
> either adapt from GS3/e, create your own, or bribe one of the GT gearheads:<BR>
> Tom Bont, John Buston, or Robert Prior have the most material.<BR>
<BR>
Jump Drive: per unit, 3 tons, 10 MW, 0.75 spaces.  Needs (J+1) units per 100T.<BR>
Not sure what other units you need.<BR>
<BR>
Alternately, may I recommend: http://www.geocities.com/ac_jackson/traveller/gthg.html<BR>
<BR>
It's full of heresies, and isn't terribly compatible with existing GT designs,<BR>
but it does a good job with CT designs, and the way it does turrets and bays<BR>
may be appealing to those who hate the external turret rule.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:45:21 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GURPS Traveller Design Question, Discussion and Proposal (Re: sensors)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh writes:<BR>
> >Actually, david pulver wrote the ship design section, and the ranges could<BR>
> >easily be upped without rules changes, it would just make bridges a bit<BR>
> >larger and considerably more expensive.  However, there are scaling<BR>
> >problems with large sensors in GT.<BR>
> <BR>
> My memory is that they scale so size is linear with range; so a big warship<BR>
> in GT can have an incredibly long-ranged sensor. Good thing no-one has ever<BR>
> desinged a big warship for GT.<BR>
<BR>
No, but people have designed big warheads for gurps ;)  Basically, what it <BR>
works out to is: big ships win over small ships.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:46:19 -0700 <BR>
From: Rodney Basler <rgb@odetics.com><BR>
Subject: Anyone in So Cal?<BR>
<BR>
This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand<BR>
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFFE33.83A2B950<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
<BR>
	I've been digging back through the digests looking for a post from<BR>
someone requesting players in the West Los Angeles area and have been<BR>
comming up empty.  I'm in Orange County and wonder if there are any TMLers<BR>
that are local to me.  My schedule is probably far too hectic right now for<BR>
a steady game, but I would love to get together occasionally with fellow<BR>
lunatics.  Snapshot/Mayday, anyone?  A pick-up game?  Arguements about ship<BR>
design?<BR>
	My home email is RBasler1@aol.com.<BR>
<BR>
	Thanks,<BR>
	Rod Basler, COFIT<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Disclaimer - They don't tell me _what_ to think, so any cranial by-products<BR>
are not their fault.<BR>
<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFFE33.83A2B950<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<HEAD><BR>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =<BR>
charset=3Diso-8859-1"><BR>
<META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version =<BR>
5.5.2651.75"><BR>
<TITLE>Anyone in So Cal?</TITLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; I've been =<BR>
digging back through the digests looking for a post from someone =<BR>
requesting players in the West Los Angeles area and have been comming =<BR>
up empty.&nbsp; I'm in Orange County and wonder if there are any TMLers =<BR>
that are local to me.&nbsp; My schedule is probably far too hectic =<BR>
right now for a steady game, but I would love to get together =<BR>
occasionally with fellow lunatics.&nbsp; Snapshot/Mayday, anyone?&nbsp; =<BR>
A pick-up game?&nbsp; Arguements about ship design?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; My home =<BR>
email is RBasler1@aol.com.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Thanks,<BR>
<BR>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Rod =Basler, COFIT<BR>
---------------------------------------------------------------=- ---------<BR>
Disclaimer - They don't tell me _what_ to think, so =any cranial by-products are not their fault.<BR>
- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BFFE33.83A2B950--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 09:58:57 -0700<BR>
From: "Dave Strebe" <strebe@intergate.bc.ca><BR>
Subject: Fw: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
Has anybody else done this idea? If so do you have charts/examples <BR>
that you could send me? Also does anyone know what magazine and issue#<BR>
is mentioned in the below snip?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
Dave<BR>
<BR>
> ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
> From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
> To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 12:51 PM<BR>
> Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> > Also, I borrowed an idea from a gaming magazine for  FASA's  Star<BR>
> > Trek RPG ... so that players don't parrot  the  ship's  computer,<BR>
> > etc, (like Sigorney Weaver in Galaxy Quest) each position  has  a<BR>
> > sheet of codes.  I give the player a code, he looks  it  up,  and<BR>
> > then (in character) tells the others.<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2883<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (rly-yd05.mail.aol.com [172.18.150.5]) by air-yd02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 12:49:16 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yd05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 12:48:38 2000<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id MAA74988;<BR>
	Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:48:37 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:48:28 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id MAA74944<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:48:28 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:48:28 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008041648.MAA74944@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2883<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2884</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/4/00 1:41:57 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, August 4 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2884<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Sensor Options for FFS3<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Sensor Options for FFS3<BR>
Structure Factor<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
re:  Game report: Striker<BR>
re:  Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Definite Articles (OT) <BR>
Re: Alien Vision<BR>
Re: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2881<BR>
FFSv3<BR>
Re: "Start Wrecked" and FFSx<BR>
Re: Jumping and Gravity Waves<BR>
RE: Reverse Engineering (was Re: GT Starship Modules )<BR>
GT Power Slices (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: Definite Articles (OT) <BR>
Re: GT Power Slices (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Sensors<BR>
Re: Structure Factor<BR>
A normal extra-solar gas giant<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 10:08:32 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Sensor Options for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
As noted, we can reasonably handwave sensors up and down.<BR>
If you want to reduce sensors, note that the current PEMS appears to be a large-area, high-resolution, high-sensitivity, phased array.  If something<BR>
like that isn't available, you could reasonably go with a sensor area<BR>
of 10 ^ (S*2-25) and volume of (diameter * area; x0.5 at TL 10, x0.2 at TL 12,<BR>
x0.1 at TL 14).  This changes a TL-12 PEMS-12.5 from 0.1 m^2, 0.1 M^3, <BR>
0.5 MCr, to 1 m^2, 0.2 m^3, 1 MCr.<BR>
<BR>
If you want to upgrade sensor resolution, you could probably up the diameter<BR>
(and thus resolution) of current sensors without upping sensitivity.  To up<BR>
resolution by 0.5, increase diameter to the next larger size, and double area.<BR>
<BR>
If you want to _seriously_ upgrade sensor resolution (enough so that PCs can actually see the skull and crossbones painted on that pirate's bow), consider<BR>
grav-focus sensors.  Copying the focal diameter rules for a grav-focus laser,<BR>
a grav-focus PEMS adds (sensitivity-11.5) at TL 9, (S-11) at TL 10, <BR>
(S-10.5) at TL 11-12, (S-10) at TL 13+; this increase in sensitivity only<BR>
counts for targeting and resolution, not for detection.  Grav-focus doubles<BR>
the volume (and cost) of a sensor, and increases the power consumption by<BR>
1 MW/m^2 when active.  This is compatible with the rules above for increased<BR>
sensor size.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 17:47:14 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 22:58 -0400 3/8/00, Thom Jones-Low <tjoneslo@together.net> wrote:<BR>
>	I think there should be a role for fighters, but not as capital ship<BR>
>killers. Having them be dangerous to anything up to about 1000 dTons<BR>
>would be good.<BR>
<BR>
They are good at crippling merchants and taking out the combat <BR>
capacity of warships (turret hits). Anything less than 600dT and <BR>
armoured is facing a critical hit in HG2.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
>	In this way I agree with Dom. I want a quick, simple and straight<BR>
>forward method of building starships, vehicles and everthing else.<BR>
>Traveller is a background, and a space opera one. Knowing the designers<BR>
>understand the concept that spaceships need radiators to eliminate the<BR>
>waste heat is good. Requiring me as vehicle designer to understand it<BR>
>may be passable. Making radiator maintenance the center of starship life<BR>
>for the characters is bad.<BR>
<BR>
Absolutely; I want the Technical Architecture in place, but I don't <BR>
want to see it in the basic game. I'd like to see the construction <BR>
rules as abstract as possible in the main book. Any revised TTA <BR>
should also show how the modules for the basic rules were built as <BR>
examples. I also don't want wholesale changes that undermine the <BR>
background (such as TNE's shift to HePLAR). Note I have no issue with <BR>
HePLAR or other semi-handwave drives, I just don't like the dumping <BR>
of what went before. HePLAR drives would trash quite a lot of canon <BR>
starports.... ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 10:26:09 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Sensor Options for FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson writes:<BR>
<BR>
> If you want to _seriously_ upgrade sensor resolution (enough so that PCs<BR>
> can actually see the skull and crossbones painted on that pirate's bow), consider grav-focus sensors.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, as a side-note, resolution at 1 parsec is roughly 10^(11.5-S) AU, or<BR>
 10^(19.5) km.  This means a TL 14 grav-focus PEMS-15 could create<BR>
a 300 meter resolution planetary surface map at 1 parsec ;)  Of course, that's<BR>
a 300 meter, 5,000 m^2, 10,000 m^3, 50 GCr sensor with standard sensors;<BR>
that increases to an appalling 100,000 m^2, 6,000,000 m^3, 30 TCr sensor with<BR>
the increased sensor mass option.<BR>
<BR>
Field of view is probably something like 10^(resolution increase+2) radians.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 11:35:39 -0700<BR>
From: "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com><BR>
Subject: Structure Factor<BR>
<BR>
Dave Goldend is one of the designer's of FFSv2.  His designer's notes page addresses among <BR>
other things how the structure factor was derived.  It can be reached here:<BR>
www.pcisys.net/~goldendj/Traveller/Admirality/Shipyard/FFS2Notes/FFSNotes.html<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Free E-mail and Homepage at http://www.prontomail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 11:39:13 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 10:43 PM -0700 8/3/00, Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
>  >I am _not_ talking about narrow band emissions.   I have postulated<BR>
>  >the same spectral distribution as thermal emmission<BR>
><BR>
>However, emitting things in the same proportions as a blackbody<BR>
>(ie the same ratio of 1 micron photons to 10 micron photons as a 100 K<BR>
>blackbody) but not in the same amounts - emitting more photons per<BR>
>m2 than the blackbody - isn't thermal emission; there's no simple way<BR>
>to do it, and all the non-simple ways that can be imagined require work.<BR>
>It's not a particularly natural state.<BR>
<BR>
I'm talking about the same distribution at the same rates.<BR>
<BR>
(As an aside, the question about _how_ you do something (rather<BR>
than _what_ you do) is not thermodyanics and is something that<BR>
technology can solve (much like a catalyst allows one to run<BR>
a thermodynamically possible reaction that default mechanics<BR>
won't allow).<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 11:41:01 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Game report: Striker<BR>
<BR>
>From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
<BR>
>On July 29th, the San Jose Traveller group played Striker. The opposing<BR>
>forces were a ragged assortment (TL 7 to 10) of forces on the planet<BR>
>Mongo, representing both the forces loyal to the government as well as<BR>
>rebels trying to take advantage of the political upheaval after the Fifth<BR>
>Frontier War.<BR>
<BR>
[excellent report deleted]<BR>
<BR>
>The game ended at this point, with the loyalist troops occupying the<BR>
>commerce park with the rebels occupying the downport facilities<BR>
>approximately 600 meters away.<BR>
<BR>
I would only add that the cantina occupied by rebel forces at the<BR>
beginning of the game (and located about 2 km southeast of the<BR>
downport/commerce park) remained undamaged throughout the action and was<BR>
unoccupied at the end of the game.  <BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 11:47:52 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>From: tim@premier.net<BR>
<BR>
>You are not alone Eris, i have been reading the thread and have <BR>
>saved alot of cool ideas.  I too see 100,000 ton ships as to big.<BR>
>I have a soluation to the problem.  Have all these people in favor of <BR>
>10,000 tons or better draw up deck plans.  That will break them.<BR>
<BR>
Hmm... my girlfriend is an ex-architect (now a recruiter for architectural<BR>
professionals) who knows AutoCAD as well as I know WordPerfect ... and her<BR>
company has AutoCAD ... and there are engineers in the top floor of my<BR>
building whom I see every day and they probably have AutoCAD ... this is<BR>
possible.  <BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:15:22 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Definite Articles (OT) <BR>
<BR>
>From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
<BR>
>"I was driving on 280" or "you need to get on 101 North"; SoCals say <BR>
>"driving on _the_ 405" or "_the_ 15".<BR>
<BR>
101? 280? Forget it; just take SamTrans or CalTrain.  _Don't_ take "the<BR>
bus," "the express bus," "the train," or "the light rail."  (In San Jose<BR>
and Sacramento, however, you can take "the light rail.")<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:33:02 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Alien Vision<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
<BR>
>2) My fem sub is not one of them, she enjoys serving me, but she does not<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for sharing, but that's more information than I really need.<BR>
<BR>
>    ObTrav:  How many colonies are made up of BDSM groups?  I.e. ones<BR>
that<BR>
>do practice a "legal" form of slavery.  One in which a male of female<BR>
>enters willingly into slavery because that is what he or she wants out of<BR>
>life. And, how are these people treated by mainstream 3I culture?<BR>
<BR>
In my Traveller universe no colonies (at least none comprising entire<BR>
worlds) are made up of BDSM groups, but BDSM (and every other practice one<BR>
can imagine) is practiced here and there.  Mongo/Jewell produces a fair<BR>
amount of leather and other items for this market, and sells them<BR>
throughout the Spinward Marches.  Mainstream 3I culture generally ignores<BR>
individuals unless they are dangerous, powerful, popular, or some or all<BR>
of the above. <BR>
<BR>
>    For example, say Jack is a Master & jill decides that all she wants<BR>
>out of life is to be Jack's slave, what would the 3I do about it?  Would<BR>
>they arrest Jack for "owning" jill?  Would they commit jill to a<BR>
>hospital?  <BR>
<BR>
The underlying reason for the ban on slavery in the Imperium is economic. <BR>
Traffic in slaves disrupts societies and their commerce.  Capitalism is<BR>
possible with wage slavery, but not with chattel slavery.  Household<BR>
servants are not part of the productive process, so they don't implicate<BR>
these concerns.  Imperial authorities have the discretion to enforce the<BR>
ban on chattel slavery reasonably.  This sometimes leads to abuses, and<BR>
sometimes avoids abuses.  <BR>
<BR>
>What if Jack joins up with the IA, IN, IMC, or ISS & brings jill allong<BR>
>as a dependent, would she be treated by the other people on the base as a<BR>
>spouse, or something else?  <BR>
<BR>
I haven't figured out the entire scheme of Imperial service.  Does the<BR>
Imperium provide benefits for dependents?  What benefits and what<BR>
dependents?  Pay increments for additional dependents -- or pay cuts for<BR>
each dependent above a certain number?  Medical/dental/vision etc.? <BR>
Discounts on food, clothing, etc.?  Help with loans?  How big is the<BR>
"dependent train" in Imperial service?<BR>
<BR>
>Or, would his culture be respected by the 3I because of the fact that<BR>
>jill is Jack's slave because she wants to be his slave? <BR>
<BR>
The volition of a slave is irrelevant from a legal perspective, but see my<BR>
comment on prosecutorial discretion above.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:39:57 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Neural Activity Sensors<BR>
<BR>
>From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
<BR>
>David P. Summers writes: <BR>
>> I expect a sheet of metal of almost any thickness would obscure the<BR>
>> signal....<BR>
><BR>
>In particular, a thin layer of aluminum foil in a hat will protect you.  <BR>
>It also helps against the orbital mind control lasers.<BR>
<BR>
I've been trying this for a while, but I realized that there is neural<BR>
activity occuring throughout my nervous system -- that is, all over my<BR>
body.  So I would have to wear a complete coverall of aluminum foil, which<BR>
doesn't sound like a bad idea.  It sounds like reflec, actually.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 19:43:43 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2000 21:21:08 -0700<BR>
>From: Justice Hypercleats <eris@sierratel.com><BR>
>Subject: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
A few comments to add to those already made:<BR>
<BR>
>What is the meaning of the term "Imperial Client State?" <BR>
Good examples from history would be Roman client states (the original<BR>
use of the term) and the Indian Princely States under the British Raj.<BR>
Nominally, they were entirely independent.  However, the Imperial<BR>
power kept the ruling class under its influence using everything from<BR>
bribery (sorry, "pensions and subsidies") to taking hostages (sorry,<BR>
"offering to educate the ruler's children in the best schools in the<BR>
Empire").  Of course, an Imperial garrison force would be stationed<BR>
close by (probably not in the client state itself) ready to intervene<BR>
if there was any trouble (and, of course, to "protect the client state<BR>
from external threats").  In this way, the Imperial power kept the<BR>
region pacified and friendly without having to pick up the expense of<BR>
actually governing it.<BR>
<BR>
>Is a world that is owned and governed by a Megacorporation a "client state?"<BR>
<BR>
Not necessarily, but possibly - if the Megacorp took over a world that<BR>
was outside the formal boundaries of the Imperium, that world would<BR>
become a de facto client state.  But, the Imperium could later grant<BR>
full membership to the world, and it would cease to be a Client State.<BR>
<BR>
>Does the ethnicity of the<BR>
>majority of the population have any bearing on the Imperium's policy toward<BR>
>that world?<BR>
Officially, legally, and for most of the time in reality , no.<BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium colonize newly discovered, uninhabited worlds directly? <BR>
I have seen references to an "Imperial Bureau/Ministry of<BR>
Colonisation" in some sources, but don't know what it's actual role<BR>
is.  It may be simply there to oversee and control private<BR>
colonisation initiatives, or it may carry out colonisation itself.  Or<BR>
both, of course.<BR>
<BR>
>(If the latter, what government type is the<BR>
>world? <BR>
Government type is more a matter of "perception".  If the colonist<BR>
families get together once a week to decide important matters, then<BR>
it's a participatory democracy;  if there's an appointed "colony<BR>
director" answerable to higher authority, then its probably a<BR>
Controlled Government, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
>Or are<BR>
>there certain boundaries they must stay within in order to be rewarded with<BR>
>Imperial status, diplomacy, trade, protection? Does the Imperium have a<BR>
>'Bill of Rights' of any kind? Or an expectation of basic civil rights? <BR>
<BR>
AFAIK the only *firm* boundaries are that a world must not impose<BR>
chattel slavery, use weapons of mass destruction against inhabited<BR>
planets, put undue restrictions on trade, or deny Imperial citizenship<BR>
to any organic sentient being.  There are no other formally stated<BR>
rights. However, the higher Imperial authorities are given wide<BR>
discretion to intervene in any situation when they think fit;  this is<BR>
based on their own judgement, honour, sense of ethics, and belief that<BR>
"decent people just don't behave in certain ways".  It's sort of a<BR>
cross between 18th century enlightened despotism and the British<BR>
theory of an unwritten constitution based on precedent and popular<BR>
consensus, rather than a formal written Bill of Rights.<BR>
<BR>
The background to TNE made it pretty clear that, at least in the<BR>
writers' opinion, this system had broken down by the 1100s and there<BR>
was widespread abuse within the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
>planets that are ruled by extremist dictators, theocrats, oligarchies <BR>
Permitted.<BR>
<BR>
>who enslave their population, <BR>
Illegal<BR>
<BR>
>hold them at a very low tech-level (while<BR>
>equipping their police/military with their highest tech they have), <BR>
Permitted<BR>
<BR>
>prevent them from ever leaving the planet, <BR>
A grey area - you could make the case that this would be a restriction<BR>
on free trade.<BR>
<BR>
>prevent free speech, prevent any info<BR>
>from outside their world to be heard by their 'subjects,' segregate and<BR>
Permitted<BR>
<BR>
>commit acts of genocide, <BR>
Not sure on this one.<BR>
<BR>
>fund and foment revolutionary movements and<BR>
>terrorism in other nearby Imperial worlds, <BR>
Illegal (if they get caught).<BR>
<BR>
>force their population (including<BR>
>children), against their will, to work at subsistence level to make and sell<BR>
>products for trade, the profits from which will only go to the government's<BR>
>leaders<BR>
Illegal if by "force" you mean legal compulsion.  If it's simply<BR>
social and economic pressures, then that is permitted. <BR>
<BR>
>Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of an<BR>
>Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? <BR>
Good question.  As long as the slave-holding world was outside the<BR>
Imperial borders, I would say that was, technically, legal.  However,<BR>
if the Megacorp's rivals complained to the Imperial authorities they<BR>
could probably find ways to prevent this trade - eg, by sending a<BR>
fleet to annex the slave world andf emancipate its population.<BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium allow people from an oppressive government to request<BR>
>asylum? <BR>
<BR>
The moment they cross the line into an Imperial starport, they are<BR>
free to move to almost any other planet in the Imperium.  Of course,<BR>
the oppressive government can try to stop them *reaching* the<BR>
starport.<BR>
<BR>
>Is there any method of redress if Megacorps commit acts of piracy,<BR>
>slavery, theft, carpet nuking a rival's world, or a plantet that will not<BR>
>trade with them, etc..?<BR>
<BR>
This is why the Imperium needs all those 200,000 ton dreadnoughts...<BR>
;-)<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:47:25 -0700<BR>
From: "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2881<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Free E-mail and Homepage at http://www.prontomail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 13:01:57 -0700<BR>
From: "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com><BR>
Subject: FFSv3<BR>
<BR>
I like the Traveller Technical Architecture Book and I applaud the effort to produce a cleaned <BR>
up version.  My 0.02 credits worth:<BR>
<BR>
Big Ships/Small Ships:  Rather than arbitrarily determining the size limits for ships I would <BR>
rather let engineering limitations set the upper scale.  This means that realistic treatment of <BR>
structural integrity, thermal management, etc. would go a long ways to setting the limits.<BR>
<BR>
Fighters:  Personally, I like fighters.  The weapon of choice for attacking capital ships is the <BR>
det-laser missile.  Reducing the warhead costs would go a long way to improving this weapon <BR>
system.  With improved (realistic) structural integrity and thermal management rules fighters <BR>
should have a g-advantage over capital ships (i.e., capital ships may have to sacrifice <BR>
g-performance to achieve their large size).  This g-advantage may or may not be sufficient for <BR>
giving fighter carriers a stand-off capability.  In any event small ships should be able to outrun <BR>
large ships given improved structural integrity/thermal rules. <BR>
<BR>
FFSv3 design:  It should be recognized from the start that the only way for this project to <BR>
succeed is to assume that the rules will be incorporated into either a dedicated spreadsheet <BR>
program or a software program. Trying to make it work only with paper, pencil, and calculator <BR>
is absurd.  FFSv2 is just way tooooooooooo complex for that.  On the other hand a module <BR>
based system (with components built using FFSv3) should not require a computer otherwise it <BR>
will have failed.  <BR>
<BR>
FFSv3 and the Traveller System:  When we develop the design system it should be integrated <BR>
with the combat system.  This issue is one of the primary current failures.  There does not <BR>
seem to be a ship based combat system (other than the Role Playing Ship Combat System <BR>
for small ships).  In parallel with the FFSv3 effort there should also be an effort to develop a <BR>
naval combat system (an upgraded Brilliant Lances/Battle Rider perhaps ?).<BR>
<BR>
FFSv3 General:  Before we begin major effort on this rewrite I think it would be a good idea to <BR>
develop a consensus on the following:  (1) scale of effort (ie inclusion of wet nautical ships, <BR>
walker ground vehicles, computers/robots/AI, etc) (2)  general technological assumptions, (3) <BR>
effect intended for fictional technology, (4) laws of physics broken, and (5) inclusion of <BR>
alternative technologies other than in the standard OTU.  There are probably others as well.  <BR>
Keep in mind that what you may assume may not be what I may assume, so it is a good idea <BR>
to state the obvious.  <BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Free E-mail and Homepage at http://www.prontomail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:10:22 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: "Start Wrecked" and FFSx<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> Actually, I'd be surprised if you understand any 21st Century tech,<BR>
>> since the 20th Century doesn't end until midnight Dec 31st of this<BR>
>> year. (Remember, the *First* Century went from 1 to 100)<BR>
><BR>
> And I'd be very surprised if there was enough of a leap in technology in<BR>
> the next 5 months that someone who understands it today won't still<BR>
> understand it when the 21st century rolls around.<BR>
<BR>
Ah, but that means that tech is 20th century. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 12:15:44 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Jumping and Gravity Waves<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Ships emerging from jump will cause gravity waves because of the suddenly<BR>
> appearing mass. But, will these waves be minimized if the ship "phases in"<BR>
> more or less gradually?  What sorts of time scales would be required to<BR>
> minimize the grav waves?<BR>
<BR>
Just a guess, but probably *hours*. With longer period for heavier ships.<BR>
<BR>
> On a related point, would a ship jumping out produce gravity waves?  Using<BR>
> the rubber sheet analogy it would be like quickly lifting up a mass from<BR>
> the sheet, thus producing vibrations.  This would no longer be a "graviton<BR>
> wave front", but the termination of a graviton signal (so to speak). <BR>
> Would that be as easily detectable? <BR>
<BR>
It should be just as detectable. Same "pulse", just opposite polarity.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 13:49:42 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: Reverse Engineering (was Re: GT Starship Modules )<BR>
<BR>
On 08/04/00 at 12:41 PM,  "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>I'll do it over the weekend and post it Monday<BR>
<BR>
Thank you very much!<BR>
<BR>
Dris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 14:58:31 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: GT Power Slices (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/04/00 at 09:34 AM,  Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>> Commo takes power, AG takes power, Life Support takes power, the track<BR>
>> lighting in the captians cabin takes power...<BR>
<BR>
>A typical 100T scout ship (GT) with 3 lasers has the following reactor<BR>
>slices: <BR>
>Lasers:          33 MW<BR>
>Thrusters:       80 MW<BR>
>Jump Drive:      30 MW<BR>
>Art. Gravity:     2 MW<BR>
>AESA:           2.5 MW<BR>
>Everything Else:.01 MW or less (maybe .1 for a fuel processor).<BR>
<BR>
>As you can see, the redundant power slices for weaponry and jump drive<BR>
>are in fact a noticeable inefficiency; everything else can pretty much be<BR>
>ignored.<BR>
<BR>
Rhetorically, I want to draw a deckplan of the non-standard 400 dTon<BR>
ship I just designed using GT's modules.  How big is my ship's<BR>
engine room?  Before you say, just add up the spaces for Jump and<BR>
Maneuver drives, consider that there *is* a power slice from the<BR>
weapons, AG, and sensors...as well as the tiny bit from everything<BR>
else.  IAC, tiny power requirements do eventually add up to<BR>
something.<BR>
<BR>
As per an earlier suggestion, using the system in G:Space 3rd is a<BR>
viable choice...almost.  <g> What is missing there is the *other*<BR>
thing that is missing from GT's modules...a primer on constructing<BR>
new and *deconstructing* existing modules. <BR>
<BR>
Yeah, that's another book.  Or at least, a series of articles in<BR>
JTAS or Pyramid.  <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 16:06:26 -0400<BR>
From: trentfs@ix.netcom.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Definite Articles (OT) <BR>
<BR>
Glenn wrote:<BR>
> 101? 280? Forget it; just take SamTrans or CalTrain.  _Don't_ take "the<BR>
> bus," "the express bus," "the train," or "the light rail."  (In San Jose<BR>
> and Sacramento, however, you can take "the light rail.")<BR>
<BR>
Which brings to mind an apparently-uncommented-upon feature of Northern Californian linguistics that I've noticed -- the tendency for these types to abbreviate words down to their first syllable (i.e. "CalTrain," "SamTrans," et numerous al).  Here in the southern part of the state we don't do that (except to refer to "SoCal" itself, a term surely coined up north)-- we seem more likely to use initials (LA, OC, TJ (i.e. Tijuana), etc.).  As far as I can tell, they don't do it anywhere else in the country either (unless using SF-isms; I have little doubt where "fro-yo" for frozen yogurt came from).  Does anyone (or, perhaps, everyone but me) know when/why this linguistic oddity developed?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Trent<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 13:14:44 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
Subject: Re: GT Power Slices (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net writes:<BR>
<BR>
> Rhetorically, I want to draw a deckplan of the non-standard 400 dTon<BR>
> ship I just designed using GT's modules.  How big is my ship's<BR>
> engine room?  Before you say, just add up the spaces for Jump and<BR>
> Maneuver drives, consider that there *is* a power slice from the<BR>
> weapons, AG, and sensors...as well as the tiny bit from everything<BR>
> else.  IAC, tiny power requirements do eventually add up to<BR>
> something.<BR>
<BR>
Not really.  VE has a slop factor of several percent, which means that power<BR>
requirements under a megawatt or so can probably be safely ignored.<BR>
> <BR>
> As per an earlier suggestion, using the system in G:Space 3rd is a<BR>
> viable choice...almost.  <g> What is missing there is the *other*<BR>
> thing that is missing from GT's modules...a primer on constructing<BR>
> new and *deconstructing* existing modules. <BR>
Space 3/e doesn't require much deconstruction.  <BR>
> <BR>
> Yeah, that's another book.  Or at least, a series of articles in<BR>
> JTAS or Pyramid.  <g><BR>
<BR>
Yes, it's another book.  That book is 'GURPS Vehicles'.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 13:13:12 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
<BR>
>>   *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
>Agree. 'No! You'll tear the ship apart, you maniac!'<BR>
<BR>
Or, of course:  "She canna take much more o'this, Sair! She'll blooow!"<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:11:05 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
On 08/04/00 at 02:35 AM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>> Bruce there is a Resolves at 50,000 km column, but as I wrote<BR>
>> earlier, that's not all that helpful when you don't know how to<BR>
>> use that to answer, "What can I resolve at 32,000 km?" or "Can I see<BR>
>> that 4 sq meter hatch from here?"<BR>
<BR>
>Simple. Divide the actual range by 50,000 km. Then muliply the resolved<BR>
>size by that number.<BR>
<BR>
Leonard, I got it!  When you *explained* the relationship, I got<BR>
it.<g><BR>
<BR>
I was pointing out that the "Divide the actual..." wasn't *in* the<BR>
design document, and it should have been.  I'm not totally stupid,<BR>
so if I didn't realize the relationship was a linear ratio, then I'm<BR>
sure others didn't either.  This was a case of the designer falling<BR>
into the "everyone knows that" trap. <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 13:37:56 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Structure Factor<BR>
<BR>
that address is actually:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj/Traveller/Admiralty/Shipyard/FFS2Notes/FFSNotes.html<BR>
<BR>
'Admiralty' not 'Admirality'<BR>
<BR>
Robert Snyder wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Dave Goldend is one of the designer's of FFSv2.  His designer's notes page addresses among<BR>
> other things how the structure factor was derived.  It can be reached here:<BR>
> www.pcisys.net/~goldendj/Traveller/Admirality/Shipyard/FFS2Notes/FFSNotes.html<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:41:42 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: A normal extra-solar gas giant<BR>
<BR>
While its orbit is eliptical, it at least orbits at a "normal" distance<BR>
and has jupiter-range mass.  Not one of these touching-its-parent-star-<BR>
and-orbitting-every-5-minutes things they've been finding so often :-).<BR>
<BR>
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=197<BR>
<BR>
This site has more details and an interesting discussion of gas giant<BR>
formation theories...<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2884<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (rly-yc04.mail.aol.com [172.18.149.36]) by air-yc03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 16:41:57 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yc04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 16:41:33 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id QAA83871;<BR>
	Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:41:30 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:41:17 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id QAA83825<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:41:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:41:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008042041.QAA83825@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2884<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2885</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/4/00 3:42:41 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, August 4 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2885<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
Re: TML Roster<BR>
Re: Miniatures Question<BR>
RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (longish)<BR>
Re: Structure Factor<BR>
Re: Definite Articles (OT)<BR>
re: FFSv3<BR>
re: A normal extra-solar gas giant<BR>
RE: Ship Sizes and other stuff (long)<BR>
Re: FFSv3<BR>
Re: Tweeked LBB2 Starship Combat (long)<BR>
Solomani Money (again)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:45:15 EDT<BR>
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 8/3/00 5:22:08 AM !!!First Boot!!!, <BR>
travellerne@3rd-imperium.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
<< ...and then the whole battalion was swept away by one of Mongo's freak<BR>
 force 1000 gales...<BR>
  >><BR>
<BR>
SPLORT! Great way to get back to the list...:-). BTW; how did I get unsubbed?<BR>
<BR>
Seth<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 15:49:23 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: TML Roster<BR>
<BR>
On 08/04/00 at 08:23 AM,  "Brian Jenkins" <Brian.Jenkins@grpwise1.westek.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Where can I find the Roster?<BR>
<BR>
Look down about 11 lines for the url. <g><BR>
<BR>
Anyone that wants to add their name, city, state, country, and<BR>
optionally email and web page can drop me a line at the address..um,<BR>
6 lines down.  <g> One list is in text format and the other is comma<BR>
delimited for use in spreadsheets.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:52:36 EDT<BR>
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Miniatures Question<BR>
<BR>
Heres a suggestion:<BR>
<BR>
Why doesn't Mr. Wiseman (and Mr. Miller) contact Mr. McClintock (?) over at <BR>
Microtactix games? They make some NICE cardboard lines (mostly fantasy, but <BR>
also a generic SF roleplaying line). They have people, vehicles and buildings <BR>
at 25mm. I don't see why they can't do a Traveller licsensed line....<BR>
<BR>
here's the URL:<BR>
<BR>
 <A HREF="http://www.microtactix.com/">Welcome to MicroTactix Games!</A><BR>
<BR>
BTW; I'm not affiliated with any of the above companies (well; I do volunteer <BR>
to run the SJG table at GAMA...:-) ); I just thought this idea has merit...<BR>
<BR>
Seth <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 14:09:40 -0700<BR>
From: sneadj@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (longish)<BR>
<BR>
Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Mark Preston writes:<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
> >Retroviruses most definately do fiddle around with the genome, but<BR>
> >generally operate on a tiny scale, even compared to the scales we are<BR>
> >looking at. However, there _is_ some suggestion that they may really<BR>
> >be involved in evolutionary stages in punctuated equilibrium of<BR>
> >species.<BR>
> <BR>
>  This is entirely new to me.  Could you point me to a source?<BR>
<BR>
There was an article in Discover Magazine a few months ago about <BR>
something called transposons.  Basically, these were gene <BR>
sequences which could quite literally hop between species, <BR>
independent of normal reproduction.  In effect, a flea or tick drinks <BR>
your blood and either you get a few flea or tick genes, or it gets <BR>
some of yours, or possibly both.  This sort of thing seems fairly <BR>
rare, and there were mechanisms in place that normally (but not <BR>
always) "turned off" this DNA as soon as it was in place.  In fact, it <BR>
was suggested that since the markers to turn off genes could <BR>
sometime affect other nearby genes that having a transposon insert <BR>
itself in a particular portion of DNA could easily turn off a few of the <BR>
surrounding genes.<BR>
<BR>
How this whole bizarre process may have affected evolution is still <BR>
under investigation.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -John Snead sneadj@mindspring.com    <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 16:38:26 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Structure Factor<BR>
<BR>
On 08/04/00 at 01:37 PM,  Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
>that address is actually:<BR>
<BR>
>http://www.pcisys.net/~goldendj/Traveller/Admiralty/Shipyard/FFS2Notes/FFSNotes.html<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, what he said. <g><BR>
<BR>
Basically 225,000 was as much of a swag as whatever swag produced<BR>
the Internal Structure Value for the largest ship in SSDS. <g><BR>
<BR>
Let's take a 1,000,000 dTon ship with 1 g support and Enhanced<BR>
Bonded SuperDense material (toughness = 47), and see how much<BR>
internal structure FFS2 gives it...<BR>
<BR>
SF = 110,433,490<BR>
<BR>
Structure volume = 110,433,490 * 1 / 47 = 2,349,649.7 cubic meters<BR>
<BR>
...hum, that's ~17% of the total volume of the ship!  That leaves<BR>
you with 832,168 dTons to play with.  It wouldn't do to make this<BR>
much faster.<BR>
<BR>
A Tigeress is 500,000 dT, 3 g, Enhanced Bonded SuperDense?  That<BR>
reduces to an SF of 39,044,135 and a Structure Volume of 2,482,179<BR>
(178,013 dT) leaving 321,987...about 12% per g.<BR>
<BR>
On the other end there is a 200 dT Trader, with 1 g and<BR>
SuperDense...SF of 312, Structure Volume of 16 stere (1.14 dT).<BR>
<BR>
Do these number look too low, too high, or just right?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 16:45:49 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Definite Articles (OT)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/04/00 at 04:06 PM,  trentfs@ix.netcom.com said:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Which brings to mind an apparently-uncommented-upon feature of Northern<BR>
>Californian linguistics that I've noticed -- the tendency for these types<BR>
>to abbreviate words down to their first syllable (i.e. "CalTrain,"<BR>
>"SamTrans," et numerous al).  Here in the southern part of the state we<BR>
>don't do that (except to refer to "SoCal" itself, a term surely coined up<BR>
>north)-- we seem more likely to use initials (LA, OC, TJ (i.e. Tijuana),<BR>
>etc.).  As far as I can tell, they don't do it anywhere else in the<BR>
>country either (unless using SF-isms; I have little doubt where "fro-yo"<BR>
>for frozen yogurt came from).  Does anyone (or, perhaps, everyone but me)<BR>
>know when/why this linguistic oddity developed?<BR>
<BR>
But just *try* to call that city on the bay, SanFran around one of<BR>
its inhabitants.  <g><BR>
<BR>
Ob Trav:  Have the party run into undecipherable slang and<BR>
abbreviations that change from system to system in a hap-hazard<BR>
fashion.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 23:07:35 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: re: FFSv3<BR>
<BR>
At 16:41 -0400 4/8/00, "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>FFSv3 design:  It should be recognized from the start that the only <BR>
>way for this project to<BR>
>succeed is to assume that the rules will be incorporated into either <BR>
>a dedicated spreadsheet<BR>
>program or a software program. Trying to make it work only with <BR>
>paper, pencil, and calculator<BR>
>is absurd.  FFSv2 is just way tooooooooooo complex for that.  On the <BR>
>other hand a module<BR>
>based system (with components built using FFSv3) should not require <BR>
>a computer otherwise it<BR>
>will have failed.<BR>
<BR>
I think if we go this way it should be a java engine. And who is <BR>
going to check it all if it's too complex? ;-)<BR>
<BR>
>FFSv3 and the Traveller System:  When we develop the design system <BR>
>it should be integrated<BR>
>with the combat system.  This issue is one of the primary current <BR>
>failures.  There does not<BR>
>seem to be a ship based combat system (other than the Role Playing <BR>
>Ship Combat System<BR>
>for small ships).  In parallel with the FFSv3 effort there should <BR>
>also be an effort to develop a<BR>
>naval combat system (an upgraded Brilliant Lances/Battle Rider perhaps ?).<BR>
<BR>
Have a look at the BITS site: Specifically at MayDay M4.1 on the <BR>
archive page. This is updated MayDay using the FFS2 design sequence <BR>
and Bruce's DSR. It's a nice game, and the acrobat file is free.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 23:13:35 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: re: A normal extra-solar gas giant<BR>
<BR>
At 16:41 -0400 4/8/00, Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca> wrote:<BR>
>While its orbit is eliptical, it at least orbits at a "normal" distance<BR>
>and has jupiter-range mass.  Not one of these touching-its-parent-star-<BR>
>and-orbitting-every-5-minutes things they've been finding so often :-).<BR>
><BR>
>http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewnews.html?id=197<BR>
><BR>
>This site has more details and an interesting discussion of gas giant<BR>
>formation theories...<BR>
<BR>
Well, cribbing mercilessly from another list - this gas giant is <BR>
coincident with the Viking (Epsilon Eridani) system in CJ Cherryh's <BR>
Alliance/Union Downbelow station universe.:<BR>
<BR>
The URLs posted by for more information where:<BR>
<BR>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_865000/865365.stm<BR>
<BR>
More information about Viking is available at:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.solstation.com/cjc/viking.htm<BR>
<BR>
More information about Epsilon Eridani is available at:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.solstation.com/stars/eps-erid.htm<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 18:28:33 -0400 <BR>
From: Robert Sanders <RSanders@mpprint.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship Sizes and other stuff (long)<BR>
<BR>
Lurk mode off... <BR>
<BR>
Greetings all,<BR>
<BR>
I have been reading the very interesting discussion on ship size and game<BR>
play.  If we are adding to the wish list let me add my voice to the crowd -<BR>
please excuse the bandwidth.  I have not had much time respond, and you get<BR>
to receive it all in one shot! <BR>
<BR>
KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid.   Any system created needs to be able to be<BR>
played by your average 7th grader.  Avoid the SFB syndrome of adding and<BR>
adding until the game is unplayable.  <BR>
<BR>
Simple Design - I used to have a BASIC program that would create ships<BR>
(customized high guard) in seconds, that had my system of damage points,<BR>
damage list, ship sensor stats, EP's, and weapon stats all on one page.<BR>
Took about 5 minutes to create a new ship, have it printed (on my old daisy<BR>
wheel printer) and into the game.  I feel that any new version of FFS needs<BR>
to be designed from the very start is a program... then create the  books,<BR>
etc.  Make it available over the internet, and start some tournaments in<BR>
some game stores... restore interest in the game Traveller.  The role<BR>
players will follow... <BR>
<BR>
Simple Game Play - I did like the abstract version of space combat in TNE.<BR>
I expanded it to use my ships, but it worked for role playing.  Something<BR>
like that should be used for T5.  <BR>
<BR>
For small units, add on a simple tactical game and hook the kids in.  And of<BR>
course... <BR>
<BR>
Strategic Play - any system should be able to roll up into a macro game.  My<BR>
CA with hundreds of weapons, crew, etc, equals a 4-4-4 chit, or something<BR>
like that.  For those of you who remember FFW! Add some more detail then<BR>
that, but you get the idea!  Publish a game with that system centered around<BR>
the Solomani Rim War, and hook the hard core wargammers!  <BR>
<BR>
Ability to Drill Down - Sure, I have a basic 100 ton scout, but my players<BR>
want to know if they can put in a 6G drive...  what do I do?  Flip to the<BR>
back of the book and find out that the 6G drive requires XYZ, and if we<BR>
remove 2.5 staterooms, add 5 tons of bracing, and a super hydro multiplexing<BR>
computer it can be done... or something like that.  Hook the gearheads! <BR>
<BR>
Ship Size - I like Big Ships!  However, they need to be used in moderation.<BR>
In the US we have about 10 Fleet carriers (not sure now... used to be 15 or<BR>
so), so most of the people in the world have never seen one in real life.  A<BR>
few people in the US may have (if you drive pass Norfolk Va. on any given<BR>
day you can see 1-3 in port) but from a distance, and there are the<BR>
(un?)lucky few who have served on one (I spent over 2.5 years of my life<BR>
floating on the USS Indy). I still remember when I was on a small (30 foot)<BR>
boat in the bay when a CV sailed past...  wow.  In fact, that feeling of<BR>
being so small and helpless next to a huge war machine should to be<BR>
communicated to your players next time they come across a battle ship!<BR>
Hook the space opera players! <BR>
<BR>
In Traveller the critical-hit-and-you're-out-of-the-game rule (fuel tanks<BR>
smashed, vaporized, drives gone, etc...) effectively ends the reason for<BR>
really large ships. No reason to spend trillions on really big ships, as<BR>
they are just too weak. (We called them eggshells) If you have to fight a<BR>
base, or planet, or another fleet with many small ships built around meson<BR>
guns...  forgetaboutit. One good whack, and most of the invasion fleet is<BR>
nothing but critically hit hulls. And for PC's in small ships it was just<BR>
too quick. BANG! "Uh, your fuel tanks just got vaporized. Sorry." Get rid of<BR>
it.  <BR>
<BR>
Remove the concept of spinal mounts...  keep the really big weapons, just<BR>
make it so that if you wanted that Tigress could be packing 9(!) type T<BR>
mason guns!  (that is just my feeling that it is really silly to have a<BR>
500,000 ton ship with a "spinal" mount that masses 5k... or whatever it<BR>
is...  don't have the books here with me).  Smaller ships could still be<BR>
build around a very large weapon in a spinal mount, but for the BIG ships<BR>
why not have them carry several?<BR>
<BR>
I feel that big ships should be able to take a lot of damage before losing<BR>
any combat effectiveness. And the VERY FEW really big ships will have to be<BR>
ganged up on, or they will crush the enemy fleet unless it runs (big ships<BR>
should be slow and NOT agile) Only after the ship has absorbed several<BR>
rounds of punishing fire will it start to effect operations. I think of<BR>
Traveller capital ships as close relatives to the old W.W.I and W.W.II<BR>
Battleships.  Most of the time they took HUGE amounts of damage before<BR>
losing their punch. Very survivable. (Until damage passed a certain point,<BR>
then it was goodbye: they would turn turtle and sink, sometimes with guns<BR>
still firing!) Sure, there are those examples of lucky hits (a.k.a. the<BR>
Hood) but most of the time it was a slugfest.  Any combat system I buy will<BR>
have to give the big boys a reason to be around.  <BR>
<BR>
In fact, I do not see any reason to limit ship size at all!  Heck, if we<BR>
wanted to we could build a HUGE ship in space with today's technology!! (not<BR>
saying it could do anything... but it could be BIG)  In fact, if you are TL<BR>
9-11 I could see the reason to build much larger ships! (giant armored slabs<BR>
drifting through space... have to pound on them for days to knock them out)<BR>
Think of the W.W.II Battleships (16 inches of armor) and our Cruisers today<BR>
(1 inch of aluminum).  But that cruiser MAY sink the battleship long before<BR>
it entered the BB's effective range...  or it may not!  After the USS<BR>
Virginia (CGN-38)expended its 16 Tomahawk and Harpoon missiles that BB COULD<BR>
STILL BE COMING ON!!!  Think of the fear!  All that CA has left is two 5<BR>
inch guns!  I know, and I hate it as well when people use RW examples to<BR>
make a point about space combat theory, so please do not use these as flame<BR>
bait, and stick to the point. That a lower tech space ship if built with<BR>
enough armor and size should be able to defeat a smaller higher tech ship! <BR>
<BR>
Besides, people like big ships!  Think Starwars! Remember the feeling when<BR>
that big honking star destroyer cruised over your head! <BR>
<BR>
Heat is a interesting limiting factor...  I like what I have read about the<BR>
problems getting rid of it, and it should be included in the new system...<BR>
but not to get rid of large ships!  To add to realism!  <BR>
<BR>
humm....  looking back over this I really rambled... sorry.  <BR>
<BR>
Back to my real life as a mild mannered ex-squid, ex-jarhead, ex-ad guy,<BR>
current IT master. <BR>
<BR>
Bob Sanders<BR>
<BR>
Suit up and lurk mode on! <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 08:29:30 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com><BR>
> Subject: FFSv3<BR>
><BR>
> I like the Traveller Technical Architecture Book and I applaud the effort<BR>
to produce a cleaned<BR>
> up version.  My 0.02 credits worth:<BR>
><BR>
> Big Ships/Small Ships:  Rather than arbitrarily determining the size<BR>
limits for ships I would<BR>
> rather let engineering limitations set the upper scale.  This means that<BR>
realistic treatment of<BR>
> structural integrity, thermal management, etc. would go a long ways to<BR>
setting the limits.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Yes.<BR>
<BR>
> Fighters:  Personally, I like fighters.  The weapon of choice for<BR>
attacking capital ships is the<BR>
> det-laser missile.  Reducing the warhead costs would go a long way to<BR>
improving this weapon<BR>
> system.  With improved (realistic) structural integrity and thermal<BR>
management rules fighters<BR>
> should have a g-advantage over capital ships (i.e., capital ships may have<BR>
to sacrifice<BR>
> g-performance to achieve their large size).  This g-advantage may or may<BR>
not be sufficient for<BR>
> giving fighter carriers a stand-off capability.  In any event small ships<BR>
should be able to outrun<BR>
> large ships given improved structural integrity/thermal rules.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
I believe a layered defense of nuclear counter-missiles, det laser<BR>
counter-missiles and laser fire from 'defensive' fighters,  nuclear dampers,<BR>
rapid-fire lasers and sand should be able to attrit det laser missiles.<BR>
<BR>
I also believe that if missiles are effective counter-ship weapons, then<BR>
specialised ships will mount them (the ancient example of this class being<BR>
the Terran Missile Boat in Imperium).<BR>
<BR>
> FFSv3 design:  It should be recognized from the start that the only way<BR>
for this project to<BR>
> succeed is to assume that the rules will be incorporated into either a<BR>
dedicated spreadsheet<BR>
> program or a software program. Trying to make it work only with paper,<BR>
pencil, and calculator<BR>
> is absurd.  FFSv2 is just way tooooooooooo complex for that.  On the other<BR>
hand a module<BR>
> based system (with components built using FFSv3) should not require a<BR>
computer otherwise it<BR>
> will have failed.<BR>
<BR>
Umm, everything Ditzie has been involved with has been done with pen, paper<BR>
and calculator. And on some of it, we didnt use a calculator :)<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> FFSv3 and the Traveller System:  When we develop the design system it<BR>
should be integrated<BR>
> with the combat system.  This issue is one of the primary current<BR>
failures.  There does not<BR>
> seem to be a ship based combat system (other than the Role Playing Ship<BR>
Combat System<BR>
> for small ships).  In parallel with the FFSv3 effort there should also be<BR>
an effort to develop a<BR>
> naval combat system (an upgraded Brilliant Lances/Battle Rider perhaps ?).<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Macintosh's Military Combat System is well worth a look. Bruce, could<BR>
you please post it to the list ?<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> FFSv3 General:  Before we begin major effort on this rewrite I think it<BR>
would be a good idea to<BR>
> develop a consensus on the following:  (1) scale of effort (ie inclusion<BR>
of wet nautical ships,<BR>
> walker ground vehicles, computers/robots/AI, etc) (2)  general<BR>
technological assumptions, (3)<BR>
> effect intended for fictional technology, (4) laws of physics broken, and<BR>
(5) inclusion of<BR>
> alternative technologies other than in the standard OTU.  There are<BR>
probably others as well.<BR>
> Keep in mind that what you may assume may not be what I may assume, so it<BR>
is a good idea<BR>
> to state the obvious.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
1) basically, I think it will be space- and starships, ground vehicles, grav<BR>
vehicles and aircraft. But if someone wants to put up their hand for trains<BR>
or wet navy ships, go for it.<BR>
<BR>
2) general tech assumptions are not going to be changed from FFS2.<BR>
<BR>
3) the intended effects will be to replicate the Trav stuff as currently<BR>
exists (and to bring back things that act like the good old Fusion Guns for<BR>
starships)<BR>
<BR>
4) frankly, I think most of them will be broken ... but they will be broken<BR>
as few times as possible, and where they are broken will be documented<BR>
<BR>
5) alternative technologies will be included as such, and are dependant on<BR>
people sending them in.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 15:35:01 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Tweeked LBB2 Starship Combat (long)<BR>
<BR>
Ian,<BR>
<BR>
Perhaps you'd care to look at my old 'Advanced Small Ship Combat'.  I wrote<BR>
these rules back in 1980 and haven't updated them (not much ship combat in<BR>
my games)<BR>
<BR>
Look at http://www.travellercentral.com in the 'House Rules' section.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Ian Ferguson" <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
To: <traveller@mpgn.com><BR>
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 9:44 AM<BR>
Subject: RE: Tweeked LBB2 Starship Combat (long)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Eris writes:<BR>
> >Ian, I would really like to see your tweeked LBB2 rules. Could you post<BR>
them?<BR>
><BR>
> Certainly, but they are a little long-winded and currently disorganized.<BR>
><BR>
> Initiative: unless one side gains the initiative through specific tactics,<BR>
> each side rolls 1D+Ship Tactics and the higher result becomes the<BR>
"Intruder."<BR>
><BR>
> I use the LBB2 scale and combat turn sequence except that "Laser Return<BR>
> Fire" phases are exactly like "Laser Fire" phases [no special software is<BR>
> required, any weapon (except sand/missiles) may be fired even if not fired<BR>
> upon].  Missiles may be fired on at any range, but when targeted just<BR>
> before impact they are considered to be at a range of 150 km.<BR>
><BR>
> Attack<BR>
> Roll 8+ on 2D plus skill and software adjustments plus the following:<BR>
><BR>
> Range Beam Energy Meson<BR>
> *0" +2 +2 +2<BR>
> 1-50" +1 -0 +12<BR>
> 51-100" -0 -2 -0<BR>
> 101-150" -1 -4 ( dmg) -2<BR>
> 151-200" -2 -6 ( dmg) -3<BR>
> 201-250" -3 -8 ( dmg) -4<BR>
> 251-300" -4 no -6<BR>
> 301-350" -5 no -7<BR>
> 351-400" -6 no -8<BR>
> 401-450" -7 ( dmg) no no<BR>
> 451-500" -8 ( dmg) no no<BR>
><BR>
> * At range < 100 km, fire 1/minute<BR>
> * At range < 10 km, fire 1/6 seconds<BR>
> * At range < 1 km, roll to hit specific parts<BR>
><BR>
> Beam includes lasers and PA's<BR>
> Energy includes plasma and fusion guns<BR>
><BR>
> Sandcasters Laser (only ship sand is launched towards)<BR>
> 1 -1<BR>
> 2 -2<BR>
> 4 -3<BR>
> 8 -4<BR>
> 16 -5<BR>
> 32 -6<BR>
><BR>
> Target<BR>
> Tonnage Any Configuration Meson<BR>
> 0.01+ -4 1: needle/wedge -3<BR>
> 0.1+ -3 2: cone -2<BR>
> 1+ -2 3: cylinder -2<BR>
> 10+ -1 4: close -1<BR>
> 100+ +0 5: sphere -0<BR>
> 1,000+ +1 6: flattened sphere -1<BR>
> 10,000+ +2 7: dispersed -4<BR>
> 100,000+ +3 8: planetoid -0<BR>
> 1,000,000+ +4 9: buffered planetoid -3<BR>
><BR>
> beam laser: +1<BR>
> particle accelerator barbette: -1<BR>
> evading: -(Pilot/Ship's Boat skill) or -(Maneuver drive), whichever is<BR>
lower<BR>
> meson screen: -(USP) for mesons only<BR>
> TL 13+: +1<BR>
><BR>
> Damage<BR>
> Hits/ep surface interior radiation<BR>
> Pulse Laser 1**<BR>
> Beam Laser 1<BR>
> Plasma Gun 1.5<BR>
> Fusion Gun 1.5<BR>
> Particle Accelerator 2 2<BR>
> Meson Gun 2*** 2***<BR>
><BR>
> ** -1 on armour roll (see below)<BR>
> *** Ignore armour<BR>
><BR>
> Note that I consider a HG2 "battery" of "30 lasers" to be one large<BR>
turret.<BR>
><BR>
> Missiles:<BR>
> Missiles mass 50-500 kg depending on the turret (battery) size, doing<BR>
> 1D to 10D hits.  50-ton missile bays launch three 1,000 kg missiles which<BR>
> do 20D (2Dx10) hits, 100-ton bays launch three 2,000-ton missiles which<BR>
> do 40D (4Dx10) hits (bays hold 24 missiles).  These are standard homing<BR>
> missiles which accelerate at 12G for 8 turns.  Naturally, there are<BR>
variants<BR>
> (e.g. 50 kg Sprint: 18G for 3 turns causing 1 hit, Smart: 12G for 4 turns<BR>
> causing 1 hit but ignoring ECM, Long Range: 6G for 32 turns causing 1<BR>
> hit, Heavy: 6G for 8 turns causing 2D hits, Nuclear: 12G for 8 turns<BR>
> causing 2Dx100 hits).<BR>
><BR>
> Surface Damage<BR>
> 2D? Location Hull Hold 1D Computer<BR>
> 2 power plant air lock 100% 1 computer<BR>
> 3 maneuver drive locker 96% 2 sensors<BR>
> 4 jump drive frame 88% 3 sensors<BR>
> 5 computer bridge 76% 4 radio<BR>
> 6 hull lounge 61% 5 batteries<BR>
> 7 hull stateroom 45% 6 controls<BR>
> 8 hold/vehicle engineering 27%<BR>
> 9 fuel hall 15%<BR>
> 10 turret/spinal weapon fresher 7%<BR>
> 11 turret/bay weapon fire control 2%<BR>
> 12 turret/screen life support 0%<BR>
><BR>
> ? Missiles get -4<BR>
> Roll for location, then roll again for Hull, Hold, or Computer<BR>
> If the Hold is hit and it is 88% full, roll 4+ to damage the cargo.<BR>
><BR>
> Armour 2D:<BR>
> USP 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12<BR>
> 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5<BR>
> 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 10<BR>
> 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 10 20<BR>
> 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 10 20 50<BR>
> 5 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 10 20 50 100<BR>
> 6 0 0 0 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200<BR>
> 7 0 0 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500<BR>
> 8 0 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000<BR>
> 9 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000 1500<BR>
> 10 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000 1500 2000<BR>
> 11 5 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000 1500 2000 2500<BR>
> 12 10 20 50 100 200 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000<BR>
> 13 20 50 100 200 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500<BR>
> 14 50 100 200 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000<BR>
> 15 100 200 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500<BR>
><BR>
> Result is amount damage is reduced (e.g. USP 7 armour with a roll of 10<BR>
> reduces<BR>
> damage by 100 hits).<BR>
><BR>
> Internal Damage<BR>
> 2D Location Hull Hold 1D Computer<BR>
> 2 maneuver drive air lock 100% 1 computer<BR>
> 3 power plant locker 96% 2 sensors<BR>
> 4 jump drive frame 88% 3 sensors<BR>
> 5 computer bridge 76% 4 radio<BR>
> 6 hull lounge 61% 5 batteries<BR>
> 7 hold/vehicle stateroom 45% 6 controls<BR>
> 8 hold/vehicle engineering 27%<BR>
> 9 fuel hall 15%<BR>
> 10 fuel fresher 7%<BR>
> 11 weapon fire control 2%<BR>
> 12 weapon/screen life support 0%<BR>
><BR>
> Radiation Damage<BR>
> 2D Location Hull Hold 1D Computer<BR>
> 2 maneuver/jump drive air lock 100% 1 computer<BR>
> 3 power plant locker 96% 2 sensors<BR>
> 4 computer frame 88% 3 sensors<BR>
> 5 computer bridge 76% 4 radio<BR>
> 6 computer lounge 61% 5 batteries<BR>
> 7 computer stateroom 45% 6 controls<BR>
> 8 crew? engineering 27%<BR>
> 9 crew? hall 15%<BR>
> 10 hull fresher 7%<BR>
> 11 weapon/screen fire control 2%<BR>
> 12 hold/vehicle life support 0%<BR>
><BR>
> ? (hits/10) crew take (hits/10)D damage<BR>
> crew wearing a vacc suit or protective suit take half damage<BR>
> crew wearing combat armour or battle dress take quarter damage<BR>
><BR>
> Whenever a hull hit affects a compartment with a character in it, roll to<BR>
> hit the character:<BR>
> Weapon to hit armour DM for damage<BR>
> laser 7+ PGMP-12 8D<BR>
> missile 7+ RAM HE 6D<BR>
> energy 8+ FGMP-15 10D<BR>
> PA 7+ Fusion Support Weapon 12D<BR>
> meson 6+ Fusion Support Weapon 14D<BR>
><BR>
> Software<BR>
> program space effect<BR>
> Target 1 tracks one target for offensive weapons<BR>
> Multitarget 1 when combined with Target, tracks additional target<BR>
(stackable)<BR>
> Launch 1 required for missile launchers and sandcasters<BR>
> Predict 1 1 +1 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Predict 2 2 +2 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Predict 3 4 +3 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Predict 4 8 +4 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Predict 5 16 +5 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Predict 6 32 +6 to hit one target with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Scramble 1 2 -1 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Scramble 2 4 -2 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Scramble 3 8 -3 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Scramble 4 16 -4 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
> Scramble 5 32 -5 to be hit by one ship with lasers, etc.<BR>
> ECM 1 1 detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 12 on 2D<BR>
> ECM 2 2 detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 10+ on 2D<BR>
> ECM 3 3 detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 7+ on 2D<BR>
> ECM 4 9 detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 6+ on 2D<BR>
> ECM 5 27 detonate missile at 100 km with roll of 5+ on 2D<BR>
><BR>
> A salvo of missiles fired at the same time from one ship may be considered<BR>
> "one target" for the purposes of software targeting programs.  A single<BR>
> turret may only engage one target at a time.<BR>
><BR>
> One "hit" of damage is sufficient to drop a LBB2 drive one letter, or<BR>
> effectively reduce the tonnage of a HG2 drive by:<BR>
> TL 7-8 9-12 13-14 15<BR>
> Power Plant: 8 tons 6 tons 4 tons 2 tons<BR>
> Maneuver: 6 tons<BR>
> Jump: 2 tons<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Constructive comments are welcome.<BR>
><BR>
> Peez<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 15:41:11 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Solomani Money (again)<BR>
<BR>
Just check, in case my last post didn't make it to the list.<BR>
<BR>
Does the Solomani Confederation issue a currency along the lines of the<BR>
Imperial credit?  Please let me know the source.  I see that "Rim of Fire"<BR>
has arrived today, so I'll be checking there.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks<BR>
<BR>
Tod "your papers please" Glenn<BR>
- ----<BR>
"SolSec:  Keeping the Confederation Safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- ----<BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2885<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg02.mx.aol.com (rly-yg02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.2]) by air-yg04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 18:42:41 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 18:42:18 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA88567;<BR>
	Fri, 4 Aug 2000 18:42:15 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 4 Aug 2000 18:41:44 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA88517<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 18:41:44 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 18:41:44 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008042241.SAA88517@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2885<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2886</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/4/00 7:01:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Friday, August 4 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2886<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Downport updates (finally)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
New Official Home of Traveller on the Web<BR>
Re : Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: navy<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
Re: Ship size limits <BR>
Dick Salamder's holovid <BR>
RE: Miniatures Question<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Support the tml<BR>
RE: Jump emitted ripples<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: Definite Articles (OT) <BR>
Re: Definite Articles (OT)<BR>
Re: Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship sizes and other stuff (long)<BR>
RE: FFS3<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 15:50:44 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
>From: Victor Abraham Delnore <vad9m@unix.mail.virginia.edu><BR>
<BR>
>But who's paying for the subsector and imperial navies?  In fact, how do<BR>
>the subsector and imperial (I'm lower-casing because I mean the <BR>
>generic imperial government of Traveller, the rules, and not<BR>
>the Third Imperium of Traveller, the universe) governments pay for<BR>
>anything?  You're assuming that the planetary government takes the<BR>
largest<BR>
>chunk out of everybody's paycheck.  What if it doesn't?  What if the<BR>
>imperium takes the big money and the planet's share is more like a<BR>
>twentieth-century city government's?  Then "big" planetary navies really<BR>
>do become something like two escorts, a dozen SBDs, and a bunch of<BR>
>smallcraft.  <BR>
<BR>
I've always assumed that the Imperium taxes the member states themselves,<BR>
not Imperial citizens.  That is, there is no direct Imperial income tax on<BR>
citizens of the Imperium (although there is one on Licensed Imperial<BR>
Corporations).  <BR>
<BR>
Member states may pay the taxes in a variety of ways; the type and amount<BR>
of such taxes a major subject of the negotiations surrounding the<BR>
membership agreement with the Imperium, and is of course subject to<BR>
revision as the member state develops over time.  Member states may pay in<BR>
money, or in raw materials, personnel made available for Imperial service,<BR>
or something else.  Thus a high-tech, industrial world may pay money, or<BR>
may allocate a portion of its production of, say, radar direction finders,<BR>
to the Imperial Marines.  A low-tech, high-pop world may impose a draft on<BR>
its citizens, and send them to spend one term in Imperial service.  <BR>
<BR>
The subsector dukes are usually in charge of enforcing Imperial tax<BR>
agreements, with help from the Imperial Ministry of Revenue.  Subsector<BR>
dukes keep a portion of the taxes they collect for the purposes of<BR>
subsector defense and administration -- again subject to agreement with<BR>
IMR.<BR>
<BR>
How much money do worlds allocate to naval ship-building?  I don't know,<BR>
but I do like large ships in a universe of large empires.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 18:54:27 -0400<BR>
From: "swordworlder" <swordworlder@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Downport updates (finally)<BR>
<BR>
I have finally begun to take care of the backlog at Downport (<BR>
http://www.downport.com ).  Sorry for the two month hiatus while relocating<BR>
from Maine to North Carolina.  My career, home, lifestyle, church and family<BR>
life have all had some major changes and needed to be dealt with.  Most of<BR>
the upheaval is past.  I certainly won't have the amount of time that I've<BR>
had the past 18 months to spend on Traveller-related stuff, but the upside<BR>
is that I am gainfully employed as a Java Developer in the Raleigh/Durham<BR>
boomtown, so you take the bad with the good.<BR>
<BR>
Most of the work I've done for this update is in the TML Landgrab area (<BR>
http://www.downport.com/landgrab ).  It needed the most attention and has<BR>
gotten it.  Stop by and see the fine work that Eric Holmes has done on<BR>
Equus/Lanth.  The work is preliminary and some coding, organizing and<BR>
presentation repairs will need to be done, but there is a lot of great<BR>
material to check out.<BR>
<BR>
Thanks for your time and the bandwidth.<BR>
<BR>
- -Colin Michael<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 13:58:21 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 10:43 PM -0700 8/3/00, Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
>>  >I am _not_ talking about narrow band emissions.   I have postulated<BR>
>>  >the same spectral distribution as thermal emmission<BR>
>><BR>
>>However, emitting things in the same proportions as a blackbody<BR>
>>(ie the same ratio of 1 micron photons to 10 micron photons as a 100 K<BR>
>>blackbody) but not in the same amounts - emitting more photons per<BR>
>>m2 than the blackbody - isn't thermal emission; there's no simple way<BR>
>>to do it, and all the non-simple ways that can be imagined require work.<BR>
>>It's not a particularly natural state.<BR>
><BR>
> I'm talking about the same distribution at the same rates.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, you've lost me again. To *me* the above says "same frequency<BR>
distribution curve, same energy per sq. m.". In which case it *is* a<BR>
black body. <BR>
<BR>
I'm confused.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 19:10:08 -0400<BR>
From: "Hunter Gordon" <trav@RPGRealms.com><BR>
Subject: New Official Home of Traveller on the Web<BR>
<BR>
Get ready to update your bookmarks, Traveller and Far Future Enterprises have a new official home on the web!<BR>
<BR>
http://www.FarFuture.net<BR>
<BR>
and<BR>
<BR>
http://www.TravellerRPG.com<BR>
<BR>
Stop by, take a look around, let us know what you think. This site will be updated as needed to keep Traveller fans abrest of the latest happening in the Traveller Universe, such as product announcements, release dates, licensing news, and more. <BR>
<BR>
Much of the information from the old website (members.aol.com/Traveller) has been recreated on the new site, but some has not yet been posted. So if anything is missing, be patient it'll be up soon! If you just gotta have it, you can still access the old address for now, and we have a backup of it available on the new site (www.FarFuture.net/old).<BR>
<BR>
For criticisms of the website layout, blame me, not Marc ;)<BR>
<BR>
Hunter<BR>
The GRIP Team<BR>
http://www.RPGRealms.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 19:17:39 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re : Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 18:45:06 -0400 (EDT), "Robert O'Connor"<BR>
<robocon@ozemail.com.au> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Jeff Zeitlin wrote :-<BR>
>> In Greg Bear's book, _Darwin's_Radio_, he posits a virus that activates<BR>
>> some DNA in the human genome.  When active, these genes apparently trigger<BR>
>> the 'next step' in evolution.<BR>
<BR>
>I haven't read the book. Is the virus engineered or natural?<BR>
>If the former, how did the designers know what to target to trigger the<BR>
>'next stage of evolution'? What criteria did they use?<BR>
<BR>
>If natural, where was the reservoir (e.g. influenza, West Nile virus)?<BR>
>Why haven't there been case reports of mutations (unless mind-clouding<BR>
>psionics or immortality are part of the package...)?<BR>
<BR>
I'll have to reread it to give you the answer on the reservoir; that'll<BR>
take some time, since I have to reborrow the book (my father is, if<BR>
anything, more possessive of his books than I am).  It was definitely not a<BR>
geneered virus, though.<BR>
<BR>
It didn't show up as mutations; rather, it seemed to cause major changes in<BR>
fetuses conceived after infection - IIRC, the 'fetus' was mostly ovarian<BR>
tissue, which released a 'fertilized egg' with the 'new' genetic code<BR>
(i.e., the next evolution, which had a different number of chromosomes),<BR>
and then 'miscarried', allowing the new egg to implant and start a new<BR>
pregnancy, this time being a viable new-human.  A 'successful' pregnancy<BR>
also triggered other changes in _both_ parents (I don't recall how they<BR>
explained the changes to the father - possibly pheromonal response?) to<BR>
modify their appearance to be more in conformance with the eventual<BR>
appearance of the adult new-human, to provide a model for the new-human<BR>
child.  As I recall, the virus was detected as a result of investigations<BR>
into a worldwide increase in miscarriages and certain 'odd' syndromes.<BR>
<BR>
(This explanation was also invoked to explain something that the book<BR>
referred to as 'gracile neanderthals' - the GN were the 'last' generation<BR>
of H. Sap. Neander., whose children were the first true H. Sap. Sap.)<BR>
<BR>
In some ways, I had to suspend disbelief, but I'm not knowledgeable in the<BR>
field; in other ways, it was chillingly accurate - mostly in the way people<BR>
- - and governments - would react.<BR>
<BR>
Again, I'll have to reborrow and reread the book to be able to give you<BR>
better information.  It _was_ a good read as SF, though, and you might want<BR>
to acquire a copy on your own.<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 19:17:42 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: navy<BR>
<BR>
On Wed, 2 Aug 2000 21:50:55 -0400 (EDT), Olegamer@aol.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>In a message dated 8/2/00 9:09:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <BR>
>webmaster@travellercentral.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
><< Yes, but it refers to tons, not dtons.  I was wondering where the 'dtons'<BR>
> nomenclature came from.<BR>
 <BR>
>I think its a T4 convention. <BR>
<BR>
Actually, to the best of my recollection, Traveller always referred to<BR>
_displacement_ tons rather than mass tons - early on, on the TML pre-MPGN,<BR>
there was a discussion where displacement and mass tons were confused, and<BR>
people started using the abbreviation 'dtons' for clarification.  Later<BR>
versions of Traveller (TNE? T4?) may have adopted the distinction from<BR>
usage here.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:16:59 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
><BR>
>"Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridis HOMINES EST!"<BR>
<BR>
My vote for best sig file seen today!<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:24:57 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: another thought about miniatures<BR>
<BR>
>From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com><BR>
<BR>
>> through it to the list:  What about paper or cardboard vehicles?...<BR>
><BR>
>I can see the San Jose after action report now: ...and then the whole<BR>
>battalion was swept away by one of Mongo's freak force 1000 gales...<BR>
<BR>
We did in fact have natural wind effects determining the direction of<BR>
smoke from the destroyed LPV.  I guess paper vehicles would have to have<BR>
something heavy inside, like a lead sinker or something.  I'll see if I<BR>
have any suitable paper and bring some to our paint&design day this month.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:30:43 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits <BR>
<BR>
>From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
<BR>
>What I don't want to see is a new design sequence that actively<BR>
>discourages the existence of these larger vessels (which is what it seems<BR>
>to me is being proposed) and/or prevents them from being designed.<BR>
<BR>
I agree entirely with Andrew's comments.  I want to know that big ships<BR>
are out there, even if I never interact with them.  Remember, even if PC<BR>
doesn't own a big ship, he or she may be a passenger on one.  Even if a PC<BR>
doesn't pilot one in space combat, he or she may have to deal with the<BR>
results of that space combat in some way (search & rescue and salvage come<BR>
immediately to mind, as does having to cope with a sudden change in the<BR>
ownership of the star system where the PC is located).<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:39:10 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Dick Salamder's holovid <BR>
<BR>
>From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
<BR>
>Meanwhile, Dirk is taking a break, playing the part of Inspector Seymore<BR>
>Globber in "Major Case Squad", filmed on location on Regina Orbital.<BR>
>As a side note, "MCS" is regarded as a gritty action film everywhere but<BR>
>Regina, where it is high comedy.  The locals are quite aware of the<BR>
>disparity of appearance between vid star Dirk Savage and the real Seymore<BR>
>Globber (who has been described as Sidney Greenstreet's hips with Mick<BR>
>Jagger's lips and a salivary gland problem) Read all about it on<BR>
>TravellerCentral<BR>
<BR>
I see a visit to Traveller Central in my future, as I am just starting a<BR>
campaign set on Regina in which the PCs are members of the Regina<BR>
Subsector Special Police, an organization charged with supporting local<BR>
law enforcement in Regina and Jewell subsectors in dealing with organized<BR>
crime.  MCS should provide some good atmosphere.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:51:51 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Miniatures Question<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
>Just a data point, I still have the cardboard cut-outs from the back<BR>
>cover of Judges Guild "Tancred" scenario pack. While very simple '2D'<BR>
cut->outs, with movable "turrets", they worked great with SJG's cardboard<BR>
>figures, and had enough detail to help tactical decisions and player<BR>
>visualization.<BR>
>They had a "top down" view printed on one side, and a "mao view" on the<BR>
>other side like the standard Traveller deck plans, so you just flipped<BR>
the<BR>
>cut-out when you wanted to know where people were in the vehicle.<BR>
<BR>
I'd forgotten all about those.  They also sold the tanks separately, and I<BR>
bought several sets used at Gamescape many years ago.  Now where the heck<BR>
are they?  <BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 16:52:27 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Kiri Aradia Morgan <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
> ><BR>
> >"Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridis HOMINES EST!"<BR>
> <BR>
> My vote for best sig file seen today!<BR>
> <BR>
Ningen da!  Ningen da!  Soylent no midori wa honto ni ningen da!<BR>
<BR>
Kiri  ^_^<BR>
******************************************************************************<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan                                  93!  Thou Art God<BR>
tiamat@tsoft.com<BR>
<BR>
"If time passes, everything turns into beauty<BR>
If the rains stop, tears clean the scars of memory away<BR>
Everything starts wearing fresh colors<BR>
Every sound begins playing a heartfelt melody<BR>
Jealousy embellishes a page of the epic<BR>
Desire is embraced in a dream..."              -- X-JAPAN<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 17:04:18 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Support the tml<BR>
<BR>
I've modified a little form I have for handling majordomo activities related<BR>
to the tml.<BR>
<BR>
The following page can be embedded in anyone's website and allows users to<BR>
send TML majorodomo commands easily.<BR>
<BR>
Check out http://www.travellercentral.com/tml.html<BR>
<BR>
and send me your comments.  I'll pretty it up later tonight.  Feel free to<BR>
include this page on you website, either in a frame or as a link.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- ----<BR>
"SolSec:  Keeping the Confederation Safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- ----<BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 17:16:05 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Jump emitted ripples<BR>
<BR>
Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> If you are familar with the "rubber sheet" model, where masses are<BR>
> represented as dimples in a rubber sheet, this is like dropping in a<BR>
> new weight on the sheet. it'll immediately push down the sheet to the<BR>
> proper depth, but that gives a cylindrical "hole". The sides spread out<BR>
> at some *finite* rate until the have the normal slope, and go a bit<BR>
> past and rebound. that's the ripple.<BR>
><BR>
> What makes it so detectable is that it's not a case of mass moving<BR>
> around, like ordinary gravity waves. Instead it just appears.<BR>
<BR>
In my personal model of how this stuff works in the Traveller universe, you<BR>
can't always detect ships coming out of jump due to gravity effects. Here's<BR>
why.<BR>
<BR>
I assume that gravity acts like other forces which we actually understand.<BR>
So if you suddenly have a mass appear in the middle of nowhere, you will get<BR>
lots of high-frequency components emitted due to the sudden transition. It's<BR>
probably these high-frequency compoments which you can detect, since<BR>
otherwise it's a lot like trying to detect a starship using just gravity<BR>
(really hard).<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, I also assume that normal grav vehicles will produce<BR>
similar effects. After all, when you start that air/raft, you are doing<BR>
something to the local gravity which is not normal. So I assume that by<BR>
starting your air/raft you are causing the same general type of effect, but<BR>
probably much closer to you, so that the signal from the jumping ship is<BR>
lost in the background gravity noise.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, if you have the appropriate type of sensor way out in<BR>
space, away from all of the background noise from civilization, you may be<BR>
able to sense a jumping ship.<BR>
<BR>
Military ships may have specialized jump drives which use technology which<BR>
lets them gradually reenter normal space, so that those detectable<BR>
high-frequency components are minimized. Just like we can do pulse shaping<BR>
to eliminate those annoying high-frequency components you get from a square<BR>
pulse.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 17:24:53 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > >From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
> > ><BR>
> > >"Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridis HOMINES EST!"<BR>
> ><BR>
> > My vote for best sig file seen today!<BR>
> ><BR>
> Ningen da!  Ningen da!  Soylent no midori wa honto ni ningen da!<BR>
<BR>
"Mmmmmm....Green" <BR>
<munch munch> <BR>
"Needs Tabasco..." <BR>
<squirt><munch munch> <BR>
"Mmmmmm....Green"<BR>
<BR>
;-P<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 17:26:07<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Definite Articles (OT) <BR>
<BR>
At 12:15 PM 8/4/2000 -0700, you wrote:<BR>
>>From: Russell Bornschlegel <kaleja@estarcion.com><BR>
><BR>
>>"I was driving on 280" or "you need to get on 101 North"; SoCals say <BR>
>>"driving on _the_ 405" or "_the_ 15".<BR>
><BR>
>101? 280? Forget it; just take SamTrans or CalTrain.  _Don't_ take "the<BR>
>bus," "the express bus," "the train," or "the light rail."  (In San Jose<BR>
>and Sacramento, however, you can take "the light rail.")<BR>
<BR>
And us old-time south bay types still call it "County Transit,"  not "The<BR>
Transportation Authority."<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 17:28:42<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Definite Articles (OT)<BR>
<BR>
At 04:45 PM 8/4/2000 -0500, you wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>But just *try* to call that city on the bay, SanFran around one of<BR>
>its inhabitants.  <g><BR>
<BR>
How difficult is it to say Mission de San Francisco de Assisi y Pueblo de<BR>
la Yerba Buena?<BR>
<BR>
SF, or The City, is also acceptable.  Frisco will get you shot.<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 20:55:11 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Actually, my brother has drawn up deck plans for a 75,00 ton planet class<BR>
cruiser (by hand).  They are no more difficult than an AHL.  Now, he also<BR>
drew up a singlr cross section of a very large, (12 MT), II-15 (which of<BR>
course is non-canonical).  This was quite an effort on his part.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Glenn Goffin" <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
To: "traveller mailing aa list" <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 2:47 PM<BR>
Subject: re: Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> >From: tim@premier.net<BR>
><BR>
> >You are not alone Eris, i have been reading the thread and have<BR>
> >saved alot of cool ideas.  I too see 100,000 ton ships as to big.<BR>
> >I have a soluation to the problem.  Have all these people in favor of<BR>
> >10,000 tons or better draw up deck plans.  That will break them.<BR>
><BR>
> Hmm... my girlfriend is an ex-architect (now a recruiter for architectural<BR>
> professionals) who knows AutoCAD as well as I know WordPerfect ... and her<BR>
> company has AutoCAD ... and there are engineers in the top floor of my<BR>
> building whom I see every day and they probably have AutoCAD ... this is<BR>
> possible.<BR>
><BR>
> --Glenn<BR>
><BR>
> __________________________________________________<BR>
> Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
> Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
> http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 10:09:14 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship sizes and other stuff (long)<BR>
<BR>
> From: Robert Sanders <RSanders@mpprint.com><BR>
> Subject: RE: Ship Sizes and other stuff (long)<BR>
><BR>
> Lurk mode off...<BR>
><BR>
> Greetings all,<BR>
><BR>
> I have been reading the very interesting discussion on ship size and game<BR>
> play.  If we are adding to the wish list let me add my voice to the<BR>
crowd -<BR>
> please excuse the bandwidth.  I have not had much time respond, and you<BR>
get<BR>
> to receive it all in one shot!<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Feedback is 110% essential for this sort of design process, and I'd like to<BR>
thank you and everyone else who has been putting in feedback.<BR>
<BR>
> KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid.   Any system created needs to be able to be<BR>
> played by your average 7th grader.  Avoid the SFB syndrome of adding and<BR>
> adding until the game is unplayable.<BR>
<BR>
Yup.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Simple Design - I used to have a BASIC program that would create ships<BR>
> (customized high guard) in seconds, that had my system of damage points,<BR>
> damage list, ship sensor stats, EP's, and weapon stats all on one page.<BR>
> Took about 5 minutes to create a new ship, have it printed (on my old<BR>
daisy<BR>
> wheel printer) and into the game.  I feel that any new version of FFS<BR>
needs<BR>
> to be designed from the very start is a program... then create the  books,<BR>
> etc.  Make it available over the internet, and start some tournaments in<BR>
> some game stores... restore interest in the game Traveller.  The role<BR>
> players will follow...<BR>
<BR>
I'd prefer to keep the number of problems as small as possible, so I'd<BR>
prefer to have someone doing the coding after the system is done.<BR>
<BR>
Note that Andy Atkins' FFS2 spreadsheet is functionally such a program, and<BR>
there is at least one project to do a FFS3 design program (probably a C++<BR>
back end feeding into a HTML-based front end).<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Simple Game Play - I did like the abstract version of space combat in TNE.<BR>
> I expanded it to use my ships, but it worked for role playing.  Something<BR>
> like that should be used for T5.<BR>
><BR>
> For small units, add on a simple tactical game and hook the kids in.  And<BR>
of<BR>
> course...<BR>
<BR>
The design system is being done with an eye towards Striker 3.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Strategic Play - any system should be able to roll up into a macro game.<BR>
My<BR>
> CA with hundreds of weapons, crew, etc, equals a 4-4-4 chit, or something<BR>
> like that.  For those of you who remember FFW! Add some more detail then<BR>
> that, but you get the idea!  Publish a game with that system centered<BR>
around<BR>
> the Solomani Rim War, and hook the hard core wargammers!<BR>
<BR>
Yup. The Imperium boardgame was one of the first products of the Traveller<BR>
universe :)<BR>
<BR>
I'd actually like to see a subsector-level game based on Fifth Frontier<BR>
War - just the events that happened in, say, District 268 and Five Sisters.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Ability to Drill Down - Sure, I have a basic 100 ton scout, but my players<BR>
> want to know if they can put in a 6G drive...  what do I do?  Flip to the<BR>
> back of the book and find out that the 6G drive requires XYZ, and if we<BR>
> remove 2.5 staterooms, add 5 tons of bracing, and a super hydro<BR>
multiplexing<BR>
> computer it can be done... or something like that.  Hook the gearheads!<BR>
<BR>
Yup. Note that there is a skill of 'Naval Architect'. They'd better find one<BR>
...<BR>
><BR>
> Remove the concept of spinal mounts...  keep the really big weapons, just<BR>
> make it so that if you wanted that Tigress could be packing 9(!) type T<BR>
> mason guns!  (that is just my feeling that it is really silly to have a<BR>
> 500,000 ton ship with a "spinal" mount that masses 5k... or whatever it<BR>
> is...  don't have the books here with me).  Smaller ships could still be<BR>
> build around a very large weapon in a spinal mount, but for the BIG ships<BR>
> why not have them carry several?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Under FFS2, there were 2 sorts of big gun mounts - spinal mounts and<BR>
parallel mounts.<BR>
<BR>
Spinal mounts could be the length of the hull, while parellel mounts were<BR>
limited to 80% of hull length.<BR>
<BR>
The range of PAWs and meson guns was in part a function of their length.<BR>
<BR>
If you had enough range with 80% of your length, then you could pack in lots<BR>
of parallel mounts. I think the 'Montana' had one spinal PAW backed up by 8<BR>
smaller (but still impressive) PAWs mounted in parallel.<BR>
<BR>
> I feel that big ships should be able to take a lot of damage before losing<BR>
> any combat effectiveness. And the VERY FEW really big ships will have to<BR>
be<BR>
> ganged up on, or they will crush the enemy fleet unless it runs (big ships<BR>
> should be slow and NOT agile) Only after the ship has absorbed several<BR>
> rounds of punishing fire will it start to effect operations. I think of<BR>
> Traveller capital ships as close relatives to the old W.W.I and W.W.II<BR>
> Battleships.  Most of the time they took HUGE amounts of damage before<BR>
> losing their punch. Very survivable. (Until damage passed a certain point,<BR>
> then it was goodbye: they would turn turtle and sink, sometimes with guns<BR>
> still firing!)<BR>
<BR>
There was a whole school of thought that said the torpedo evened things up<BR>
(the Jeune Ecole, or 'Young School'). Eventually, they were right, but it<BR>
took the aircraft to work the way it was intended (the torpedo boat never<BR>
lived up to expectations, really).<BR>
<BR>
>That a lower tech space ship if built with<BR>
> enough armor and size should be able to defeat a smaller higher tech ship!<BR>
<BR>
Small ships have 2 major advantages, and one major disadvantage over big<BR>
ships.<BR>
<BR>
The advantages are less structure, and relatively more surface area to mount<BR>
radiators and other surface area-intensive things.<BR>
<BR>
The disadvantage is relatively more surface area, so a given quantity of<BR>
armour has to be stretched over more surface area.<BR>
<BR>
Thus, all other things being equal, a small ship should be less armoured,<BR>
and a big ship should have more heat problems.<BR>
<BR>
This will probably result in small ships having more power than big ships,<BR>
but less armour.<BR>
<BR>
Lo-tech ships probably have a sensor disadvantage, so the small high-tech<BR>
ship will probably try and hang out at range, crank up the EW and plink<BR>
radiators away. The other killer with having lower tech is that grav<BR>
compensation improves as TLs go up, so high tech ships will presumably be<BR>
able to pull more gees than low tech ships.<BR>
<BR>
Basically, I think each TL should give you about a 3:1 advantage.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Besides, people like big ships!  Think Starwars! Remember the feeling when<BR>
> that big honking star destroyer cruised over your head!<BR>
><BR>
> Heat is a interesting limiting factor...  I like what I have read about<BR>
the<BR>
> problems getting rid of it, and it should be included in the new system...<BR>
> but not to get rid of large ships!  To add to realism!<BR>
><BR>
> humm....  looking back over this I really rambled... sorry.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Better a long, rambling post with interesting thinking in it than designers<BR>
going 'Hello ? Feedback ? Anyone ? Anyone ?'.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 11:25:43 +1000<BR>
From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Umm, sorry, but I haven't been paying attention to the list for a while.<BR>
<BR>
With this FFS3 stuff:  what system are the game stats it produces going to<BR>
be oriented towards?<BR>
<BR>
Alan Bradley<BR>
alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 11:34:42 +1000<BR>
From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
I think the key to creating a small ship Imperium is to "fix" the planetary<BR>
populations.  If there are no high pop, high tech worlds, there aren't<BR>
going to be any super ships.<BR>
<BR>
This is easy enough to rationalise:  you say that most worlds are<BR>
relatively small colonies established by starfaring cultures, while the<BR>
hi-pop worlds are homeworlds of relatively primitive minor races.<BR>
<BR>
I'll leave the details of the tweaking as an exercise.<BR>
<BR>
Alan Bradley<BR>
alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2886<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-ye03.mx.aol.com (rly-ye03.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.200]) by air-ye01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:01:42 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-ye03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:01:18 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA96344;<BR>
	Fri, 4 Aug 2000 22:01:16 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Fri, 4 Aug 2000 22:01:07 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA96291<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Fri, 4 Aug 2000 22:01:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 22:01:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008050201.WAA96291@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2886<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2887</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/4/00 9:19:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, August 5 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2887<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFSv3<BR>
re:  Imperial Law?<BR>
Re: Ship size limits & agility<BR>
Imperial (Course) Credits<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Ship Structure in Combat (was Re: Ship sizes and other stuff (long))<BR>
Re: Ship Sizes and other stuff (long)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 11:23:02 +1000<BR>
From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
> From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
> is Heck, do you know what the *only* actual power of the Moot (Imperial<BR>
> assembly) is?  It's to disolve the Imperium..that's it.  The only right<BR>
> it has is to disolve itself.  <g><BR>
<BR>
That's one heckuva power though.  The Moot consists of everyone who is<BR>
anyone in the Imperium.  They are the people with the private armies and<BR>
navies, and are quite likely to be the ones the former Imperial forces<BR>
would rally to.<BR>
<BR>
The real power the Moot has is not just to dissolve the Imperium - it's to<BR>
establish a new Imperium afterwards.<BR>
<BR>
Alan Bradley<BR>
alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:32:39 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:32:08 -0400 (EDT), "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance"<BR>
<a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>I don't think anybody is going to convince anybody that any position is <BR>
>"right" and this will be my final comment. The argument seems to be "An <BR>
>Impeium where ships are restricted in size to somewhere between 5,000 <BR>
>tons and 50,000 tons would be more fun to roleplay in, so lets make the <BR>
>design rules enforce this". If you want a small ship Imperium, more power <BR>
>to you. Write it up and send it to JTAS (if Chris Trash writes it to his usual <BR>
>standards, I'll probably rate it a 4 or 5). However, please do not enforce this <BR>
>choice on those of us who do choose the big ship Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
This paragraph contains an error that makes even _me_ wince - and I've had<BR>
my name mangled in so many ways that if it starts with a Z, it's probably<BR>
me.<BR>
<BR>
I think that Chris _Thrash_ will forgive it, though.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:32:43 -0400<BR>
From: Jeff Zeitlin <jzeitlin@cyburban.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
On Fri, 4 Aug 2000 02:32:08 -0400 (EDT), Justice Hypercleats<BR>
<eris@sierratel.com> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
WARNING: ALL RESPONSES SHOULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE PREFIXED "IMTU".<BR>
<BR>
>What is the meaning of the term "Imperial Client State?" Is this any world<BR>
>that is aligned with the Imperium? Is this only a subset of "Imperial"<BR>
>worlds? In what ways are Client States treated differently than other<BR>
>Imperial worlds?<BR>
<BR>
An Imperial Client State is a polity that looks to the Imperium for<BR>
guidance in certain matters, and generally follows the Imperial lead in<BR>
those areas.  It is _not_ a member world of the Imperium, and reserves the<BR>
right to act in its own interests without necessarily considering the<BR>
Imperium's interests.<BR>
<BR>
>Is a world that is owned and governed by a Megacorporation a "client state?"<BR>
<BR>
Maybe.  Or, more accurately, ownership/government by an Imperial megacorp<BR>
is independent of member-world/client-state status.  Sometimes, a corp may<BR>
operate a world outside the Imperium deliberately, to cater to markets that<BR>
may very well be illegal within the Imperium - psi-related, for example.<BR>
<BR>
>Can a world populated with Solomani and other humans (but has less than 1%<BR>
>Vilani population) be an "Imperial World?" Does the ethnicity of the<BR>
>majority of the population have any bearing on the Imperium's policy toward<BR>
>that world?<BR>
<BR>
No and no.  Political status (i.e., member world vs. client state) is<BR>
essentially a question of 'Has the recognized government of the world sworn<BR>
fealty to the Imperium, or otherwise signalled a willingness to suborn some<BR>
or all of its interests to those of the Imperium, or consider themselves to<BR>
have high commonality of interest with the Imperium?'  If the answer to the<BR>
the first is 'yes', the world is a member world; if the answer to the<BR>
second or third is 'yes', it's a client state.<BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium colonize newly discovered, uninhabited worlds directly? Do<BR>
>they 'contract it out' to planetary governments and Megacorps, or does it<BR>
>happen "in the Emperor's Name?" (If the latter, what government type is the<BR>
>world? Feudal, like the Imperium? What government types are given for<BR>
>Imperial fiefs and noble fiefs? Is that all Feudal?)<BR>
<BR>
Maybe, yes, and maybe.  Colonization doesn't just happen; there's going to<BR>
be a reason for it.  That reason is largely going to provide the impetus<BR>
for a specific model of colonization.  Government type will be partially<BR>
dependent on the colonization model, and partially dependent on the consent<BR>
(or tacit acceptance) of the governed.<BR>
<BR>
>I notice that many worlds within Imperial Borders have government types and<BR>
>law levels (and cultures) that are radically different than, say, Core --<BR>
>from the 'standard' Imperial (Vilani) norm. Yet they are on the X-boat<BR>
>route, they often have Imperial Naval bases and Scout bases. I take that to<BR>
>mean that pretty much all are welcome, regardless of government. Or are<BR>
>there certain boundaries they must stay within in order to be rewarded with<BR>
>Imperial status, diplomacy, trade, protection? Does the Imperium have a<BR>
>'Bill of Rights' of any kind? Or an expectation of basic civil rights? Are<BR>
>planets that are ruled by extremist dictators, theocrats, oligarchies who<BR>
>enslave their population, hold them at a very low tech-level (while<BR>
>equipping their police/military with their highest tech they have), prevent<BR>
>them from ever leaving the planet, prevent free speech, prevent any info<BR>
>from outside their world to be heard by their 'subjects,' segregate and<BR>
>commit acts of genocide, fund and foment revolutionary movements and<BR>
>terrorism in other nearby Imperial worlds, force their population (including<BR>
>children), against their will, to work at subsistence level to make and sell<BR>
>products for trade, the profits from which will only go to the government's<BR>
>leaders -- does the Imperium do business with such worlds? Do they allow<BR>
>speculative traders who are Imperial Citizens to do business with such<BR>
>planets?  How about Megacorps?<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium does not rule worlds; it rules the space between the worlds,<BR>
and largely leaves the local affairs of the planets to their local<BR>
governments.  Stick to the Warrant of Restoration and to Imperial Edicts,<BR>
and you can do anything else you like.<BR>
<BR>
>Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of an<BR>
>Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? Would it matter if the<BR>
>slaves were Vilani or not? Would it matter if the subjugation and control of<BR>
>the slaves were facilitated by the use of psioncs?<BR>
<BR>
Again, reference to the Warrant of Restoration and the Edicts is indicated.<BR>
The Warrant would appear to preclude the sale of stuff made with slave<BR>
labor - but the prohibition on slavery is very specifically on _chattel_<BR>
slavery, which means that if it was produced through the labor of, say,<BR>
slaves who were enslaved because of debt, it's legally 'clean' for Imperial<BR>
sale.  With regard to psionics, you'd have to see the text of the relevant<BR>
Edicts.<BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium allow people from an oppressive government to request<BR>
>asylum? Is there any method of redress if Megacorps commit acts of piracy,<BR>
>slavery, theft, carpet nuking a rival's world, or a plantet that will not<BR>
>trade with them, etc..?<BR>
<BR>
Asylum is _generally_ a matter between individual worlds; the Imperium will<BR>
probably not get involved, although the Starport Authority commissioners on<BR>
a particular world have quite a bit of discretion as to whether they will<BR>
expel a local.  Normally, the world is expected to control the starport<BR>
extrality line.  As far as redress, sometimes, maybe.  It depends on what<BR>
was done, where it was done, and how it was done.  Free Trade and planetary<BR>
freedom of association (i.e., any planet has the right to associate itself<BR>
with the Imperium) are pretty much paramount, and will be the primary<BR>
considerations when determining the need to intervene.  If it's bad for<BR>
FT/PFA, it's bad, and the Imperium will intervene to stop what's bad.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Jeff Zeitlin<BR>
jzeitlin@cyburban.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 19:33:38 -0700<BR>
From: "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
Would that reall work for 3I? Even by CT, the main sectors of the Imperium<BR>
have fairly dense population concentrations because of the long history of<BR>
space travel.<BR>
<BR>
Jeffrey Yin<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Alan Bradley" <alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 6:34 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> I think the key to creating a small ship Imperium is to "fix" the<BR>
planetary<BR>
> populations.  If there are no high pop, high tech worlds, there aren't<BR>
> going to be any super ships.<BR>
><BR>
> This is easy enough to rationalise:  you say that most worlds are<BR>
> relatively small colonies established by starfaring cultures, while the<BR>
> hi-pop worlds are homeworlds of relatively primitive minor races.<BR>
><BR>
> I'll leave the details of the tweaking as an exercise.<BR>
><BR>
> Alan Bradley<BR>
> alanb@elf.brisnet.org.au<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:36:42 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
VonRammen wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> ...Yes, but what I was alluding to in my original post was what might happen<BR>
> when ships designed under a simpler system come up against ships designed<BR>
> under a more complex system. It seems to me that the modular ships aren't<BR>
> just going to lose, they're going to get reamed, which is just penalizing<BR>
> people for not wanting to take the time to totally immerse themselves in<BR>
> FFS3.<BR>
<BR>
> ...<BR>
<BR>
> . I'm just looking out for nightmare scenarios like the GM isn't a<BR>
> gearhead and a player *is*...<BR>
<BR>
I've been in that situation and it ain't pretty.  I agree that the<BR>
custom-designed ships should not have an overwhelming advantage over modular<BR>
ships.  A slight advantage I can live with.<BR>
<BR>
I enjoyed designing ships in HG, but found FFS tedious.  I would love to design<BR>
ships again, but am not willing to dedicate my life to it.  I am also not<BR>
willing to work with a modular system if the resulting ships suck in relation to<BR>
custom ships.<BR>
<BR>
WKH<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:49:47 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3<BR>
<BR>
Absolutely!!  HG was both a design system and a combat system.  We have not had this since.  One of<BR>
the reasons I designed ships was to see how they did in combat.  The design and combat systems have to<BR>
be integrated for this to be possible.<BR>
<BR>
WKH<BR>
<BR>
Robert Snyder wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> FFSv3 and the Traveller System:  When we develop the design system it should be integrated<BR>
> with the combat system.  This issue is one of the primary current failures.  There does not<BR>
> seem to be a ship based combat system (other than the Role Playing Ship Combat System<BR>
> for small ships).  In parallel with the FFSv3 effort there should also be an effort to develop a<BR>
> naval combat system (an upgraded Brilliant Lances/Battle Rider perhaps ?).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 19:53:34 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re:  Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
>From: Justice Hypercleats <eris@sierratel.com><BR>
>Subject: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
We must be about ready for a FAQ on this subject.<BR>
<BR>
>What is the meaning of the term "Imperial Client State?" Is this any<BR>
world<BR>
>that is aligned with the Imperium? Is this only a subset of "Imperial"<BR>
>worlds? In what ways are Client States treated differently than other<BR>
>Imperial worlds?<BR>
<BR>
A client state is a state that is not a member of an interstellar<BR>
government, but is dependent on it in some way.  Typically, the<BR>
interstellar government guarantees the political independence of the<BR>
client state from neighbors who might want to conquer.  The Darrians are<BR>
arguably an Imperial client state.  The Conferation of Arden before the<BR>
5FW was a Zhodani client state.  Client states are treated differently in<BR>
that they are not members of whatever government they are a client.  <BR>
<BR>
>Is a world that is owned and governed by a Megacorporation <BR>
>a "client state?"<BR>
<BR>
Maybe; see supra.<BR>
<BR>
>Can a world populated with Solomani and other humans (but has less than<BR>
1%>Vilani population) be an "Imperial World?" <BR>
<BR>
Of course.  Any world can be an Imperial World if the Imperium and the<BR>
world agree.  <BR>
<BR>
>Does the ethnicity of the majority of the population have any bearing on<BR>
>the Imperium's policy toward that world?<BR>
<BR>
Your question is too broad for a meaningful answer.  Ethnicity may have<BR>
bearing on some Imperial policies, but probably not on the membership<BR>
decision, which is based on economic, political, and military concerns.   <BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium colonize newly discovered, uninhabited worlds directly?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'm not sure that by the time of the founding of the Imperium there are<BR>
any "newly discovered" worlds.  The Imperium has a Ministry of<BR>
Colonization which handles colonization.  In my Traveller universe, the<BR>
MoC works closely with the subsector and sector governments in<BR>
establishing colonization policy.<BR>
<BR>
>Do they 'contract it out' to planetary governments and Megacorps, or does<BR>
>it happen "in the Emperor's Name?" <BR>
<BR>
An undeveloped world is presumably property of the Imperium, so all<BR>
colonization would be in the name of the Emperor.  The new colony would<BR>
become autonomous and a member state of the Imperium ab initio.<BR>
<BR>
>(If the latter, what government type is the world? <BR>
<BR>
In any event, the government type depends on who's doing the colonizing<BR>
and what they want to do.  The proposed colonists must apply to MoC for a<BR>
permit, and MoC may favor or disfavor certain government types.<BR>
<BR>
>Feudal, like the Imperium? <BR>
<BR>
I'm not sure that the Imperium can be characterized as a feudal system. <BR>
It's really a highly developed state of capitalism with some aspects of a<BR>
Roman style empire.  <BR>
<BR>
>What government types are given for Imperial fiefs and noble fiefs? Is<BR>
>that all Feudal?)<BR>
<BR>
Whoever owns a fief runs it however they see fit.  <BR>
<BR>
>I notice that many worlds within Imperial Borders have government types<BR>
>and law levels (and cultures) that are radically different than, say,<BR>
>Core -- from the 'standard' Imperial (Vilani) norm. <BR>
<BR>
What makes you think that there is a "'standard' Imperial (Vilani) norm"? <BR>
By the time of the founding of the Third Imperium, the Vilani empire has<BR>
been gone for over 1,000 years.  Their standardized culture is long gone. <BR>
<BR>
>Yet they are on the X-boat route, they often have Imperial Naval bases<BR>
>and Scout bases. I take that to mean that pretty much all are welcome,<BR>
>regardless of government. <BR>
<BR>
Yes, basically any world can join the Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
>Or are there certain boundaries they must stay within in order to be<BR>
>rewarded with Imperial status, diplomacy, trade, protection? <BR>
<BR>
There are very few.  Chattel slavery is prohibited because it's bad for<BR>
business for a number of reasons.  Piracy and other extraplanetary<BR>
restraints on trade are contrary to Imperial law.  I'm not aware of any<BR>
cases where the Imperium threw a world out. It's more likely just to take<BR>
it over and run it properly.  <BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium have a 'Bill of Rights' of any kind? Or an expectation<BR>
>of basic civil rights? <BR>
<BR>
Not really and no, except for nobles.  Early Imperial edicts and the<BR>
Warrant of Restoration (the founding document of the Imperium (which I<BR>
don't use in its canonical form in my Traveller universe)) provide that no<BR>
Imperial citizen may be made a chattel slave, and make a few vague<BR>
promises about security of the persons and property of Imperial citizens<BR>
against foreign invaders.  The Imperium is really a relationship among the<BR>
Emperor, the nobles, the megacorporations and the member states. <BR>
Individual citizens are not that important.  <BR>
<BR>
Nobles have certain rights beyond those of ordinary citizens (otherwise<BR>
what's the point of being noble? it's a lot of hard work with little<BR>
thanks).  Specifically, they have the right to a trial by a tribunal of<BR>
their peers, not to be subject to unreasonable searches and seizures, and<BR>
to complete freedom of speech in the Moot.<BR>
<BR>
>Are planets that are ruled by extremist dictators, theocrats, oligarchies<BR>
>who enslave their population, hold them at a very low tech-level (while<BR>
>equipping their police/military with their highest tech they have),<BR>
>prevent them from ever leaving the planet, prevent free speech, prevent<BR>
>any info from outside their world to be heard by their 'subjects,'<BR>
>segregate and commit acts of genocide, fund and foment revolutionary<BR>
>movements and terrorism in other nearby Imperial worlds, force their<BR>
>population (including children), against their will, to work at<BR>
>subsistence level to make and sell products for trade, the profits from<BR>
>which will only go to the government's leaders -- does the Imperium do<BR>
>business with such worlds? <BR>
<BR>
That's a compound question that assumes some facts not in evidence.  The<BR>
Imperium itself doesn't do business with anyone except various contractors<BR>
(battleship builders, e.g.).  Its primary mission is to provide a secure<BR>
environment for its citizens to do business with one another and with<BR>
their neighbors.  So your question should probably be, does the Imperium<BR>
allow such a world to be a member state? and the answer is yes, but the<BR>
Imperium will address slavery and the export of terrorism in a number of<BR>
ways (up to and including taking over the government of the planet and<BR>
restructuring the culture).  <BR>
<BR>
The Imperium does not guarantee anyone a right to travel off their<BR>
homeworld, or anywhere else.  <BR>
<BR>
>Do they allow speculative traders who are Imperial Citizens to do<BR>
>business with such planets?  How about Megacorps? <BR>
<BR>
Of course.  Anyone may do business with anyone else, subject only to<BR>
concerns about the security of the realm.  <BR>
<BR>
>Is it acceptable for Megacorps to sell goods in the open marketplace of<BR>
an<BR>
>Imperial world that were manufactured by slave labor? <BR>
<BR>
Chattel slavery is an Imperial high justice crime.  So are aiding and<BR>
abetting chattel slavery and conspiracy to commit chattel slavery.  Anyone<BR>
selling goods in the Imperium that they know were manufactured by chattel<BR>
slaves is subject to prosecution as an aider/abettor and/or conspirator. <BR>
However, an exception would be made where the proceeds of the sale are<BR>
intended to go to the slaves as restitution.  <BR>
<BR>
>Would it matter if the slaves were Vilani or not? <BR>
<BR>
No.  Chattel slavery of any sophont is prohibited -- Vargr, Droyne, Bwap,<BR>
or what-have-you.  If they're sophonts, you can't own them.  <BR>
<BR>
>Would it matter if the subjugation and control of the slaves were<BR>
>facilitated by the use of psioncs?<BR>
<BR>
It is a little-known fact that Imperial law does not prohibit the use of<BR>
psionics.  Local laws do, however, and local laws often prohibit slavery<BR>
as well.  <BR>
<BR>
>Does the Imperium allow people from an oppressive government to request<BR>
>asylum? <BR>
<BR>
The Imperium generally welcomes refugees from its enemies.  <BR>
<BR>
>Is there any method of redress if Megacorps commit acts of piracy,<BR>
>slavery, theft, carpet nuking a rival's world, or a plantet that will not<BR>
>trade with them, etc..?<BR>
<BR>
Piracy and chattel slavery are Imperial high justice crimes.  A<BR>
megacorporation engaging in them as a matter of corporate policy may be<BR>
fined and is subject to revocation of its Limited Imperial Charter.  More<BR>
important, all individuals with management power, including the directors,<BR>
officers, and senior employees, who knew of the policy, are subject to<BR>
punishment as perpetrators, aiders and abettors, and conspirators.  That<BR>
is, they face imprisonment and death.  Bear in mind that megacorporations<BR>
may engage in trade war.  Trade war is a defense to charge of piracy.   <BR>
<BR>
"Carpet nuking a rival's world":  Megacorporations don't generally own<BR>
worlds outright.  They may have extensive holdings on primary worlds, and<BR>
may own some asteroids or satellites for exploitation.  Nuking a world is<BR>
a breach of the peace of the realm beyond that permitted by the Imperial<BR>
rules of war, and will be dealt with on an ad hoc basis.  <BR>
<BR>
"... a world that will not trade with them":  It doesn't matter what<BR>
Imperial world you nuked; the Imperium will hunt you down and make you<BR>
pay.  There is no interstellar commerce clause forcing anyone to<BR>
participate in interstellar commerce (in my Traveller universe at least).<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 21:55:13 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits & agility<BR>
<BR>
Rotational movement and high agility in large ships is one of the things<BR>
I<BR>
considered 'broken' in HG.  It doesn't make sense to me that a 100kdt<BR>
ship could<BR>
be just as 'agile' as a 10-ton fighter.  When combined with the<BR>
difference in<BR>
computer size as a to-hit modifier, it became ridiculous.  Using those<BR>
rules, I<BR>
once designed a 10kdt ship specifically for use against fighters<BR>
(_Flyswatter_<BR>
class).  It had max agility and computer(model 7 at TL13, IIRC), and<BR>
lots of<BR>
laser batteries.  A sub-100 ton agility 6 fighter with a standard<BR>
computer and<BR>
gunner-1 had to roll a 14 (2d6) to hit it.  It, on the other hand, had<BR>
to roll<BR>
about a 4 to hit them.  On the average, it would take out at least 75<BR>
fighters/turn.<BR>
<BR>
This brought me to the conclusion that large ships should have agility<BR>
penalties<BR>
and size modifiers making them easier to be hit.<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I've never seen an adequate discussion of rotational moment, and its effect<BR>
> on maneuverability and movement control systems in Traveller, so I couldn't<BR>
> say how large the forces are.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 19:55:45 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Imperial (Course) Credits<BR>
<BR>
>From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
<BR>
>I just wanted to let the TML know that my research paper on "The Problem<BR>
>of Cultural Unity in _Traveller's_ Third Imperium Setting" helped me<BR>
>earn an "A" in my Sociology 200 course.  <BR>
<BR>
Congratulations!  Now I, at least, want to read it.  Why don't you post it<BR>
to the web?<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:00:34 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Anthony Jackson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a moment and consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
><BR>
> Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible arguments<BR>
> against large ships could include<BR>
>    *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
>    *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
>    *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
>    *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
>         defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
<BR>
I do not want to 'discourage' large ships, but I do think that the HG combat modifiers for agility, ship size, and relative computer<BR>
size should be changed.  Large ships should not be as agile as small ships and should be easier to hit because of their sheer size.<BR>
<BR>
> Do we want to encourage fighters?  If so, how?  Basically as above, plus<BR>
>    *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
<BR>
There are a lot of fighters in the traveller universe.  The rules should reflect this.  Fighters already have a role against small<BR>
(<500dt) ships.  They should also have some role against larger ships.  In one CT/HG universe, we experimented with allowing groups of<BR>
small fighters to be controlled as a unit and combine their firepower.  We allowed 'control fighters' which were larger and carried a<BR>
larger computer.  The weapons of all the fighters in the group were combined into one battery.  They got one to-hit roll, using the<BR>
computer of the control fighter -1 as the relative computer size.  The control fighters tended to be high priority targets and had<BR>
very short lives.<BR>
<BR>
As for grav compensation, we allowed the canon 6G maximum drives and 6Gs of compensation.  Our rationale was that <handwave on> 6G was<BR>
the maximum 'gravitic potential' that was available in the universe.  Just as a hand pump that relies on  air pressure differential<BR>
can only lift water 32 feet or so, gravitic devices were limited to 6 Gs because they relied on a gravitic differential.<handwave<BR>
off>.  Acceleration above 6G was only possible with reaction drives, such as chemical rockets, and had to be compensated by<BR>
traditional means, e.g.g-suits, couches, and tanks.  There was no HEPLAR at the time.  In one game, the players were detected by and<BR>
had to run from a SDB.  It was deep in a gravity well and they were very smug that it couldn't catch them..They got a nasty surprise<BR>
when it fired up its 4G chemical boosters.  It could only do 10G for one turn, but that was all it needed.<BR>
<BR>
I like the idea of having a maximum on gravitic g-compensation.  Below that you can walk around while the ship manuevers.  Above that<BR>
(usually military only), you have to worry about being strapped in during manuever, and it gets very expensive very fast.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?  DSR-style sensors are<BR>
>    sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any major<BR>
>    system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a bit<BR>
>    less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors; either one<BR>
>    can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that matter,<BR>
>    there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved pretty<BR>
>    easily too).<BR>
<BR>
Ship sensors should not be all-powerful.  Ships should be able to hide from other ships to some degree.  Major systems would have<BR>
dedicated large sensor arrays which would make stealth virtually impossible<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> What is the relative importance of<BR>
>    *Completeness.<BR>
>    *Technical accuracy.<BR>
>    *Quickness of use.<BR>
> What other questions should we answer?<BR>
<BR>
Completeness and quickness of use are tied.  Technical accuracy is least important, because it is based on our _current_ understanding<BR>
of physics; an understanding that does not allow for jump drives, thruster plates, or many other canon traveller realities.  I am<BR>
quite willing to accept all of these, confident that in the next several thousand years we will improve our understanding of physics<BR>
to the point where they will be possible.  Technical _consistency_, on the other hand is very important.  Once we make the base<BR>
assumptions of our universe, let's stick to them.<BR>
<BR>
Just my cr.02, YMMV,<BR>
WKH<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:57:20 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Ship Structure in Combat (was Re: Ship sizes and other stuff (long))<BR>
<BR>
On 08/05/00 at 10:09 AM,  "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Small ships have 2 major advantages, and one major disadvantage over big<BR>
>ships.<BR>
<BR>
>The advantages are less structure, and relatively more surface area to<BR>
>mount radiators and other surface area-intensive things.<BR>
<BR>
Here's a suggestion.  Incorporate the idea of "structural points" in<BR>
combat.  Internal hits can (or always do depending on how you do<BR>
this) reduce a ship's "structural integrity."  When a ship's<BR>
structure is reduced to 0 it is destroyed...back broken, explodes,<BR>
breaks up, or otherwise is reduced to a useless hulk.<BR>
<BR>
A ship with a "light" structure is less massive than normal.  It has<BR>
more available volume, can be built to be faster, more agile, and/or<BR>
carry more weapons, but it can't take much punishment.  A few hits<BR>
and it's destroyed.<BR>
<BR>
A ship with "heavy" structure is more massive than nomral.  It has<BR>
less available volume because extra structure (braceing,<BR>
compartmentalization, etc) has been built in.  Therefore it is going<BR>
to be slower, less agile, and/or can't carry as many weapons, but it<BR>
can take a lot more punishment.  You can stand it in "the wall of<BR>
battle" (to borrow a phrase) and expect it to exchange sledgehammer<BR>
blows with other heavy ships or, perhaps, planetary defenses.<BR>
<BR>
Thoughts?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 00:17:07 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Sizes and other stuff (long)<BR>
<BR>
I agree with most of what Bob said here.  His example of the CGN vs the BB<BR>
was interesting, and I think at the end of the day, the BB would still be<BR>
afloat.  The real BB-killers are torpedoes and overhead penetrating bombs.<BR>
You can shoot standard Tomahawks at it all day and the BB's armor will just<BR>
shrug the blasts off.  You would take out the surface sensors and bridge,<BR>
however.  But the BB's were designed to keep on fighting even if that<BR>
happened.<BR>
<BR>
So why don't we build BB's anymore?  Well, it has a lot to do with the<BR>
ascendence of airpower and the supposition from the 70's that the next war<BR>
would be nuclear, so it didn't matter how much you armored a ship - it<BR>
wouldn't protect it.  Instead the US Navy opted to maximize speed and fuel<BR>
economy (and price) which translated to lighter, less heavily armed ships.<BR>
Guns lost their importance as airpower became decisive after the 40's and<BR>
missile came into widespread use.<BR>
<BR>
I like big ships because they are awe inspiring.  We build skyscrapers and<BR>
large structures because of the desire for prestige and perception of<BR>
power/technological preeminence.  Future powers which share our basic human<BR>
motivations will build for dominance like this as well.  Big ships in a real<BR>
universe would have real uses, and like the BB's of the 20's and 30's would<BR>
be built because sheer size confers a tactical or strategic advantage.  One<BR>
such advantage would be range for spinal mounts.  The key to success in<BR>
modern combat is to hit your opponent first before he knows you are there,<BR>
with more firepower than his defenses can handle.   Once you get a mission<BR>
kill, you've won 90% of the battle.  It would be hard to make big ships<BR>
stealthy, but black globes and related technologies would help.<BR>
<BR>
As far as agility and maneuver, the BB's couln't turn fast and for that<BR>
matter neither can CVN's, but they could do 28+ knots and the CVN's are some<BR>
of the the fastest monohull ships in the world.  They are also surprisingly<BR>
maneuverable if you are willing to shake things up inside and lose whatever<BR>
you have on the flight deck.<BR>
<BR>
I think that the design system should rely on extrapolated physical<BR>
pricniples and not biases.  If big ships make little sense due to waste<BR>
heat, structural and other factors, well that's fine.  But I believe that<BR>
any attempt to bias the design system against them is ill-considered and<BR>
probably unrealistic.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, after the Bikini atoll tests, US Navy personnel boarded one of those<BR>
targets that you probably saw in the picture, the little speck at the bottom<BR>
of the water column.  They then lit off the steam plant and steamed her.<BR>
IIRC she was about 2000 yards from ground zero.  Her name was USS NEVADA.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Robert Sanders" <RSanders@mpprint.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 6:28 PM<BR>
Subject: RE: Ship Sizes and other stuff (long)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Lurk mode off...<BR>
><BR>
> Greetings all,<BR>
><BR>
> I have been reading the very interesting discussion on ship size and game<BR>
> play.  If we are adding to the wish list let me add my voice to the<BR>
crowd -<BR>
> please excuse the bandwidth.  I have not had much time respond, and you<BR>
get<BR>
> to receive it all in one shot!<BR>
><BR>
> KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid.   Any system created needs to be able to be<BR>
> played by your average 7th grader.  Avoid the SFB syndrome of adding and<BR>
> adding until the game is unplayable.<BR>
><BR>
> Simple Design - I used to have a BASIC program that would create ships<BR>
> (customized high guard) in seconds, that had my system of damage points,<BR>
> damage list, ship sensor stats, EP's, and weapon stats all on one page.<BR>
> Took about 5 minutes to create a new ship, have it printed (on my old<BR>
daisy<BR>
> wheel printer) and into the game.  I feel that any new version of FFS<BR>
needs<BR>
> to be designed from the very start is a program... then create the  books,<BR>
> etc.  Make it available over the internet, and start some tournaments in<BR>
> some game stores... restore interest in the game Traveller.  The role<BR>
> players will follow...<BR>
><BR>
> Simple Game Play - I did like the abstract version of space combat in TNE.<BR>
> I expanded it to use my ships, but it worked for role playing.  Something<BR>
> like that should be used for T5.<BR>
><BR>
> For small units, add on a simple tactical game and hook the kids in.  And<BR>
of<BR>
> course...<BR>
><BR>
> Strategic Play - any system should be able to roll up into a macro game.<BR>
My<BR>
> CA with hundreds of weapons, crew, etc, equals a 4-4-4 chit, or something<BR>
> like that.  For those of you who remember FFW! Add some more detail then<BR>
> that, but you get the idea!  Publish a game with that system centered<BR>
around<BR>
> the Solomani Rim War, and hook the hard core wargammers!<BR>
><BR>
> Ability to Drill Down - Sure, I have a basic 100 ton scout, but my players<BR>
> want to know if they can put in a 6G drive...  what do I do?  Flip to the<BR>
> back of the book and find out that the 6G drive requires XYZ, and if we<BR>
> remove 2.5 staterooms, add 5 tons of bracing, and a super hydro<BR>
multiplexing<BR>
> computer it can be done... or something like that.  Hook the gearheads!<BR>
><BR>
> Ship Size - I like Big Ships!  However, they need to be used in<BR>
moderation.<BR>
> In the US we have about 10 Fleet carriers (not sure now... used to be 15<BR>
or<BR>
> so), so most of the people in the world have never seen one in real life.<BR>
A<BR>
> few people in the US may have (if you drive pass Norfolk Va. on any given<BR>
> day you can see 1-3 in port) but from a distance, and there are the<BR>
> (un?)lucky few who have served on one (I spent over 2.5 years of my life<BR>
> floating on the USS Indy). I still remember when I was on a small (30<BR>
foot)<BR>
> boat in the bay when a CV sailed past...  wow.  In fact, that feeling of<BR>
> being so small and helpless next to a huge war machine should to be<BR>
> communicated to your players next time they come across a battle ship!<BR>
> Hook the space opera players!<BR>
><BR>
> In Traveller the critical-hit-and-you're-out-of-the-game rule (fuel tanks<BR>
> smashed, vaporized, drives gone, etc...) effectively ends the reason for<BR>
> really large ships. No reason to spend trillions on really big ships, as<BR>
> they are just too weak. (We called them eggshells) If you have to fight a<BR>
> base, or planet, or another fleet with many small ships built around meson<BR>
> guns...  forgetaboutit. One good whack, and most of the invasion fleet is<BR>
> nothing but critically hit hulls. And for PC's in small ships it was just<BR>
> too quick. BANG! "Uh, your fuel tanks just got vaporized. Sorry." Get rid<BR>
of<BR>
> it.<BR>
><BR>
> Remove the concept of spinal mounts...  keep the really big weapons, just<BR>
> make it so that if you wanted that Tigress could be packing 9(!) type T<BR>
> mason guns!  (that is just my feeling that it is really silly to have a<BR>
> 500,000 ton ship with a "spinal" mount that masses 5k... or whatever it<BR>
> is...  don't have the books here with me).  Smaller ships could still be<BR>
> build around a very large weapon in a spinal mount, but for the BIG ships<BR>
> why not have them carry several?<BR>
><BR>
> I feel that big ships should be able to take a lot of damage before losing<BR>
> any combat effectiveness. And the VERY FEW really big ships will have to<BR>
be<BR>
> ganged up on, or they will crush the enemy fleet unless it runs (big ships<BR>
> should be slow and NOT agile) Only after the ship has absorbed several<BR>
> rounds of punishing fire will it start to effect operations. I think of<BR>
> Traveller capital ships as close relatives to the old W.W.I and W.W.II<BR>
> Battleships.  Most of the time they took HUGE amounts of damage before<BR>
> losing their punch. Very survivable. (Until damage passed a certain point,<BR>
> then it was goodbye: they would turn turtle and sink, sometimes with guns<BR>
> still firing!) Sure, there are those examples of lucky hits (a.k.a. the<BR>
> Hood) but most of the time it was a slugfest.  Any combat system I buy<BR>
will<BR>
> have to give the big boys a reason to be around.<BR>
><BR>
> In fact, I do not see any reason to limit ship size at all!  Heck, if we<BR>
> wanted to we could build a HUGE ship in space with today's technology!!<BR>
(not<BR>
> saying it could do anything... but it could be BIG)  In fact, if you are<BR>
TL<BR>
> 9-11 I could see the reason to build much larger ships! (giant armored<BR>
slabs<BR>
> drifting through space... have to pound on them for days to knock them<BR>
out)<BR>
> Think of the W.W.II Battleships (16 inches of armor) and our Cruisers<BR>
today<BR>
> (1 inch of aluminum).  But that cruiser MAY sink the battleship long<BR>
before<BR>
> it entered the BB's effective range...  or it may not!  After the USS<BR>
> Virginia (CGN-38)expended its 16 Tomahawk and Harpoon missiles that BB<BR>
COULD<BR>
> STILL BE COMING ON!!!  Think of the fear!  All that CA has left is two 5<BR>
> inch guns!  I know, and I hate it as well when people use RW examples to<BR>
> make a point about space combat theory, so please do not use these as<BR>
flame<BR>
> bait, and stick to the point. That a lower tech space ship if built with<BR>
> enough armor and size should be able to defeat a smaller higher tech ship!<BR>
><BR>
> Besides, people like big ships!  Think Starwars! Remember the feeling when<BR>
> that big honking star destroyer cruised over your head!<BR>
><BR>
> Heat is a interesting limiting factor...  I like what I have read about<BR>
the<BR>
> problems getting rid of it, and it should be included in the new system...<BR>
> but not to get rid of large ships!  To add to realism!<BR>
><BR>
> humm....  looking back over this I really rambled... sorry.<BR>
><BR>
> Back to my real life as a mild mannered ex-squid, ex-jarhead, ex-ad guy,<BR>
> current IT master.<BR>
><BR>
> Bob Sanders<BR>
><BR>
> Suit up and lurk mode on!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2887<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb05.mx.aol.com (rly-zb05.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.5]) by air-zb02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:19:53 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb05.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:19:15 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id AAA01946;<BR>
	Sat, 5 Aug 2000 00:19:12 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 5 Aug 2000 00:19:07 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id AAA01907<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 5 Aug 2000 00:19:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 00:19:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008050419.AAA01907@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2887<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2888</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/5/00 5:13:09 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, August 5 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2888<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: Ship Structure in Combat (was Re: Ship sizes and other stuff (long))<BR>
Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
RE: Sensors<BR>
OT:  Reading E-mail<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
RE: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 21:27:13 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Ship Structure in Combat (was Re: Ship sizes and other stuff (long))<BR>
<BR>
Accually, FFS-1 'kinda' had this -<BR>
<BR>
the G rating of the ship - the higher the G rating, the more structure the<BR>
bigger the hull HP. I routinely over built military ships to 10 or 20 G's<BR>
that the structure was rated to.. really heavy and really tough.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 8:57 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Ship Structure in Combat (was Re: Ship sizes and other stuff<BR>
(long))<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
On 08/05/00 at 10:09 AM,  "Katharine Whitchurch"<BR>
<katts@globalfreeway.com.au> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Small ships have 2 major advantages, and one major disadvantage over big<BR>
>ships.<BR>
<BR>
>The advantages are less structure, and relatively more surface area to<BR>
>mount radiators and other surface area-intensive things.<BR>
<BR>
Here's a suggestion.  Incorporate the idea of "structural points" in<BR>
combat.  Internal hits can (or always do depending on how you do<BR>
this) reduce a ship's "structural integrity."  When a ship's<BR>
structure is reduced to 0 it is destroyed...back broken, explodes,<BR>
breaks up, or otherwise is reduced to a useless hulk.<BR>
<BR>
A ship with a "light" structure is less massive than normal.  It has<BR>
more available volume, can be built to be faster, more agile, and/or<BR>
carry more weapons, but it can't take much punishment.  A few hits<BR>
and it's destroyed.<BR>
<BR>
A ship with "heavy" structure is more massive than nomral.  It has<BR>
less available volume because extra structure (braceing,<BR>
compartmentalization, etc) has been built in.  Therefore it is going<BR>
to be slower, less agile, and/or can't carry as many weapons, but it<BR>
can take a lot more punishment.  You can stand it in "the wall of<BR>
battle" (to borrow a phrase) and expect it to exchange sledgehammer<BR>
blows with other heavy ships or, perhaps, planetary defenses.<BR>
<BR>
Thoughts?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- --<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 00:33:34 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
Hello gunbunny-types (you know who you are),<BR>
<BR>
I have a semi-important question about firearms, specifically shotguns.<BR>
Since the TML seems to be a fine source of such information on such topics,<BR>
I figured that I'd give it a shot here (no pun intended).<BR>
<BR>
My question concerns the legendary sawed-off shotgun. What effect, if any,<BR>
does sawing off the barrel have. Obviously, this increases concealability.<BR>
However, does it have any other effect which can be translated into game<BR>
terms. Traditional gaming wisdom is that this makes the shotgun much more<BR>
deadly. However, I don't always trust traditional gaming wisdom. Does a<BR>
sawed-off barrel increase the spread of the shotgun pellets. If so, is it<BR>
enough that it would make a "gamable" difference? If so, would it effect<BR>
range?<BR>
<BR>
Any information would be greatly appreciated.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:12:27 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
On 08/05/00 at 12:33 AM,  "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Hello gunbunny-types (you know who you are),<BR>
<BR>
Not me! <g> But I'll give you a non-gunbunny answer. <g> <BR>
<BR>
>I have a semi-important question about firearms, specifically shotguns.<BR>
>Since the TML seems to be a fine source of such information on such<BR>
>topics, I figured that I'd give it a shot here (no pun intended).<BR>
<BR>
>My question concerns the legendary sawed-off shotgun. What effect, if<BR>
>any, does sawing off the barrel have. Obviously, this increases<BR>
>concealability. However, does it have any other effect which can be<BR>
>translated into game terms. Traditional gaming wisdom is that this makes<BR>
>the shotgun much more deadly. However, I don't always trust traditional<BR>
>gaming wisdom. Does a sawed-off barrel increase the spread of the shotgun<BR>
>pellets. If so, is it enough that it would make a "gamable" difference?<BR>
>If so, would it effect range?<BR>
<BR>
Easier to conceal, but probably harder to use.  You'd get a slightly<BR>
wider spread, but not enough to make a difference in a game I don't<BR>
think.  If you remove the stock when you saw off the barrel then<BR>
you're going to have to "hip fire" it and that should be lousy for<BR>
accuracy...any "hip fire" is lousy for accuracy.  If you don't<BR>
remove the stock, it probably isn't all that much more concealable<BR>
than a normal shotgun, and you'd still lose some accuracy with the<BR>
shorter barrel...I think.  I might be wrong about this, but I'd bet<BR>
with less mass in the weapon there will be a much bigger "kick",<BR>
too.  <BR>
<BR>
The real advantage might be that it's more maneuverable in tight<BR>
places, like inside cars, in buildings, corridors, going around a<BR>
corner, aboard ships...that sort of thing.  At these ranges accuracy<BR>
isn't much of an issue.<BR>
<BR>
Let's see if the gunbunny's agree or disagree with me. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 22:22:46 -0700<BR>
From: "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: <eris@pcola.gulf.net><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 10:12 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> On 08/05/00 at 12:33 AM,  "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net> said:<BR>
><BR>
> >Hello gunbunny-types (you know who you are),<BR>
><BR>
> Not me! <g> But I'll give you a non-gunbunny answer. <g><BR>
><BR>
> >I have a semi-important question about firearms, specifically shotguns.<BR>
> >Since the TML seems to be a fine source of such information on such<BR>
> >topics, I figured that I'd give it a shot here (no pun intended).<BR>
><BR>
> >My question concerns the legendary sawed-off shotgun. What effect, if<BR>
> >any, does sawing off the barrel have. Obviously, this increases<BR>
> >concealability. However, does it have any other effect which can be<BR>
> >translated into game terms. Traditional gaming wisdom is that this makes<BR>
> >the shotgun much more deadly. However, I don't always trust traditional<BR>
> >gaming wisdom. Does a sawed-off barrel increase the spread of the shotgun<BR>
> >pellets. If so, is it enough that it would make a "gamable" difference?<BR>
> >If so, would it effect range?<BR>
><BR>
> Easier to conceal, but probably harder to use.  You'd get a slightly<BR>
> wider spread, but not enough to make a difference in a game I don't<BR>
> think.  If you remove the stock when you saw off the barrel then<BR>
> you're going to have to "hip fire" it and that should be lousy for<BR>
> accuracy...any "hip fire" is lousy for accuracy.  If you don't<BR>
> remove the stock, it probably isn't all that much more concealable<BR>
> than a normal shotgun, and you'd still lose some accuracy with the<BR>
> shorter barrel...I think.  I might be wrong about this, but I'd bet<BR>
> with less mass in the weapon there will be a much bigger "kick",<BR>
> too.<BR>
><BR>
> The real advantage might be that it's more maneuverable in tight<BR>
> places, like inside cars, in buildings, corridors, going around a<BR>
> corner, aboard ships...that sort of thing.  At these ranges accuracy<BR>
> isn't much of an issue.<BR>
><BR>
> Let's see if the gunbunny's agree or disagree with me. <g><BR>
><BR>
> Eris<BR>
> --<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
> http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
><BR>
I also lack any significant knowledge on firearms, but I was under the<BR>
impression that in general, if you shorten the barrel, you diminish the<BR>
velocity the rounds travel. Is this true? If it is, sawed off weapons would<BR>
seem less effective in combat, but useful for concealability.<BR>
<BR>
Jeffrey Yin<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 22:35:46 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
on 8/4/00 9:33 PM, Chris Seamans at semo@pil.net wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> My question concerns the legendary sawed-off shotgun. What effect, if any,<BR>
> does sawing off the barrel have. Obviously, this increases concealability.<BR>
> However, does it have any other effect which can be translated into game<BR>
> terms. Traditional gaming wisdom is that this makes the shotgun much more<BR>
> deadly. However, I don't always trust traditional gaming wisdom. Does a<BR>
> sawed-off barrel increase the spread of the shotgun pellets. If so, is it<BR>
> enough that it would make a "gamable" difference? If so, would it effect<BR>
> range?<BR>
<BR>
Sawed-off shotguns generally fall into two categories: Short shotguns and<BR>
whippet gun.  <BR>
<BR>
A short shotgun will typically have a barrel anywhere from 11-14", and will<BR>
usually retain the stock.  This sort of abbreviation is to improve<BR>
maneuverability.  The weapon can still be effectively shouldered for aimed<BR>
fire and is quite handy in closed spaced (indoors and such).  However, there<BR>
is an increase in muzzle blast, making the weapon loader and more unpleasant<BR>
to shoot.  Also, since barrel length is reduced, muzzle velocity suffers and<BR>
pattern size is increased (although not as much as people assume.  A<BR>
standard shotgun's pattern with 00 buck at 21 ft is about the size of a<BR>
fist.<BR>
<BR>
A whippet gun has very abbreviated barrels (less than 11") and almost never<BR>
has a stock.  These weapons are strictly for concealment.  The really short<BR>
guns are incredibly unpleasant to shoot, and can have patters that are a<BR>
hazard to any bystander in the general area.  Mind you, it is still quite<BR>
possible to miss, with a 21 foot pattern in the neighborhood of 6-8" for the<BR>
really stubby guns.<BR>
<BR>
IMTU, short shotguns have a slightly higher probability to hit at close<BR>
range (easier to maneuver) and medium range (better spread).  They are<BR>
relatively ineffective at longer ranges when using conventional ammunition.<BR>
<BR>
Short shotguns do have a decided psychological advantage, since anyone who's<BR>
ever watched tv (movies, tri-d, etc) knows that even if you have the<BR>
eyesight and coordination of Mr. Magoo, with a sawed-off you can take out<BR>
the front line of the Regina Rottweilers grav-ball team. So it's not really<BR>
true.  What's important is what they THINK.<BR>
<BR>
Anyway, hope that helps.  I can get you more detailed info (muzzle velocity,<BR>
spread, etc) should you need it.  For a great reference on the combat<BR>
shotgun, I recommend Thomas Swearengen's "Worlds Fighting Shotguns"<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
PS If you're curious, ask me about SCMITR shotgun ammo (Flying Razor blades)<BR>
or the silent shotgun round.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 02:34:01 -0400<BR>
From: "DaveShayne" <daveshayne@email.msn.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: Current Hull Design Sequence<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2000 02:08:05 -0500<BR>
>From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
<BR>
>On 08/03/00 at 06:57 PM,  eris@pcola.gulf.net said:<BR>
><BR>
>>I thought if might be good to present "the way things are now."  I think<BR>
>>I got this correct, someone might want to double check me, though.  IAC,<BR>
>>the next 150+ lines are just to build a hull...<BR>
><BR>
>Does anyone see anything we can do to streamline the design sequence<BR>
>from FFS2 I posted?<BR>
><BR>
>The inclusion of multiple configurations, multiple types of<BR>
>streamlining and things like speed reqimes, stealth and coatings add<BR>
>a lot of detail (?complexity?), but is it worth it?  I'm not sure if<BR>
>the attempts to get the numbers exactly right for the different<BR>
>configurations, streamlining and speed regimes are worth the effort.<BR>
<BR>
We need streamlining and stealth and what have you for game effects.<BR>
Shape is largely a concern of role-playing instead of gearheading.<BR>
Perhaps cutting it down to streamlining, displacement, and length would<BR>
be enough detail and we can let individual designers chose an appropriate<BR>
shape descriptor.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I'd need to dig around for the digest involved to give more substantive<BR>
answers to these questions but don't hold your breath because I'm still<BR>
working on my primary assignment for this project (civilian fixtures) as<BR>
well as reading the unusually high on topic traffic here as well as<BR>
wotking for a living, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Dave Shayne<BR>
<BR>
"She came from Planet Claire<BR>
 I knew she came from there<BR>
 She drove a Plymouth Satellite<BR>
 Faster than the speed of light"<BR>
  - B-52's<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 10:01:39 +0300<BR>
From: "Ken J. Kazinski" <kjkazinski@ksaits.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Sensors<BR>
<BR>
This is were pulse compression comes into play.  With compression<BR>
ratios' of 256:1 you can get more accurate.<BR>
<BR>
Kaz<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>You don't get ranges accurate to within meters at 10,000 to 100,000 km<BR>
>ranges. At 10,000 km, that'd require pulse timing accuracy to 1 part in<BR>
<BR>
>10 million. Heck, the pulse duration is likely to be more than that!<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 10:08:08 +0300<BR>
From: "Ken J. Kazinski" <kjkazinski@ksaits.com><BR>
Subject: OT:  Reading E-mail<BR>
<BR>
This does not apply to people at their work environment using company<BR>
assets.  This has been taken to court and the company won.  The courts<BR>
ruled that email is like any other tool that the company ownes and can<BR>
be read by the company with our without the employee's knowledge.<BR>
<BR>
Kaz<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Matter of fact, in the US, I could make a damn good case for anyone<BR>
doing this sort of thing being in violation of the Electronic<BR>
Communications Privacy Act (as co-sysop of a BBS, I'm *real* familiar<BR>
with this law).<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:34:25 -0700<BR>
From: Justice Hypercleats <eris@sierratel.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
Via electronic medium on 8/4/00 12:43 PM, stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk<BR>
issued forth:<BR>
<BR>
> A few comments to add to those already made:<BR>
 <BR>
>> What is the meaning of the term "Imperial Client State?"<BR>
<BR>
> Good examples from history would be Roman client states (the original<BR>
> use of the term) and the Indian Princely States under the British Raj.<BR>
> Nominally, they were entirely independent.  However, the Imperial<BR>
> power kept the ruling class under its influence using everything from<BR>
> bribery (sorry, "pensions and subsidies") to taking hostages (sorry,<BR>
> "offering to educate the ruler's children in the best schools in the<BR>
> Empire").  Of course, an Imperial garrison force would be stationed<BR>
> close by (probably not in the client state itself) ready to intervene<BR>
> if there was any trouble (and, of course, to "protect the client state<BR>
> from external threats").  In this way, the Imperial power kept the<BR>
> region pacified and friendly without having to pick up the expense of<BR>
> actually governing it.<BR>
<BR>
Ok, this makes sense to me. This is what I've always assumed it to mean. But<BR>
that just raises the question, then, of the *difference* between a Client<BR>
State and a Member State.<BR>
<BR>
It is apparent in the CT sources I have, and "Milieu 0" which goes into more<BR>
depth on the formation of the 3rd Imperium, (along with a consensus on the<BR>
TML), that the 3I doesn't care what kind of government you are. You can be<BR>
as 'independent' as you like, so long as you do not break any of the very<BR>
few rules they impose: No piracy, no chattel slavery, no weapons of mass<BR>
destruction used against populated worlds, and (most importantly) no<BR>
restriction/hampering/meddling with free interstellar trade.<BR>
<BR>
(Please excuse my late arrival at the table...) Essentially, the 3I is the<BR>
administrative arm of a Trade Federation that happens to be composed of the<BR>
same worlds, on the whole, that the 1st Imperium claimed. Kind of like an<BR>
interstellar "Federal Trade Commission" with it's own military. The<BR>
interests of the Megacorporations, ultimately, are the elemental<BR>
constituents of the 3I. Cleon controlled the largest Megacorp himself, at<BR>
the time of his Warrant of Restoration. They are the first benefactors, and<BR>
they hold the wealth necessary to back up the Throne. The most important<BR>
battle that was fought along the road out of the Long Night was an agreement<BR>
between the ferociously competitive Megacorps. They did have one interest in<BR>
common (if total domination was off the table): maintaining peace and order<BR>
on "the King's Roads." The Grand Empire of the Stars reborn for capitalist<BR>
purpose, unconcerned about the internal policies of member worlds, so long<BR>
as each world's external policy is conducive to free trade.<BR>
<BR>
Which brings up a small matter still confusing me: since a 'Client State' is<BR>
also going to have an external policy facilitating free trade with other<BR>
worlds of the 3I, what is the qualitative difference between them and a<BR>
'Member State?' It cannot be that the government of the client state is an<BR>
issue, as member worlds come in all flavors of government and culture --<BR>
including monarchs who wield total sovereignty over their subjects. Or<BR>
theocrats, whom the population may believe is God in the flesh (I wonder how<BR>
a 'god' humbles himself to pay fealty to the Emperor? Secretly?) Is it a<BR>
geographical matter (the world is outside the formal boundaries of the<BR>
Imperium)? It cannot be a dependance on trade with other worlds of the 3I,<BR>
for this describes most Member States. The reason I ask this is that when I<BR>
think of the Darrians, being a government/culture independent of the 3I, the<BR>
fact that they are a Client State makes perfect sense in the ancient Roman<BR>
paradigm. But the fact that 'Member States' can have any government type<BR>
indicates that 'independence' from the Imperium -- at least as much as the<BR>
Darrians -- does not really matter.<BR>
<BR>
The 3I is not nearly so strong and powerful as many take it to be, as I took<BR>
it to be. It has no need to be. It's got a limited mission -- not a Pax<BR>
Romanus, or even a Pax Vilanus of the 1st Imperium -- it does not attempt to<BR>
bring anything to any world except safe access to trade. The 'Pax Cleon' is<BR>
more like the Highway Patrol, because it doesn't extend to the population of<BR>
member worlds, just to their starports and the space in between. Many of us<BR>
talk about the awesome power of the Imperium and its massive fleets of<BR>
multi-trillion-Cr squadrons and hyper-technology, as if it bared some<BR>
resemblance to the Galactic Empire of Star Wars or something. But it lacks a<BR>
crucial element: an agenda. It doesn't try, doesn't even want to rule<BR>
people. It is a 'meta-government' if you'll pardon the creative English,<BR>
dealing only with worlds and governments as they regard matters of<BR>
interstellar trade. As such, it only needs such military force as is<BR>
required to keep the peace on the 'roads,' and deal with governments who<BR>
might attempt to do something that will harm trade. Besides, many members of<BR>
the Moot control large private navies (and large stakes in the Megacorps).<BR>
<BR>
3I = no pirates = happy Megacorps<BR>
  <BR>
>> Does the ethnicity of the majority of the population have any bearing on the<BR>
>> Imperium's policy toward that world?<BR>
<BR>
> Officially, legally, and for most of the time in reality , no.<BR>
<BR>
Okay. I was asking because there was some Trav literature I've read that<BR>
describes Vilani racism, especially toward the Zhodani, though not<BR>
exclusively so. Some postulated that Vilani intolerance of psionics was<BR>
borne out of hatred of the Zhodani. (Though I can only see this as valid if<BR>
there were no psionics before contact with the Zhodani.) Anyway! The 3I is<BR>
neutral to this issue, as it does not pertain to trade.<BR>
<BR>
>> Does the Imperium colonize newly discovered, uninhabited worlds directly?<BR>
<BR>
> I have seen references to an "Imperial Bureau/Ministry of<BR>
> Colonisation" in some sources, but don't know what it's actual role<BR>
> is.  It may be simply there to oversee and control private<BR>
> colonisation initiatives, or it may carry out colonisation itself.  Or<BR>
> both, of course.<BR>
<BR>
>> (If the latter, what government type is the world?)<BR>
<BR>
> Government type is more a matter of "perception".  If the colonist<BR>
> families get together once a week to decide important matters, then<BR>
> it's a participatory democracy;  if there's an appointed "colony<BR>
> director" answerable to higher authority, then its probably a<BR>
> Controlled Government, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
I ask this to clarify the 'government type' of the 3I itself -- which turned<BR>
out to be an irrational question. Though it is described as a Feudal Empire,<BR>
this is just another way of saying 'multi-tiered bureaucracy,' with 'nobles'<BR>
being department heads. A 'Securities and Exchange Commission' of<BR>
interstellar scale.<BR>
<BR>
>> Or are there certain boundaries they must stay within in order to be rewarded<BR>
>> with Imperial status, diplomacy, trade, protection? Does the Imperium have a<BR>
>> 'Bill of Rights' of any kind? Or an expectation of basic civil rights?<BR>
 <BR>
> AFAIK the only *firm* boundaries are that a world must not impose<BR>
> chattel slavery, use weapons of mass destruction against inhabited<BR>
> planets, put undue restrictions on trade, or deny Imperial citizenship<BR>
> to any organic sentient being.<BR>
<BR>
Now what does it mean to be an Imperial Citizen? What rights does that give<BR>
a person? What incentive is there for anyone to be an Imperial Citizen? I<BR>
can see a definite incentive to be among the nobility, but unless<BR>
Citizenship bestows any rights/powers, what's the point? If an oppressive<BR>
government (say, Khmer Rhouge-style Marxist, or Mujadin-style<BR>
fundamentalist) is not allowed to prevent one from its 'untouchable caste'<BR>
from claiming Imperial Citizenship, what happens? Does this impart any<BR>
rights on this person who has no rights under his own government? If not,<BR>
what worth is it, or the Edict that protects it?<BR>
<BR>
> There are no other formally stated<BR>
> rights. However, the higher Imperial authorities are given wide<BR>
> discretion to intervene in any situation when they think fit;  this is<BR>
> based on their own judgement, honour, sense of ethics, and belief that<BR>
> "decent people just don't behave in certain ways".<BR>
<BR>
It seems that, beyond all concern for honour or the way 'decent people are<BR>
to behave,' these are at least secondary to the issue of free trade in any<BR>
decision or action taken by an Imperial Authority.<BR>
 <BR>
>> prevent them from ever leaving the planet,<BR>
> A grey area - you could make the case that this would be a restriction<BR>
> on free trade.<BR>
<BR>
Very interesting! Mmmmmmm.<BR>
  <BR>
>> force their population (including<BR>
>> children), against their will, to work at subsistence level to make and sell<BR>
>> products for trade, the profits from which will only go to the government's<BR>
>> leaders<BR>
> Illegal if by "force" you mean legal compulsion.  If it's simply<BR>
> social and economic pressures, then that is permitted.<BR>
<BR>
Then it would not be a difficult matter to engineer de facto slavery on a<BR>
population and have it pass Imperial muster.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 19:37:30 +1200<BR>
From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
Subject: RE: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> (2) Large ships, however, may not even be *possible* given the assumptions<BR>
> in the Traveller Technical Architecture as written. This is much the more<BR>
> serious point, and one on which I will be totally inflexible -- there is,<BR>
> in fact, a "right" answer somewhere.<BR>
<BR>
The right answer, however, is plainly that structures much larger than 1<BR>
million d-tons are physically possible.<BR>
<BR>
The proof ? You're standing on it !<BR>
Planets are possible, as we can all agree because we're living on one.<BR>
<BR>
Therefore, it cannot be physically impossible to build a structure larger<BR>
than 1 million d-tons that moves in space.<BR>
<BR>
It may not be possible to build something as large as a planet at a<BR>
particular tech level, and the TL for planet-size building may be way beyond<BR>
Imperial Tech.<BR>
<BR>
You may decide that any particular set of rules will not cater for TLs above<BR>
X,<BR>
but you can't use physical impossibility as an argument to prevent huge<BR>
ships, only specific technological limits designd into the game.<BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
> Does anyone doubt that the giant, multi-ton, robot Battlemechs in the FASA<BR>
> game of the same title are not just silly or tactically suspect, but<BR>
> *physically impossible*? They simply cannot be the size, shape, and weight<BR>
> that is claimed for them and still be able to stand on anything other than<BR>
> specially prepared reinforced concrete or bedrock, much less walk around.<BR>
> They would literally sink into the ground, precisely like a<BR>
> building with a poor foundation.<BR>
> The entire game is a cartoon fantasy because of this.<BR>
><BR>
> I do not want to see Traveller become a cartoon fantasy (I would,<BR>
> regretfully, have to stop playing at that very instant).<BR>
<BR>
This is a specious argument, as you can say the same thing about Traveller.<BR>
<BR>
No-one doubts that many parts of Traveller tech are (currently) physically<BR>
impossible either, such as the jump drives and the continuous acceleration<BR>
capabilities of Traveller ships, to name but two of the many things.<BR>
<BR>
Therefore by your logic, Traveller is a "cartoon fantasy" and you should<BR>
stop playing it.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, I don't think multi-ton battle-mechs are silly, tactically suspect, or<BR>
physically impossible. Multi-ton, walking, two-legged dinosaurs are not<BR>
considered silly, tactically suspect, or physically impossible, so why<BR>
should battle-mechs be ?<BR>
<BR>
Frankie<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 00:55:12 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>  > At 10:43 PM -0700 8/3/00, Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
>  >>  >I am _not_ talking about narrow band emissions.   I have postulated<BR>
>  >>  >the same spectral distribution as thermal emmission<BR>
>  >><BR>
>  >>However, emitting things in the same proportions as a blackbody<BR>
>  >>(ie the same ratio of 1 micron photons to 10 micron photons as a 100 K<BR>
>  >>blackbody) but not in the same amounts - emitting more photons per<BR>
>  >>m2 than the blackbody - isn't thermal emission; there's no simple way<BR>
>  >>to do it, and all the non-simple ways that can be imagined require work.<BR>
>  >>It's not a particularly natural state.<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > I'm talking about the same distribution at the same rates.<BR>
><BR>
>Ok, you've lost me again. To *me* the above says "same frequency<BR>
>distribution curve, same energy per sq. m.". In which case it *is* a<BR>
>black body.<BR>
><BR>
>I'm confused.<BR>
<BR>
Well, even at this restriction, you can not have large radiator<BR>
fins, etc.<BR>
<BR>
And of course the next step is, what difference does just doing<BR>
the same thing at double the rate?  Well, none.  You can do the<BR>
same thing with two black body radiators so you must be able to up the rate.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 22:50:52 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>>From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
>>><BR>
>>>"Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridis HOMINES EST!"<BR>
>> <BR>
>> My vote for best sig file seen today!<BR>
>> <BR>
> Ningen da!  Ningen da!  Soylent no midori wa honto ni ningen da!<BR>
<BR>
Translation please?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 23:21:25 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Completeness and quickness of use are tied.  Technical accuracy is<BR>
> least important, because it is based on our _current_ understanding<BR>
> of physics; an understanding that does not allow for jump drives,<BR>
> thruster plates, or many other canon traveller realities.  I am quite<BR>
> willing to accept all of these, confident that in the next several<BR>
> thousand years we will improve our understanding of physics to the<BR>
> point where they will be possible.<BR>
<BR>
You need to keep in mind that physics as laid down by Newton, almost<BR>
400 years ago, will *never* be wrong. Instead, what will happen is<BR>
things like Einstein noting how Newton's rules are a "simplified"<BR>
version of the "real" rules, which work differently at high speeds and<BR>
in high gravity fields. But under previously encountered conditions,<BR>
the rules didn't change in any noticiable manner.<BR>
<BR>
So we *can* state that regardless of *how* far in the future you go,<BR>
Newtoniand and Einsteinian physics will still apply in the area they<BR>
currently apply. Any new rules will cover conditions not yet<BR>
enocountered. <BR>
<BR>
That doesn't make contragravity impossible. It does set limits on how<BR>
it would work. Jump drives are a problem, but they ways in which *they*<BR>
break physics are such that you can (mostly) ignore it in the game. (If<BR>
you went to a *lot* of trouble, you could manage to travel a short ways<BR>
into the past by making the right series of jumps)<BR>
<BR>
Thruster plates are a problem, not merely because of the way they break<BR>
physics, but because they *can* be used to do nasty things in the game<BR>
*because* they break physics.<BR>
<BR>
> Technical _consistency_, on the other hand is very important.  Once<BR>
> we make the base assumptions of our universe, let's stick to them.<BR>
<BR>
And that's why folks like me keep harping on the laws of physics. So<BR>
that *if* we decide to violate them, we'll know that we are violating<BR>
them, and what the consequences might be.<BR>
<BR>
Also, if we violate physics, then we have to explain IN GREAT DETAIL<BR>
how they work, so that folks don't have to guess or make up rules when<BR>
they encounter some situation we forgot to cover. I've seen such<BR>
guesses and made up rules backfire on GMs *far* too many times.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 03:54:40 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>In mail you write:<BR>
>><BR>
>>> At 10:43 PM -0700 8/3/00, Bruce Macintosh wrote:<BR>
>>>>>I am _not_ talking about narrow band emissions.   I have postulated<BR>
>>>>>the same spectral distribution as thermal emmission<BR>
>>>><BR>
>>>>However, emitting things in the same proportions as a blackbody<BR>
>>>>(ie the same ratio of 1 micron photons to 10 micron photons as a 100 K<BR>
>>>>blackbody) but not in the same amounts - emitting more photons per<BR>
>>>>m2 than the blackbody - isn't thermal emission; there's no simple way<BR>
>>>>to do it, and all the non-simple ways that can be imagined require work.<BR>
>>>>It's not a particularly natural state.<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> I'm talking about the same distribution at the same rates.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Ok, you've lost me again. To *me* the above says "same frequency<BR>
>>distribution curve, same energy per sq. m.". In which case it *is* a<BR>
>>black body.<BR>
>><BR>
>>I'm confused.<BR>
><BR>
> Well, even at this restriction, you can not have large radiator<BR>
> fins, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Huh? The above sentence doesn't make sense... <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> And of course the next step is, what difference does just doing<BR>
> the same thing at double the rate?  Well, none.  You can do the<BR>
> same thing with two black body radiators so you must be able to up the rate.<BR>
<BR>
No, because that's doubling the rate *and* the area. To be useful you<BR>
need to double the rate *per* area, and not raise the temp in the<BR>
process. Which is where I start getting doubtful.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2888<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb04.mx.aol.com (rly-yb04.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.4]) by air-yb02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Aug 2000 08:13:09 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Aug 2000 08:12:37 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id IAA20005;<BR>
	Sat, 5 Aug 2000 08:12:30 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 5 Aug 2000 08:12:15 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id IAA19930<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 5 Aug 2000 08:12:15 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 08:12:15 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008051212.IAA19930@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2888<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2889</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/5/00 12:24:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, August 5 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2889<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: OT:  Reading E-mail<BR>
Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
Re: Population Limits (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
RE: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
RE: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
Canon info on vantage/CAPELLA<BR>
RE: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Energy inefficiency<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Modular vs. non-modular<BR>
RE: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Soylent sigs<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 13:21:46 -0400<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Imperial Law ?<BR>
RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (longish)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 03:57:59 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: OT:  Reading E-mail<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>Matter of fact, in the US, I could make a damn good case for anyone<BR>
> doing this sort of thing being in violation of the Electronic<BR>
> Communications Privacy Act (as co-sysop of a BBS, I'm *real* familiar<BR>
> with this law).<BR>
<BR>
> This does not apply to people at their work environment using company<BR>
> assets.  This has been taken to court and the company won.  The courts<BR>
> ruled that email is like any other tool that the company ownes and can<BR>
> be read by the company with our without the employee's knowledge.<BR>
<BR>
I wish you'd left in the stuff I quoted. I don't recall enough<BR>
details, but if I recall corectly, that only applies to *employees*.<BR>
This involved monitoring *customers* of an ISP. That's a *very*<BR>
different situation.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 04:00:39 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> (2) Large ships, however, may not even be *possible* given the assumptions<BR>
>> in the Traveller Technical Architecture as written. This is much the more<BR>
>> serious point, and one on which I will be totally inflexible -- there is,<BR>
>> in fact, a "right" answer somewhere.<BR>
><BR>
> The right answer, however, is plainly that structures much larger than 1<BR>
> million d-tons are physically possible.<BR>
><BR>
> The proof ? You're standing on it !<BR>
> Planets are possible, as we can all agree because we're living on one.<BR>
><BR>
> Therefore, it cannot be physically impossible to build a structure larger<BR>
> than 1 million d-tons that moves in space.<BR>
<BR>
Except that planets *aren't* a "structure". For one thing they *don't*<BR>
support the stresses of just "sitting there" very well. Ever hear of<BR>
earthquakes? :-)<BR>
<BR>
For another, they are roughly spherical *because* they can't support<BR>
any other shape against gravity. <BR>
<BR>
And they certainly can't be moved at any TL short of "near magic". And<BR>
being above to move them *intact* is even higher tech.<BR>
<BR>
There's a *much* lower size limit for self-suporting structures that<BR>
aren't solid all the way thru. <BR>
<BR>
> BTW, I don't think multi-ton battle-mechs are silly, tactically suspect, or<BR>
> physically impossible. Multi-ton, walking, two-legged dinosaurs are not<BR>
> considered silly, tactically suspect, or physically impossible, so why<BR>
> should battle-mechs be ?<BR>
<BR>
Because the mech try to support *much* larger weights on the *same*<BR>
size "feet". The ground pressure is a lot higher. And they are *much*<BR>
larger than any creature that has *ever* walked upright (or is ever<BR>
likely to). <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 08:12:02 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Population Limits (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 19:33:38 -0700<BR>
>From: "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu><BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
><BR>
>Would that really work for 3I? Even by CT, the main sectors of the Imperium<BR>
>have fairly dense population concentrations because of the long history of<BR>
>space travel.<BR>
<BR>
In the OTU, no. The history is too well established in canon to fix.<BR>
<BR>
If we were to start over from scratch, however? Sure, it's easy. Just add<BR>
the following radical assumption to your world generator:<BR>
<BR>
Population distributions are not random.<BR>
<BR>
Say that the homeworld for a species is a nearly ideal environment for them<BR>
(it's what they evolved for, certainly, but there may be milder conditions<BR>
somewhere that are more favorable). Set the maximum population at whatever<BR>
density you think they will tolerate without killing one another -- for<BR>
humans, this is probably in excess of 10 billions (Pop A) on a completely<BR>
Earth-like world; for other species (Aslan?), it may be lower.<BR>
<BR>
The more a world deviates from the homeworld norm, the lower it's<BR>
desireability as a colony world (it's "affinity"), and the lower its final<BR>
population density will be as smaller and smaller fractions of the surface<BR>
are really liveable or fewer members of the species can adapt.<BR>
Uninhabitable worlds are only colonized if they have resources in abundance<BR>
that are needed elsewhere, or they occupy some strategic location (on a<BR>
jump main, for instance). The population of these secondary worlds is<BR>
necessarily low: only as large as required to exploit the resource or<BR>
maintain the position.<BR>
<BR>
These rules already exist in GURPS Traveller: First In as the standard; the<BR>
old, random method is retained as an option. If you apply the rules as<BR>
written, only one system in 15 or 16 is even marginally habitable. About<BR>
10% of the remaining systems have worlds with resources significantly above<BR>
average. All the others would be empty except for refueling stations, naval<BR>
posts, scout bases, and outlaws. In a standard Traveller subsector, this<BR>
means that only 2-3 worlds will have any significant population (most much<BR>
less than Pop A), and maybe 4 more will have exploitable resources that<BR>
support a sizeable population.<BR>
<BR>
If you're interested in the specific statistics that GT:FI generates, I've<BR>
posted the numbers at:<BR>
<BR>
http://www.io.com/~thrash/firstin.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 09:28:49 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 19:37:30 +1200<BR>
>From: "Frank G. Pitt" <frankie@mundens.gen.nz><BR>
>Subject: RE: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
><BR>
>Therefore, it cannot be physically impossible to build a structure larger<BR>
>than 1 million d-tons that moves in space.<BR>
<BR>
Look again: I didn't say "move", I said "maneuver". There is a significant<BR>
difference. I am quite convinced that you can build structures almost<BR>
arbitrarily large is microgravity, so long as you don't intend to subject<BR>
them to anything more than fractional-g accelerations. These structures are<BR>
not, however, "ships" in any conventional sense.<BR>
<BR>
>You may decide that any particular set of rules will not cater for TLs above<BR>
>X,<BR>
>but you can't use physical impossibility as an argument to prevent huge<BR>
>ships, only specific technological limits designd into the game.<BR>
<BR>
I think that was what I said -- that the technological assumptions you make<BR>
impose specific, physical limits on design. What is lacking is a solid<BR>
analysis of what those limits are, given the assumptions of the current<BR>
Traveller Technical Architecture at the proposed technological level of the<BR>
Imperium and of Traveller games in general.<BR>
<BR>
Is anyone besides Mr. Pitt really concerned about what limits Grandfather<BR>
and the Ancients may or may not have faced? I'm not.<BR>
<BR>
>No-one doubts that many parts of Traveller tech are (currently) physically<BR>
>impossible either, such as the jump drives and the continuous acceleration<BR>
>capabilities of Traveller ships, to name but two of the many things.<BR>
><BR>
>Therefore by your logic, Traveller is a "cartoon fantasy" and you should<BR>
>stop playing it.<BR>
<BR>
Not at all. Science fiction consists of making a few, carefully chosen<BR>
assumptions about future technology and then developing them to their<BR>
logical conclusions.* Traveller's core assumptions are fusion power,<BR>
gravitic manipulation, FTL jump drives, and nuclear dampers.<BR>
<BR>
"Cartoon fantasy" consists of not playing by the rules that you, yourself,<BR>
establish. Battletech's core assumptions are fusion power, myomer muscle<BR>
fibers, and FTL jump drive. They give specific, detailed statistics<BR>
(especially mass) and diagrams for their mecha.<BR>
<BR>
Those statistics demonstrate that the 'mechs are physically impossible, at<BR>
least in the range of sizes depicted (10 to 100 tons). You can calculate<BR>
the area of their feet directly, and from there the ground pressure they<BR>
exert when standing still (the "dead load"):<BR>
<BR>
A humanoid vehicle 10 meters tall (that is, 5x man-height) would stand on<BR>
an area of only approximately 1.3 m^2 (260 cm^2 per human foot, x2 feet,<BR>
x25 for the size increase).  If it masses 100 tons, at 1g that is 7.5 x<BR>
10^5 N/m^2 (16,000 lb/ft^2) ground pressure.  <BR>
<BR>
The Uniform Building Code specifies 1.9 x 10^5 N/m^2 (4000 lb/ft^2) as the<BR>
maximum allowable ground pressure for a building foundation resting on<BR>
bedrock; this means that even if a 'mech stood completely still on solid<BR>
rock, it would be too heavy to be safe by a factor of 4 -- dynamic "live"<BR>
loads (say, walking) are even worse.  <BR>
<BR>
For soft rock and gravel the number is 9.6 x 10^4 N/m^2 (2000 lb/ft^2); for<BR>
sand 7.2 x 10^4 N/m^2 (1500 lb/ft^2); and for clay only 4.8 x 10^4 N/m^2<BR>
(1000 lb/ft^2). The US Army scales its tracked vehicles so as not to exceed<BR>
the "soft rock and gravel" figure for ground pressure, regardless of size<BR>
(ref:  FM 5-36, Route Classification, Appendix C).  The comparable figure<BR>
for wheeled vehicles is the higher, "bedrock" value (which is why tracks<BR>
don't get stuck in the mud as quickly as wheels).<BR>
<BR>
>BTW, I don't think multi-ton battle-mechs are silly, tactically suspect, or<BR>
>physically impossible. Multi-ton, walking, two-legged dinosaurs are not<BR>
>considered silly, tactically suspect, or physically impossible, so why<BR>
>should battle-mechs be ?<BR>
<BR>
A physically reasonable limit is "up to 4 meters tall and massing up to 6.4<BR>
tons" -- which also happens to be the size estimated for "Sue", the largest<BR>
and most complete T. Rex skeleton ever discovered.**  This assumes 'bozo<BR>
feet' 1.5x the area of proportional human feet, and results in ground<BR>
pressure of 2.0 x 10^5 N/m^2. These mecha will have cross-country mobility<BR>
comparable to (i.e., will get stuck as often as) modern military wheeled<BR>
vehicles, while future tech (fusion power) provides greater speed through<BR>
vastly improved power-to-weight ratios. A dinosaur-shaped mecha would be<BR>
even better -- look at the proportion of leg and foot to body dimensions.*** <BR>
<BR>
Not nearly as impressive as "man-shaped, 10 meters tall and 100 tons",<BR>
though, is it? Dragging this back on topic: this is precisely my sticking<BR>
point in the big ship debate: just because it's impressive, doesn't make it<BR>
right. We need to figure out what "right" is. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
*Okay, that's "hard" science fiction, but Traveller purports to fall into<BR>
that category for the most part:<BR>
<BR>
"All changes should be rational, logical, and scientifically sound (after<BR>
all, Traveller is a /science/ fiction role-playing game." Book 0,<BR>
Introduction to Traveller, p. 34. Emphasis in the original. <BR>
<BR>
**I'm amazed: I came up with the "4 meter, 6.4 ton" estimate independently<BR>
on 18 February 1998. I hadn't looked at dinosaur sizes until today.<BR>
<BR>
***I will pass on the tactical argument -- it has been done to death here<BR>
and elsewhere, and really isn't relevant.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 06:40:46 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
It's People - It's People - Soylent Green is People!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Leonard<BR>
Erickson<BR>
Sent: Friday, August 04, 2000 11:51 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Owch (was Re: Ship size limits)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2000, Glenn Goffin wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>>From: "Kelly St.Clair" <kellys@efn.org><BR>
>>><BR>
>>>"Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridis HOMINES EST!"<BR>
>> <BR>
>> My vote for best sig file seen today!<BR>
>> <BR>
> Ningen da!  Ningen da!  Soylent no midori wa honto ni ningen da!<BR>
<BR>
Translation please?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 07:50:39 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Canon info on vantage/CAPELLA<BR>
<BR>
Greetings all.<BR>
<BR>
Aside from the brief descriptions of Vantage/CAPELLA in CT Supplement 10 and<BR>
now Rim of Fire, is there any other canon info on the planet.  Thanks.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 11:00:23 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 09:28:49 -0400<BR>
>To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
>From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
>Subject: RE: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
><BR>
> A physically reasonable limit is "up to 4 meters tall and massing up to<BR>
6.4 tons" --<BR>
> which also happens to be the size estimated for "Sue", the largest and<BR>
most complete T. > Rex skeleton ever discovered.**  <BR>
<BR>
Sorry, I just realized this is misleading. "Sue" stood 4 meters tall *at<BR>
the hip*, which is the only estimate for height I could find. She was 12.8<BR>
meters long, nose-to-tail. The difference in size for the same mass is<BR>
presumably due to the relative density of metal versus flesh-and-bone.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 15:02:57 GMT<BR>
From: "Sir Sabat" <sir_sabat@hotmail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
Loren,<BR>
I've included op-eds to each of your questions below. Opinions based on my <BR>
use of older OOP CT minis.<BR>
SS<BR>
<BR>
- ----Original Message Follows----<BR>
From: Loren Wiseman <lkw@io.com><BR>
<BR>
More miniatures questions -- mostly brainstorming at this point, we still<BR>
haven't decided yes or no for Traveller stuff, but SJ Games will definitely <BR>
be doing Ogre, so the possibility exists of a Traveller line, and of a more <BR>
general SF line:<BR>
*OGRE in Traveller, sounds like a good cross<BR>
<BR>
Hopw many of you would buy:<BR>
<BR>
- -- 25mm "adventurer" type figures --<BR>
* I think these would be good. High demand figures seem to be military and <BR>
Vargr and of course lots of females!<BR>
<BR>
- -- 25mm vehicles for use with the above --<BR>
* I would prefer military vehicles. It's rare for a civil vehicle to enter <BR>
into mini combat. Unless you combine Car Wars & Traveller (another SJG <BR>
x-over idea!)<BR>
<BR>
- -- Fittings, Equipment, and furniture in 25mm.<BR>
* These are nice for permanent displays, but I've rarely seen them used in <BR>
gaming with any frequency (or much requested)<BR>
<BR>
- -- Starships<BR>
*There are few CT ships available. I believe they would be useful, but you <BR>
would have to make them special compared to the plethora of similar SF mini <BR>
available. Perhaps make series specifically for each book (a Brillant Lances <BR>
collection) or have accessory packs available for jump tanks et.<BR>
<BR>
- -- 1/300 "Mass combat" figures<BR>
* I don't see a big demand here. It's similar to historical figures. If you <BR>
want mass, you can use a single figure to reprent whole troops.<BR>
<BR>
- -- A special collector's set of 54mm figures, perhaps something like<BR>
"Imperial Marine Fireteam" or "Free Trader Crew"<BR>
* Yes!! would be nice to get Trav figures I don't need a magnifying glass to <BR>
paint. Also would look great on my puter at work.<BR>
<BR>
- -- Imperial rank insignia, cast in white metal and plated, for use on<BR>
costumes and the like. We had to work out designs for these for use with GF <BR>
anyway . . .<BR>
* How about patches too? I believe this would be a small demand, but neat <BR>
option. Could bundle together with other offerings as an incintive.<BR>
<BR>
Opinions are solicited.<BR>
*Opinions given. They are all mine & subject to personal prefrences.<BR>
<BR>
SS<BR>
________________________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 11:23:19 EDT<BR>
From: Kagehira@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Energy inefficiency<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 8/4/00 9:49:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
>  A typical 100T scout ship (GT) with 3 lasers has the following reactor <BR>
> slices:<BR>
>  Lasers:          33 MW<BR>
>  Thrusters:       80 MW<BR>
>  Jump Drive:      30 MW<BR>
>  Art. Gravity:     2 MW<BR>
>  AESA:           2.5 MW<BR>
>  Everything Else:.01 MW or less (maybe .1 for a fuel processor).<BR>
>  <BR>
>  As you can see, the redundant power slices for weaponry and jump drive are <BR>
> in<BR>
>  fact a noticeable inefficiency; everything else can pretty much be ignored.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Only if you don't want to fire back while warming up your jump drives. It is <BR>
a case of however of not needing to run the power plant at full power (which <BR>
of course led to the alternate power rules published for MT; and led to the <BR>
format for FF&S1 more than probably).<BR>
<BR>
Bryan<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 08:30:01<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
At 12:33 AM 8/5/2000 -0400, you wrote:<BR>
>Hello gunbunny-types (you know who you are),<BR>
<BR>
Tod has already answered the question, so I'll just point out the "gun<BR>
bunny" is semi-derogatory slang for US Army artillerymen in gneral, and the<BR>
troops feeding ammo to the gun in particular.<BR>
<BR>
Us grunts and treadheads dislike being lumped in with the cannon-cockers. :)<BR>
- -- <BR>
<BR>
Douglas E. Berry       gridlore@mindspring.com<BR>
http://gridlore.home.mindspring.com/index.html<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 11:41:15 EDT<BR>
From: Kagehira@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Modular vs. non-modular<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 8/4/00 9:19:53 PM Pacific Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
>  I've been in that situation and it ain't pretty.  I agree that the<BR>
>  custom-designed ships should not have an overwhelming advantage over <BR>
modular<BR>
>  ships.  A slight advantage I can live with.<BR>
<BR>
It would be a first.......<BR>
<BR>
Custom design ships in Traveller have always had an advantage over modular <BR>
designs in all the rules variations.<BR>
<BR>
Bryan<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 09:00:19 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
Douglas Berry wrote:<BR>
 <BR>
> Us grunts and treadheads dislike being lumped in with the <BR>
> cannon-cockers. :)<BR>
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<BR>
<BR>
Don't you mean the King of Battle? <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 13:00:16 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Soylent sigs<BR>
<BR>
"Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridis HOMINES EST!"<BR>
<BR>
Okay, this is very cool.  But it would be even better if we could come up<BR>
with the latin for "soy" and "lentil".  Probably a tall order though.  Am<BR>
I right in my assumptions about the derivation of Soylent?  <BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 13:21:46 -0400<BR>
From: "Mike Peters" <Travelleri@home.com><BR>
Subject: Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 13:21:46 -0400<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 12:45:47 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Congratulations! You have entered the Star Trek Zone. (I knew someone<BR>
> would bring this up sooner or later.)<BR>
> <BR>
> Let us be clear: "structural integrity fields" are Treknology. They have<BR>
> never been mentioned in Traveller heretofore, except in the very limited<BR>
> sense of superdense and bonded superdense materials.<BR>
> <BR>
> "Gravitic compensation" exists, all right, but so far it affects the<BR>
> contents of a vessel, *not* its structure.<BR>
<BR>
I'm still a bit unclear on why starship builders would go to the trouble<BR>
of designing a g field that would exclude the ship's structure while<BR>
affecting everything else in the ship.  From where I'm sitting, exposing<BR>
the structure to g compensation is almost unavoidable, and I don't see why<BR>
you would want to avoid it.<BR>
Also note that this bears no resemblance to Star Trek structural integrity<BR>
fields, which are based on the considerably more ridiculous notion of<BR>
surrounding the ship's frame with powerful force fields, rather than<BR>
using artificial gravity.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 12:16:34 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
on 8/5/00 8:30 AM, Douglas E. Berry at gridlore@pop.mindspring.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> At 12:33 AM 8/5/2000 -0400, you wrote:<BR>
>> Hello gunbunny-types (you know who you are),<BR>
> <BR>
> Tod has already answered the question, so I'll just point out the "gun<BR>
> bunny" is semi-derogatory slang for US Army artillerymen in gneral, and the<BR>
> troops feeding ammo to the gun in particular.<BR>
> <BR>
> Us grunts and treadheads dislike being lumped in with the cannon-cockers. :)<BR>
<BR>
Artillery is the King of battle.<BR>
Infantry is the Queen of battle.<BR>
And everyone knows the Queen tells the King where to put his balls.<BR>
<BR>
(Infantry saying)<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 05:19:19 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law ?<BR>
<BR>
> From: Justice Hypercleats <eris@sierratel.com><BR>
> Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
><BR>
> Ok, this makes sense to me. This is what I've always assumed it to mean.<BR>
But<BR>
> that just raises the question, then, of the *difference* between a Client<BR>
> State and a Member State.<BR>
<BR>
No vote in the Moot. More paperwork when your citizens want to work for<BR>
Imperial instrumentalities. Limited recogniion of local patents of nobility.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
The 'no interference with planets' was probably heavily influenced by the<BR>
straegic partnership/merger/agreement with the Vilani in the very early<BR>
days. The Vilani had very little wish to see their culture changed by a new<BR>
Imperium.<BR>
<BR>
> The 3I is not nearly so strong and powerful as many take it to be, as I<BR>
took<BR>
> it to be. It has no need to be. It's got a limited mission -- not a Pax<BR>
> Romanus, or even a Pax Vilanus of the 1st Imperium -- it does not attempt<BR>
to<BR>
> bring anything to any world except safe access to trade. The 'Pax Cleon'<BR>
is<BR>
> more like the Highway Patrol, because it doesn't extend to the population<BR>
of<BR>
> member worlds, just to their starports and the space in between. Many of<BR>
us<BR>
> talk about the awesome power of the Imperium and its massive fleets of<BR>
> multi-trillion-Cr squadrons and hyper-technology, as if it bared some<BR>
> resemblance to the Galactic Empire of Star Wars or something. But it lacks<BR>
a<BR>
> crucial element: an agenda. It doesn't try, doesn't even want to rule<BR>
> people. It is a 'meta-government' if you'll pardon the creative English,<BR>
> dealing only with worlds and governments as they regard matters of<BR>
> interstellar trade. As such, it only needs such military force as is<BR>
> required to keep the peace on the 'roads,' and deal with governments who<BR>
> might attempt to do something that will harm trade. Besides, many members<BR>
of<BR>
> the Moot control large private navies (and large stakes in the Megacorps).<BR>
><BR>
> 3I = no pirates = happy Megacorps<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Pretty much. Pirates also raid worlds, so suppressing piracy also means that<BR>
worlds can cut their defense budget down to very low levels - if there is no<BR>
risk of someone dropping out of jumpspace and trying to hold your capital to<BR>
ransom, then you can dismantle the particle accelerators and missile silos<BR>
that protect your world.<BR>
<BR>
I'd say the Imperium is as powerful as it needs to be.<BR>
<BR>
For example, lets take the whole 'cargo registration' thing. If you register<BR>
every package going between the stars, and every source of repairs to<BR>
starships, then once you collect all the data and analyse it, you can<BR>
probably get some really good leads at where pirates are operating from,<BR>
where they are disposing their cargos and so on.<BR>
<BR>
Would the Imperium do this as a routine thing ? Probably not, because this<BR>
sort of red tape is expensive, and an impediment to trade.<BR>
<BR>
Would it reserve the right to do so, if the relevant Imperial Authorities<BR>
thought it would stamp out recurrent episodes of piracy in a subsector ? You<BR>
betcha.<BR>
<BR>
> I ask this to clarify the 'government type' of the 3I itself -- which<BR>
turned<BR>
> out to be an irrational question. Though it is described as a Feudal<BR>
Empire,<BR>
> this is just another way of saying 'multi-tiered bureaucracy,' with<BR>
'nobles'<BR>
> being department heads. A 'Securities and Exchange Commission' of<BR>
> interstellar scale.<BR>
<BR>
Note also that the 3I has fought some rather solid wars, and has suppressed<BR>
some serious internal revolts.<BR>
<BR>
I'd say it's limited in scope becasue it wants to be.<BR>
<BR>
Me, I'd class the Imperium as Gov Type 8, Law Level 2.<BR>
<BR>
> Now what does it mean to be an Imperial Citizen? What rights does that<BR>
give<BR>
> a person? What incentive is there for anyone to be an Imperial Citizen? I<BR>
> can see a definite incentive to be among the nobility, but unless<BR>
> Citizenship bestows any rights/powers, what's the point? If an oppressive<BR>
> government (say, Khmer Rhouge-style Marxist, or Mujadin-style<BR>
> fundamentalist) is not allowed to prevent one from its 'untouchable caste'<BR>
> from claiming Imperial Citizenship, what happens? Does this impart any<BR>
> rights on this person who has no rights under his own government? If not,<BR>
> what worth is it, or the Edict that protects it?<BR>
<BR>
Imperial citizenship could be worth either between damn little, or quite a<BR>
bit (eg Imperial Citizens get to appeal decisions to Imperial Courts etc -<BR>
but this would require limiting Imperial Citizenship).<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> > There are no other formally stated<BR>
> > rights. However, the higher Imperial authorities are given wide<BR>
> > discretion to intervene in any situation when they think fit;  this is<BR>
> > based on their own judgement, honour, sense of ethics, and belief that<BR>
> > "decent people just don't behave in certain ways".<BR>
><BR>
> It seems that, beyond all concern for honour or the way 'decent people are<BR>
> to behave,' these are at least secondary to the issue of free trade in any<BR>
> decision or action taken by an Imperial Authority.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Maybe.<BR>
<BR>
> Then it would not be a difficult matter to engineer de facto slavery on a<BR>
> population and have it pass Imperial muster.<BR>
<BR>
Not quite. The problem is government by men, not laws. Passing muster from<BR>
90% of Imperial Officials wont help if one of the other 10% makes the<BR>
decision.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 17:31:47 +0100<BR>
From: "Mark Preston" <mark@mpreston.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (longish)<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of<BR>
> Ian Ferguson<BR>
> Sent: 04 August 2000 16:40<BR>
> To: traveller@mpgn.com<BR>
> Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (longish)<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Mark Preston writes:<BR>
> <snipped><BR>
><BR>
> 	Current estimates are that about 10% of our total DNA are<BR>
> 	functional genes.  Such estimates are very approximate as we<BR>
> 	have not yet mapped or analysed the whole thing.  A lot of DNA<BR>
> 	that is not part of a gene is in spacers (segments separating<BR>
> 	genes), pseudogenes (degenerate copies of functonal<BR>
> genes), and<BR>
> 	repetitive sequences (pieces of DNA that seem to have copied<BR>
> 	themselves to various parts of the chomosomes, with as many as<BR>
> 	10^7 copies).<BR>
><BR>
That's what I said...<BR>
><BR>
> >Of that 5% we understand, only<BR>
> >4% of it is different from equivalent chimp DNA and<BR>
> probably accounts<BR>
> >for why we are what we are (instead of chimps).<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
> 	Looking at a hemoglobin pseudogene found in the<BR>
> primates, it was<BR>
> 	found that 98% of the sequence was the same in humans<BR>
> and chimps.<BR>
> 	This confirms that the two species are closely<BR>
> related, but does<BR>
> 	not give us much of an idea of just what makes humans<BR>
> human and<BR>
> 	chimpanzees chimps.  I am not aware of any estimate of how<BR>
> 	different the functional DNA is between these<BR>
> species.  Any such<BR>
> 	estimate would be hazardous until the entire genome<BR>
> of each species<BR>
> 	has been sequenced.<BR>
><BR>
The work is an early estimate & if I can find the reference for you, I<BR>
will.<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	flawed or worse.  If there was some hidden mechanism that<BR>
> 	copied the special DNA much, much more accurately than the<BR>
> 	rest of the human DNA (insert magic here), then the sequence<BR>
> 	would stand out like a sore thumb as soon as the sequence<BR>
> 	was analysed by scientists ("Why is it that everyone on earth<BR>
> 	has this exact same non-coding sequence?").<BR>
><BR>
Agreed, that's why you get rapid multiple speciation in the 'steps' of<BR>
punctuated evolution - which I mentioned later on.<BR>
><BR>
> >Retroviruses most definately do fiddle around with the genome, but<BR>
> >generally operate on a tiny scale, even compared to the<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	This is entirely new to me.  Could you point me to a source?<BR>
><BR>
No problem - check any of the new HIV work for the operation of the<BR>
virus genome in the human during its growth and proliferation within<BR>
the cell.<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	Species were originally thought of as discrete, fundamental<BR>
> 	units.  However, biologists have long recognized that they<BR>
> 	are actually arbitrary units with indistinct edges.  That<BR>
> 	does not mean that the concept of species is not useful, but<BR>
> 	one must always be careful when using the term.<BR>
><BR>
Again, that's what I said...<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	The Peppered Moth story is a classic case of evolution by<BR>
> 	natural selection, but I don't know of any involvement of<BR>
> 	any kind of virus.<BR>
><BR>
I didn't say there was - I said that genetic responses and viral<BR>
responses to evironmental stress were well known and gave the Peppered<BR>
Moth as an example of getic change in response to environmental<BR>
stress.<BR>
><BR>
> >Unfortunately, where it breaks down is his understanding of human<BR>
> >evolution. We did _not_ evolve from Homo Neanderthalis at all - far<BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	As has been mentioned, this area is still a hotbed of research<BR>
> 	and controversy.  Stay tuned.<BR>
><BR>
But the hybrid remains from Spain analysed this year are definately<BR>
hybrid.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2889<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb01.mx.aol.com (rly-zb01.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.1]) by air-zb03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Aug 2000 15:24:13 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Aug 2000 15:23:47 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id PAA35271;<BR>
	Sat, 5 Aug 2000 15:23:42 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 5 Aug 2000 15:23:20 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id PAA35226<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 5 Aug 2000 15:23:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 15:23:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008051923.PAA35226@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2889<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2890</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/5/00 7:09:33 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Saturday, August 5 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2890<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 12:30:41 -0700<BR>
RE: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Soylent sigs<BR>
FFS3 : Low Entropy Heat Tubes<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
J. Andrew Keith Memorial site...<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: Soylent sigs<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
RE: Soylent sigs<BR>
GT: PAW and Meson<BR>
Start Wrecked+<BR>
Re: J. Andrew Keith Memorial site...<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 12:30:41 -0700<BR>
From: "Robert E. Lloyd" <relloyd@ix.netcom.com><BR>
Subject: Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 12:30:41 -0700<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 15:32:41 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
Okay, a big thank you to Todd, Eris and Jeffrey, and an apology to Doug. I<BR>
meant no offense. A few months back, I remember that some gun folks called<BR>
themselves gunbunnies, and I've taken a liking to the term. :)<BR>
<BR>
All in all, this has been amazingly helpful. Todd's differentation between<BR>
the short-shotgun and the whippet gun will certainly prove useful.<BR>
<BR>
If I'm following what's been said so far:<BR>
<BR>
A short-shotgun's barrel won't have much of a gamable effect on range, but<BR>
it will help with accuracy, especially in close quarters. A whippet gun's<BR>
extremely short barrel will decrease range significantly and make it more<BR>
difficult to fire. What would be a decent range estimate for a whippet gun?<BR>
About what distance will it be most effective, and what distance will it be<BR>
least effective?<BR>
<BR>
Thanks to all who've responded for the extremely useful info so far.<BR>
<BR>
Chris<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 15:45:00 -0400<BR>
From: "Mike Demetro" <punkabilly@sprint.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Soylent sigs<BR>
<BR>
> Am<BR>
> I right in my assumptions about the derivation of Soylent?<BR>
><BR>
I dunno, but if you check the book, remember it is not called Soylent Green.<BR>
It is called "Make Room! Make Room!"<BR>
<BR>
Mike Demetro, President, The Guildhall Press, Canada<BR>
www.guildhallpress.com president@guildhallpress.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 05:47:29 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 : Low Entropy Heat Tubes<BR>
<BR>
Guys, we have a problem.<BR>
<BR>
The radiator rules only seem to work if we allow heat to be taken from place<BR>
A (the power plant) to place B (the radiators) with very little<BR>
inefficiency. Getting rid of the heat is possible with the radiators that<BR>
have been proposed, unless you have to spend energy on pumping it around.<BR>
<BR>
I'm hereby proposing some sort of doped silicate/crystal lattice/enhanced<BR>
handwave matrix material that conducts heat in a damn efficient manner. I'm<BR>
thinking, like, 95% efficient at TL9.<BR>
<BR>
This should let us have viable starships with any of the 'heat realism'<BR>
options, without changing the power input for jump drives.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 13:07:43 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
on 8/5/00 12:32 PM, Chris Seamans at semo@pil.net wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> A short-shotgun's barrel won't have much of a gamable effect on range, but<BR>
> it will help with accuracy, especially in close quarters. A whippet gun's<BR>
> extremely short barrel will decrease range significantly and make it more<BR>
> difficult to fire. What would be a decent range estimate for a whippet gun?<BR>
> About what distance will it be most effective, and what distance will it be<BR>
> least effective?<BR>
<BR>
Think of a whippet gun as a big pistol.  It will strictly be a close and<BR>
short range weapons, with some effectiveness at the lower end of medium. For<BR>
realism, consider this.  The LA police evaluation of shotgun performance<BR>
determined that 00Buck fired from a standard shotgun (18" bbl) could often<BR>
be stopped by a heavy leather jack at 50 yards!<BR>
<BR>
I doubt a whippet gun will be effective as far.  I'd say a full 4D at close<BR>
(possibly more, these weapons are murderous at close range), 3D at 15 meters<BR>
and maybe 1D at 50 meters.  The big advantage of the whippet will be at<BR>
short range, where it is as maneuverable as a pistol.<BR>
<BR>
The short shotgun will be slightly less effective at longer range, but<BR>
slightly more maneuverable at close range.  If it has a tubular magazine, a<BR>
short shotgun will have fewer rounds.<BR>
<BR>
Assuming no legal restriction, short shotguns are likely to be found in<BR>
places like starships, where their shorter length will be an asset.<BR>
<BR>
Some comparisons:<BR>
<BR>
shotgun         18-20" bbl      8-10 rnd magazine<BR>
<BR>
short shotgun   11-14"          4-5 rnd magazine<BR>
(also known as an 'entry gun')<BR>
<BR>
whippet gun     <11"            1 or 2 rnds<BR>
Really, shotgun pistols.  Made under such named as 'auto-burglar' and<BR>
typically single or multi barreled  gun (other action types don't lend<BR>
themselves to such radical shortening)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 01:04:38 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 10:00 PM -0500 8/4/00, Bill Hopper wrote:<BR>
>I do not want to 'discourage' large ships, but I do think that the <BR>
>HG combat modifiers for agility, ship size, and relative computer<BR>
>size should be changed.  Large ships should not be as agile as small <BR>
>ships and should be easier to hit because of their sheer size.<BR>
<BR>
How do ships dodge?  Do they move out of the way or spin on an<BR>
axis.  I would guess the former since it will dodge a shot<BR>
at the center which the latter won't (more dead on the shot<BR>
is the more useless spinning is).  If that is true, then ship<BR>
accel will be the only determiner of accel.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 13:30:49 -0700<BR>
From: "J. Paul Sanders" <timmon@primenet.com><BR>
Subject: J. Andrew Keith Memorial site...<BR>
<BR>
As many of you might already know, Monday (the 7th) marks the one year<BR>
anniversary of J. Andrew Keith's passing. I've put up a small webpage as a<BR>
memorial to him and added it to the Traveller Webring where it should<BR>
appear in the next day or two. For those wanting an early peek, the url is:<BR>
www.primenet.com/~timmon/andrewkeith.html<BR>
<BR>
Bill approved of the idea (and is hunting up a photo. of Andrew for me to<BR>
include once he sends it) and also told me that Andrew's favored charity<BR>
was "Operation Rescue" as he was quite fond of cats (Aslan anyone?).<BR>
<BR>
Anyway, *raising mug of Scout's Brew* Here's to Andrew!<BR>
<BR>
Slan Agat,<BR>
Paul Sanders<BR>
<BR>
P.S. Apologies for the website itself - my html-skills are nearly<BR>
non-existent :)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 16:45:46 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 12:45:47 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
>From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
><BR>
>I'm still a bit unclear on why starship builders would go to the trouble<BR>
>of designing a g field that would exclude the ship's structure while<BR>
>affecting everything else in the ship.  <BR>
<BR>
I dunno -- ask the guys who made it up:<BR>
<BR>
"Tech level requirements for maneuver drives are imposed to cover the grav<BR>
plates integral to most ship decks, and which allow high-G maneuvers while<BR>
interior G-fields remain normal." Book 5, High Guard, p. 17<BR>
<BR>
(High Guard, of course, did not consider mass separately from volume.)<BR>
<BR>
"Artificial gravity G compensators create an artificial gravity field in<BR>
direct opposition to the axis of acceleration (up to the limits of the<BR>
artificial gravity field)." FF&S, p. 77.<BR>
<BR>
"Interior structure is also a function of the craft's acceleration and its<BR>
hull material value. Multiply the hull material value from the Hull Size<BR>
table ... by the craft's maximum acceleration in Gs, and divide the result<BR>
by the hull material toughness value." Ibid., p. 10.<BR>
<BR>
"Artificial gravity inertial compensators create an artificial gravity<BR>
field directly between the deck plates of a ship to provide a constant<BR>
gravity field. The generators are also tied into the ship's computer, which<BR>
varies the field strength to counteract the effects of the ship's<BR>
acceleration, up to a maximum level." FF&S2, p. 80.<BR>
<BR>
"The volume of the internal structure depends on the volume of the hull,<BR>
the maximum acceleration of the ship, and the toughness of the material<BR>
used. Multiply the structural factor by the maximum acceleration, then<BR>
divide by the toughness. This gives you the volume of the internal<BR>
structure." Ibid., p. 65.<BR>
<BR>
At a guess, since grav units are "integral to the decks" and create a field<BR>
"directly between the deck plates," they can't be expected to act on the<BR>
structure to which they are mounted. I imagine a kind of "grav capacitor"<BR>
field effect, distinct from contragravity (nulling of natural gravitation)<BR>
and reactionless thrusters.<BR>
<BR>
In this case, my point was simply that previous versions of Traveller<BR>
(where they have considered the question at all) have not permitted grav<BR>
compensators to relieve acceleration stresses in the hull. To do so would<BR>
be a major change in naval architecture, and should be recognized and<BR>
debated as such. <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 13:49:06 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 3:54 AM -0800 8/5/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > Well, even at this restriction, you can not have large radiator<BR>
>  > fins, etc.<BR>
><BR>
>Huh? The above sentence doesn't make sense...<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
>  > And of course the next step is, what difference does just doing<BR>
>  > the same thing at double the rate?  Well, none.  You can do the<BR>
>  > same thing with two black body radiators so you must be able to <BR>
>up the rate.<BR>
><BR>
>No, because that's doubling the rate *and* the area. To be useful you<BR>
>need to double the rate *per* area, and not raise the temp in the<BR>
>process. Which is where I start getting doubtful.<BR>
<BR>
But didn't we just establish that there is no thermodynamic<BR>
restriction?  If you can do it at double the area, it is<BR>
thermodynamically possible.  Then it just becomes a matter<BR>
of doing the same thing a different way and just becuase we<BR>
can't do it now doesn't mean it isn't possible at higher TLs.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 15:51:55 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/05/00 at 01:04 AM,  "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
>How do ships dodge?  Do they move out of the way or spin on an axis.  I<BR>
>would guess the former since it will dodge a shot at the center which the<BR>
>latter won't (more dead on the shot is the more useless spinning<BR>
>is).  If that is true, then ship accel will be the only determiner<BR>
>of accel.<BR>
<BR>
Ship accel will be the only determiner of agility...right? <g><BR>
<BR>
Say, a ship has a 3 g Mdrive.  If, during a turn, her pilot<BR>
allocates 2 g to movement and 1 g to "dodging around."  Is that<BR>
going to make targetting (and hitting) her more difficult?  <BR>
<BR>
What would that "dodging around" consist of and how would it be<BR>
accomplished?  Well, if it involved lateral movements off her<BR>
course, then the rapidity she could turn on her axis *would* come<BR>
into play.  Ships with shorter axis could turn more quickly having<BR>
more time during a turn for the effects of their dodging movement to<BR>
take effect...right?<BR>
<BR>
Here's a 2 dimensional representation of a ship with 3 g accel<BR>
moving straight ahead...<BR>
<BR>
  ____________________<BR>
  O-----|-----|-----()<BR>
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<BR>
<BR>
...it is going to be in the () at the end of it's move.<BR>
<BR>
If it allocates 2 to forward and 1 to dodging...<BR>
           ___<BR>
  ___---~~~ ()<BR>
  O----|----()<BR>
  ~~~---___ ()<BR>
           ~~~<BR>
...it is going to be in *one* of the () at the end of it's move.<BR>
<BR>
Doesn't that sum up what we're looking for with "agility", making<BR>
the area that the target is in larger so there the probability of a<BR>
hit is smaller?  However, notice that the forward movement in the<BR>
second case is less than 2/3 that of the first case, because some<BR>
time was occupied in turning the ship off of and back onto it's<BR>
forward path.  The slower the ship can turn back and forth (longer<BR>
it is) the more narrow the cone at the end will be...I think.  Of<BR>
course, I could be wrong about all this. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris           <BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 13:56:44 -0700<BR>
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Soylent sigs<BR>
<BR>
Someone wrote "Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridis HOMINES EST!"<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
to which I replied:<BR>
<BR>
"Ningen da!  Minna oshiete!  Ningen da!  Ningen da!  Soylent no Midori wa<BR>
honto ni ningen da!"<BR>
<BR>
Then Charles said:<BR>
<BR>
>Okay, this is very cool.  But it would be even better if we could come up<BR>
with the latin for "soy" and "lentil".  Probably a tall order though.  Am I<BR>
right in my assumptions about the derivation of Soylent?<BR>
><BR>
I don't know, but if you are correct, it should not be hard for me to find a<BR>
word for "soy" in Japanese, LOL.<BR>
<BR>
(Actually the problem would be to find out which word is appropriate.  There<BR>
are words for soybeans and words for a host of other soybean products, such<BR>
as tofu and miso...  "Lentil" might actually be easier to get the right spin<BR>
on... except there's not a word for it in any of my dictionaries.   I don't<BR>
think that's a native Japanese legume.  But the Japanese never have any<BR>
problem importing foreign words... we got a special script for that called<BR>
katakana.  Let's try "lentil tofu"...  The problem was that I thought<BR>
Soylent was an adjective and Green was the noun.)<BR>
<BR>
If green is the adjective we have:<BR>
<BR>
"Ningen da!  Ningen da!  Midori-iro rentoru no tofu wa honto ni ningen da!"<BR>
<BR>
If not:<BR>
<BR>
"Ningen da!  Ningen da!  Rentoru no tofu na Midori wa honto ni ningen da!"<BR>
Well, it makes slightly more sense than the English part of the lyrics to<BR>
any given Southern All Stars song.<BR>
<BR>
Sorry, Latin is not "my bag".  In fact, it's the reason I decided NOT to get<BR>
a Ph.D. in Medieval Studies after all.  Well, it was one of the reasons.<BR>
The other reason was that I didn't want to spend my 20's and 30's doing one<BR>
and two year assignments at boondock colleges until I found a place that<BR>
would give me tenure or found someone I could manage to stay married to for<BR>
more than two years.   If it's smaller than San Francisco, I don't wanna<BR>
live there.<BR>
<BR>
Kiri-chan ^_^<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 23:30:35 +0100 <BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
Dave Strebe wrote:<BR>
> Has anybody else done this idea? If so do you have charts/examples<BR>
> that you can send me? Also does anyone know what magazine and issue#<BR>
> is mentioned in the below snip?<BR>
<BR>
Hey, I was having a clearout and I found it  again!  The  article<BR>
was called "Parrot Dropping" by Clarke Johnson, and  it  appeared<BR>
in "Stardate" volume 3 number 5 (in 1987).  The article  is  only<BR>
2.5 pages long.<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 18:34:52 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Soylent sigs<BR>
<BR>
Kiri wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>Sorry, Latin is not "my bag".  In fact, it's the reason I decided NOT to<BR>
get<BR>
>a Ph.D. in Medieval Studies after all.  Well, it was one of the reasons.<BR>
>The other reason was that I didn't want to spend my 20's and 30's doing one<BR>
>and two year assignments at boondock colleges until I found a place that<BR>
>would give me tenure or found someone I could manage to stay married to for<BR>
>more than two years.   If it's smaller than San Francisco, I don't wanna<BR>
>live there.<BR>
<BR>
The latin term for lentil is "lens", if I recall correctly. Anyone who wants<BR>
the various cases is on their own. It's been several years since I used the<BR>
Latin portion of my brain and it seems to be filled with cobwebs. Never<BR>
learned the Latin term for soy, though, and I wouldn't be surprised if there<BR>
even isn't one.<BR>
<BR>
Hold on. Let me check the Merriam-Webster dictionary to check for the<BR>
etymology of "soy". It certainly doesn't sound like it's derived from Latin.<BR>
<BR>
As it turns out, soy comes from the Japanese word "shOyu" (given just like<BR>
that, with a capital o). That might help you in figuring out which Japanese<BR>
word is the one to use.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 17:39:57 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: GT: PAW and Meson<BR>
<BR>
I tried to duplicate the PAW and Meson weapons from GT using Ve2<BR>
last night and wasn't able to get close.  What are the design<BR>
sequences for these type weapons?<BR>
<BR>
Here's what I tried:<BR>
<BR>
PAW Bay is described as a 12,810 Mj neutral particle beam (1/2<BR>
cyclic rate, extreme range option).  Damage is listed as 6dx1000,<BR>
1/2 range as 14,630 miles.<BR>
<BR>
 from 124, 125, O = 12,810,000, B = 1.6, E =1, T = 1.8571<BR>
 <BR>
  Damage = O^0.5  *  B  *  E  *  T<BR>
  Damage = 12,810,000^0.5 * 1.6 * 1 * 1.8571<BR>
  Damage = 10,635 d6  =  6dx1773<BR>
  <BR>
 from 124, 125, O = 12,810,000, R = 8, B = 15, T = 1.3 (and x10<BR>
                    in vacuum)<BR>
 <BR>
  1/2d range = O^0.5  *  R  *  B  *  T<BR>
  1/2d range = 12,810,000 * 8 * 15 * 1.3 yards<BR>
  1/2d range = 558,341 yards = 317 miles x 10 = 3,170 miles<BR>
<BR>
I stopped there, because I was no where near the listed numbers.  As<BR>
you can see too much damage and far too low a range.  To match I<BR>
think B should be 0.90 for Damage and B for 1/2d range should be ~69<BR>
(or maybe the vacuum modifer should be greater than 10).<BR>
   <BR>
As for as the Meson cannon, is it the Disintegrator beam or<BR>
something else entirely?  I couldn't even get numbers in the ball<BR>
park on these.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 19:20:24 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Start Wrecked+<BR>
<BR>
Regarding some negative comments about Star Trek recently:<BR>
http://www.spacemoose.com/strips/sea_serpent.gif<BR>
<BR>
Man, that's just *low* :-)<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 00:56:25 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: J. Andrew Keith Memorial site...<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "J. Paul Sanders" <timmon@primenet.com><BR>
<BR>
<snip> <BR>
<BR>
> Anyway, *raising mug of Scout's Brew* Here's to Andrew!<BR>
<BR>
<clink of mugs> To Andrew!<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 01:01:47 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com><BR>
<BR>
> Tod has already answered the question, so I'll just point out the "gun<BR>
> bunny" is semi-derogatory slang for US Army artillerymen in gneral, and<BR>
the<BR>
> troops feeding ammo to the gun in particular.<BR>
><BR>
> Us grunts and treadheads dislike being lumped in with the cannon-cockers.<BR>
:)<BR>
<BR>
Gee, and I thought it was related to the rapid proliferation of firearms<BR>
that such types possessed, almost as if they were breeding like.. errr...<BR>
well... gunbunnies :-)<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 01:36:30 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Imperium/Small Ship Imperium<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Christopher Thrash" <thrash@io.com><BR>
<BR>
<snip><BR>
<BR>
> "Cartoon fantasy" consists of not playing by the rules that you, yourself,<BR>
> establish. Battletech's core assumptions are fusion power, myomer muscle<BR>
> fibers, and FTL jump drive. They give specific, detailed statistics<BR>
> (especially mass) and diagrams for their mecha.<BR>
><BR>
> Those statistics demonstrate that the 'mechs are physically impossible, at<BR>
> least in the range of sizes depicted (10 to 100 tons). You can calculate<BR>
> the area of their feet directly, and from there the ground pressure they<BR>
> exert when standing still (the "dead load"):<BR>
><BR>
> A humanoid vehicle 10 meters tall (that is, 5x man-height) would stand on<BR>
> an area of only approximately 1.3 m^2 (260 cm^2 per human foot, x2 feet,<BR>
> x25 for the size increase).  If it masses 100 tons, at 1g that is 7.5 x<BR>
> 10^5 N/m^2 (16,000 lb/ft^2) ground pressure.<BR>
><BR>
> The Uniform Building Code specifies 1.9 x 10^5 N/m^2 (4000 lb/ft^2) as the<BR>
> maximum allowable ground pressure for a building foundation resting on<BR>
> bedrock; this means that even if a 'mech stood completely still on solid<BR>
> rock, it would be too heavy to be safe by a factor of 4 -- dynamic "live"<BR>
> loads (say, walking) are even worse.<BR>
<BR>
So double the dimensions of the feet! Look at those Mech's, do they *look*<BR>
proportional to a human. If you think they do then you hang out with a weird<BR>
crowd of folks <g><BR>
<BR>
In fact, just make 'em as large as you need, no-ones going to say to the<BR>
designer "But with those huge feet it doesn't look proportional to a human<BR>
any more! Tear up those plans and try again."<BR>
<BR>
I wouldn't be surprised to find a 10m, 100ton Mech having a footprint<BR>
3m*1.5m for each foot, or 9m^2. That's ~7 times the area so we're looking at<BR>
~1.1 x 10^5N/m^2, or close to your statement re: modern tanks.<BR>
<BR>
Also, those ground pressures apply to a constant pressure over a period of<BR>
time. If you stick a columnar 2ton weight with a base a foot square down on<BR>
bedrock (4400lb/ft^2), it won't instantly sink to the centre of the earth.<BR>
Over a few *months* or *years* the rock beneath it will gradually crack and<BR>
break up, leading to subsidence of a few inches. This is unacceptable over<BR>
the lifetime of a building, but for a transitory motion should be tolerable.<BR>
<BR>
Back at their bases, Mech's will be stationary on large steel and concrete<BR>
pads to spread their load while standing at one spot for any lengthy time.<BR>
<BR>
Also, a 10m, 100ton mech that does sink a meter or so into softish ground<BR>
(by which time the ground will probably have compacted enough to support the<BR>
mech) has probably not even had it's feet completely submerged. It just<BR>
picks up its leg and carries on walking...<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 02:21:50 +0100<BR>
From: "Matthew Bond" <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
Loren,<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
My personal choices would be<BR>
<BR>
54mm - Absolutely not!<BR>
<BR>
25mm - Yes! Ideal for roleplaying / small skirmish actions<BR>
<BR>
15mm - Yes! Useable for roleplaying / Ideal for Striker-type large<BR>
skirmishes / small battles<BR>
<BR>
1/300 - Yes! Ideal for large battles.<BR>
<BR>
Starships - Yes! Use 2 scales: PC ships (<1000dtons); Warships (>1000dtons)<BR>
<BR>
Vehicles - 25mm (Resin). Mainly Civilian, with a couple of generic Military<BR>
style vehicles (Phyrrus Support Sled rather than Trepida Grav Tank etc.);<BR>
15mm (Resin/Metal) Mainly military, maybe a couple of PC typical / Civilian<BR>
vehicles (air/raft, ATV etc); 1/300 (Metal) almost exclusively military.<BR>
Ooh! And perhaps some 1/300 compatible Scoutships / Merchants / Broadswords<BR>
etc in Resin. The Broadsword would be about 10cm across...<BR>
<BR>
Furniture - not too bothered, there's planty of generic sci-fi furnishings<BR>
around, and I can't think of any furniture that is exclusively traveller.<BR>
Maybe the Iridium Throne...<BR>
<BR>
Insignia & Fun Stuff - Yes! And Patches!<BR>
<BR>
Basically, if there is anything that is exclusive to Traveller, (such as the<BR>
ship designs) or captures the look and feel (Imperial Marines in BD with<BR>
FGMP's etc) I want it in the scales above.<BR>
<BR>
If you are only going to do one range, do the starships as everything else<BR>
can be patched together with other sci-fi figures. But there's nothing else<BR>
like the offical ships to get the pulse going in starship combat!<BR>
<BR>
Then do 25mm.<BR>
<BR>
Then shortly afterwards 15mm.<BR>
<BR>
Then after another short time 1/300.<BR>
<BR>
It's not actually the order *I* would want to see them in, but I think it's<BR>
the order that will sell best...<BR>
<BR>
Finally, if you *really* want to, then release the 54mm Character portraits.<BR>
I doubt they will sell well. Sure a few people will buy them for dioramas,<BR>
or to put in display cases, but you can't really *use* them...<BR>
<BR>
Basically, test the water with the starships, see if there is a market, get<BR>
a clearer understanding of the costs involved in miniature manufacture and<BR>
distribution, then expand into the other scales.  I think the biggest costs<BR>
are the creation of the moulds, after that the cost per figure is fairly<BR>
low.<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 18:30:19 -0700<BR>
From: "Mark F. Cook" <markc@peak.org><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
In Traveller-digest V1999 #2889, Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net> wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>> Us grunts and treadheads dislike being lumped in with the <BR>
>> cannon-cockers. :)<BR>
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<BR>
><BR>
>Don't you mean the King of Battle? <BR>
<BR>
Ah, you would, of course, be referring to the QM Corps, correct? :^)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
        - Mark C.<BR>
          Instructor, Willamette Small Arms Academy<BR>
          EOD, U.S.M.C. 1st MarDiv (Camp Pendleton), Class of '75<BR>
          Full-Auto Director, Albany Rifle & Pistol Club, Albany, OR<BR>
          NRA (Life), SAF (Life), CCRKBA (Life)<BR>
          Front Sight First Family member #1<BR>
<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
 mark f. cook   *   shoestring graphics & printing   *  markc@ssgfx.com<BR>
 7160 n.w. somerset dr. * corvallis, or, 97330  *  http://www.ssgfx.com<BR>
 Phone: 541-745-5709                                  Fax: 541-745-5818<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:34:11 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
At 05:51 PM 8/5/00, you wrote:<BR>
>Doesn't that sum up what we're looking for with "agility", making<BR>
>the area that the target is in larger so there the probability of a<BR>
>hit is smaller?  However, notice that the forward movement in the<BR>
>second case is less than 2/3 that of the first case, because some<BR>
>time was occupied in turning the ship off of and back onto it's<BR>
>forward path.  The slower the ship can turn back and forth (longer<BR>
>it is) the more narrow the cone at the end will be...I think.  Of<BR>
>course, I could be wrong about all this. <g><BR>
><BR>
>Eris<BR>
>--<BR>
<BR>
         Leonard has posted a sphere-of-probability analysis some time ago, <BR>
based on speed vs ship dimensions as a way of determining how far a ship <BR>
could have moved in the "flight time" before a laser pulse arrives.  The <BR>
short version is "not far enough", even if you are a fighter.<BR>
         If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, you <BR>
simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion.  Lasers <BR>
are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too mind bogglingly <BR>
big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 23:00:22 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
<BR>
At 07:34 PM 8/2/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>For me, the bottom line is that I really don't believe that tinkering with<BR>
>>the ship design system will make the game any better, and has some potential<BR>
>>to make it worse.<BR>
><BR>
>Particularly if the plug and play system is poor.<BR>
><BR>
>Dom<BR>
<BR>
         Hi, Dom!  In short, *bingo*.<BR>
         While I find it intellectually interesting to see these <BR>
hugely-detailed FFSx designs floating around, the short version is that my <BR>
players DON"T CARE.  Which is the reason we collectively abandoned the much <BR>
more detailed design sequences from MT and went back to CT/HG.  It just <BR>
took too much time away from playing.  If the intention is to create a <BR>
FFS-Alpha/Omega, it is going to get ignored by folks like me unless I can <BR>
blow off a "off the shelf" design in short order without getting into <BR>
silliness like panicking about surface area, radiator coverage and color of <BR>
the Captain's Chair as it influences the mood and morale of the Bridge Crew.<BR>
         K.I.S.S.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2890<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb04.mx.aol.com (rly-yb04.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.4]) by air-yb03.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:09:32 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sat, 05 Aug 2000 22:08:45 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id WAA50082;<BR>
	Sat, 5 Aug 2000 22:08:33 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sat, 5 Aug 2000 22:07:37 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id WAA50030<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sat, 5 Aug 2000 22:07:37 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 22:07:37 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008060207.WAA50030@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2890<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2891</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/5/00 10:20:47 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, August 6 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2891<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
RE: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
Re: FFS3 for Non-Techies (Long)<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
RE: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
RE: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
FFS3 : Example of the Modular System<BR>
Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
RE: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:07:28 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/05/00 at 10:34 PM,  Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> said:<BR>
<BR>
>         Leonard has posted a sphere-of-probability analysis some time<BR>
>ago,  based on speed vs ship dimensions as a way of determining how far a<BR>
>ship  could have moved in the "flight time" before a laser pulse arrives. <BR>
>The  short version is "not far enough", even if you are a fighter.<BR>
>         If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, you <BR>
>simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion.  Lasers <BR>
>are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too mind<BR>
>bogglingly  big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
<BR>
Well, sure...if the target is within a couple of light seconds.  <g><BR>
At longer ranges, though, the circle of probability starts getting<BR>
large enough to hide a small ship in.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 23:07:39 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
At 04:51 PM 8/1/00, you wrote:<BR>
         [snip]<BR>
>     Captain PC: "Gunners standby.  Here they come."<BR>
><BR>
>     Ref: "Navigator: G40 and G45."<BR>
><BR>
>     Nav PC: "INCOMING!"<BR>
><BR>
>     ... and so on.<BR>
>Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
...after fifth combat:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Ref: "Navigator: G40 and G45."<BR>
<BR>
         Gunner:  I fire lasers in anti-missile and deploy sand.<BR>
<BR>
         Ref:  What?<BR>
<BR>
         Gunner:  You just gave him the codes that makes him yell <BR>
"INCOMING" and that is what I do after he does that.  Just trying to speed <BR>
things up.<BR>
<BR>
         <weg>  Same problem, different language<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 23:15:13 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
At 11:07 PM 8/5/00, you wrote:<BR>
>On 08/05/00 at 10:34 PM,  Michel Vaillancourt <BR>
><misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> said:<BR>
> >         If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, you<BR>
> >simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion.  Lasers<BR>
> >are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too mind<BR>
> >bogglingly  big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
><BR>
>Well, sure...if the target is within a couple of light seconds.  <g><BR>
>At longer ranges, though, the circle of probability starts getting<BR>
>large enough to hide a small ship in.<BR>
><BR>
>Eris<BR>
<BR>
         If the ship is 600,000km away, why is it relevant to you in terms <BR>
of combat?  At "normal" space speeds of 20km/sec each, flying straight at <BR>
each other, its about four hours away.  Let him get a bit closer and fire <BR>
when he's bigger than the COP.  Insta-hit.  Problem solved.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 23:18:58 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
At 09:56 PM 7/31/00, you wrote:<BR>
>This means that an AHL-sized ship, displacing 60,000 tons and weighing<BR>
>600,000 tons, with 1,200,000 tons of T-plates<BR>
<BR>
         Pardon?<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 23:21:55 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 draft heat rules<BR>
<BR>
At 07:20 AM 8/3/00, you wrote:<BR>
>Also, most TL7 space vehicles don't have to dispose of the heat build up<BR>
>from firing honking great lasers...<BR>
><BR>
>Matt<BR>
<BR>
         Not so far, anyway.  We can always hope.  <g><BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 23:24:47 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 for Non-Techies (Long)<BR>
<BR>
At 12:31 PM 8/1/00, you wrote:<BR>
>FWIW, I used to be pretty good at designing MT ships. ISTR that I could<BR>
>finish a ship in between ten minutes and a half an hour with only pencil,<BR>
>paper and a calulator. I would recommend that this be the rule of thumb for<BR>
>FFS designs that are not heavily customized.<BR>
<BR>
         That was what I disliked most about the MT design <BR>
sequences...  the calculator was no longer an optional part of the design <BR>
tools.  I like being able to do "back of napkin" designs.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 23:34:33 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 09:37 PM 7/30/00, you wrote:<BR>
>They are excellent as pickets, targets covering capital ships and killing <BR>
>escorts. They are also useful as missile defense, particulerly if you use <BR>
>JTAS' expansions.<BR>
><BR>
>Dom<BR>
<BR>
         Why do we care about any of these?<BR>
         Pickets?  You can't mount a big enough sensor on 'em.<BR>
         Capital Ships don't need fighter cover, since fighters can't hurt <BR>
Capital Ships.<BR>
         Killing Escorts?  Why bother?  The only thing a Capital Ship can't <BR>
incinerate in one shot is another Capital Ship.<BR>
         Missile Defense?  TL15 Dampers and Repulsors make this irrelevant.<BR>
         At MCr 10 plus the man, fighters are *dumb* in the TL15 3i.  Just <BR>
the way it is, Supp-9 carrier designs not withstanding.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 20:02:16 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>          Leonard has posted a sphere-of-probability analysis some<BR>
> time ago,<BR>
> based on speed vs ship dimensions as a way of determining how far a ship<BR>
> could have moved in the "flight time" before a laser pulse arrives.  The<BR>
> short version is "not far enough", even if you are a fighter.<BR>
>          If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, you<BR>
> simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion.  Lasers<BR>
> are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too mind<BR>
> bogglingly<BR>
> big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
<BR>
The typical sphere of probability analysis assumes that you send a pulse<BR>
out, the pulse bounces off the target, and returns to the original ship, at<BR>
which time you let fly a laser blast. With passive sensors, you can ignore<BR>
the first steps, or course.  Note that any aspect of electronic warfare is<BR>
omitted. EW is critical, even today, and will probably become even more<BR>
critical at higher TLs.<BR>
<BR>
It's probably reasonable to assume that advanced ECM technology at higher<BR>
TLs can play all sorts of games with sensors, even passive ones which are<BR>
picking up an IR signature <technical digression omitted about the theory of<BR>
operation of these ECMs>. In this case, the usual analysis applies only if<BR>
the attacker can somehow overcome the ECM defenses of the defender.<BR>
Otherwise, all bets are off. At higher TLs, the sensors and ECM<BR>
(anti-sensors?) are probably the most important element of ship combat.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 00:05:32 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 01:41 AM 8/1/00, you wrote:<BR>
>You are not alone Eris, i have been reading the thread and have<BR>
>saved alot of cool ideas.  I too see 100,000 ton ships as to big.<BR>
>I have a soluation to the problem.  Have all these people in favor of<BR>
>10,000 tons or better draw up deck plans.  That will break them.<BR>
><BR>
>I tried doing deckplans for an 18,000 ton liner for an adventure idea.<BR>
>  It would be 21 two foot by 1 1/2 foot pieces of graph paper.  I<BR>
>stoped that adventure right away.<BR>
><BR>
>Tim Reynolds<BR>
<BR>
         This is the single biggest reason for ship sizes in <BR>
TNEC...  ability to draw a deckplan of the thing.  Even as it is, on a <BR>
600dton hull, I tend to get lazy and just MCB-style (Major Component Block) <BR>
deck-plans instead of drawing all the details.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
	---------------------------------------	<BR>
	The TNEC Guy<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 22:44:38 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
On Sat, 5 Aug 2000, Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >Well, sure...if the target is within a couple of light seconds.  <g><BR>
> >At longer ranges, though, the circle of probability starts getting<BR>
> >large enough to hide a small ship in.<BR>
> ><BR>
> <BR>
>          If the ship is 600,000km away, why is it relevant to you in terms <BR>
> of combat?  At "normal" space speeds of 20km/sec each, flying straight at <BR>
> each other, its about four hours away.  Let him get a bit closer and fire <BR>
> when he's bigger than the COP.  Insta-hit.  Problem solved.<BR>
<BR>
If he's got a weapon that can hit you from 600,000km away, he's tactically<BR>
relevant without drawing any closer.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 00:53:05 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
At 12:02 AM 8/6/00, you wrote:<BR>
>The typical sphere of probability analysis assumes that you send a pulse<BR>
>out, the pulse bounces off the target, and returns to the original ship, at<BR>
>which time you let fly a laser blast. With passive sensors, you can ignore<BR>
>the first steps, or course.<BR>
<BR>
         Leonard was explicit about his SOPA being based on the "flight <BR>
time" of the laser from the moment the sensor information was received.<BR>
<BR>
>  Note that any aspect of electronic warfare is<BR>
>omitted. EW is critical, even today, and will probably become even more<BR>
>critical at higher TLs.<BR>
<BR>
         I have always considered this to be abstracted into the HG <BR>
Relative Computer DM.  However, I agree only partially.  Active jamming is <BR>
currently getting out of vogue due to a number of weapon systems who have <BR>
an "Anti-jam" feature...  the weapons stops hunting the original target and <BR>
starts hunting the jammer by homing in on its transmissions.  Even "black <BR>
jamming" can be defeated this way, once an operator identifies the attack.<BR>
<BR>
>It's probably reasonable to assume that advanced ECM technology at higher<BR>
>TLs can play all sorts of games with sensors, even passive ones which are<BR>
>picking up an IR signature <technical digression omitted about the theory of<BR>
>operation of these ECMs>. In this case, the usual analysis applies only if<BR>
>the attacker can somehow overcome the ECM defenses of the defender.<BR>
>Otherwise, all bets are off. At higher TLs, the sensors and ECM<BR>
>(anti-sensors?) are probably the most important element of ship combat.<BR>
<BR>
         Again, I would submit that operating any active sensor or jamming <BR>
system is suicidal, since it effectively simplifies the opponents <BR>
fire-control process.  "SHOOT THE LIGHTHOUSE!"<BR>
<BR>
         Passive means of defeating detection and weapons-locks <BR>
(stealthing) will be the route required.  This is presuming the gearheads <BR>
in the next thread over don't prove that you cannot under any circumstances <BR>
reduce the IR signature of a ship enough to stealth if  <g>.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 21:01:39 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 10:00 PM -0500 8/4/00, Bill Hopper wrote:<BR>
>>I do not want to 'discourage' large ships, but I do think that the <BR>
>>HG combat modifiers for agility, ship size, and relative computer<BR>
>>size should be changed.  Large ships should not be as agile as small <BR>
>>ships and should be easier to hit because of their sheer size.<BR>
><BR>
> How do ships dodge?  Do they move out of the way or spin on an<BR>
> axis.  I would guess the former since it will dodge a shot<BR>
> at the center which the latter won't (more dead on the shot<BR>
> is the more useless spinning is).  If that is true, then ship<BR>
> accel will be the only determiner of accel.<BR>
<BR>
If they are under power, then changing the direction the ship points<BR>
will also change the direction it is moving. But not all that fast. <BR>
<BR>
Also, the ship will be rotating about it's center of mass. In fact it<BR>
*can't* rotate about any other point without imposing unreasonable<BR>
stresses on the structure (if at all).<BR>
<BR>
Given that it takes *seconds* for even 6g to move the ship far enough<BR>
to matter, dodging is apt to be a matter of varying accel by a small<BR>
amount (because dropping it very much make you too easy to hit), and <BR>
making course changes at random intervals (a few seconds).<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 14:08:28 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: FFS3 : Example of the Modular System<BR>
<BR>
> From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
>          Hi, Dom!  In short, *bingo*.<BR>
>          While I find it intellectually interesting to see these<BR>
> hugely-detailed FFSx designs floating around, the short version is that my<BR>
> players DON"T CARE.  Which is the reason we collectively abandoned the<BR>
much<BR>
> more detailed design sequences from MT and went back to CT/HG.  It just<BR>
> took too much time away from playing.  If the intention is to create a<BR>
> FFS-Alpha/Omega, it is going to get ignored by folks like me unless I can<BR>
> blow off a "off the shelf" design in short order without getting into<BR>
> silliness like panicking about surface area, radiator coverage and color<BR>
of<BR>
> the Captain's Chair as it influences the mood and morale of the Bridge<BR>
Crew.<BR>
>          K.I.S.S.<BR>
<BR>
They are going to be able to do so, with nothing more complicated than<BR>
adding, subtracting and multiplying.<BR>
<BR>
The module/High Guard-ish system will probably work something like this ...<BR>
<BR>
1 Energy Point = 28 megawatts (this being roughly the energy needed by a 100<BR>
dton/jump-1 ship. Coincidentally, it's also what a dton of TL9-12 fusion<BR>
plant creates)<BR>
a armour point = AF20 (the armour on a 'standard' civilian ship)<BR>
a damage point = DV20 (the penetration of a 'standard' civilian laser)<BR>
1 maneuver point = 10 meganewtons (the thrust needed to push a 1000t/100dton<BR>
'standard' ship at one gee)<BR>
1 surface unit = 60 m^2 (a 'standard' spherical civilian 100 dton/1000t ship<BR>
has 10 surface units)<BR>
1 mass unit = 1000 t (about the mass of a 'standard' 100 dton ship)<BR>
<BR>
Option One : You pick a hull design off the Big List of Hulls.<BR>
<BR>
For example ...<BR>
800 dton, Armour10, TL12 Streamlined Dome. Jump-3, Maneuver-4. 40 EP (8 per<BR>
jump number. 9 per gee). 40 radiators. 405 spare dtons. 17 spare surface<BR>
units. 3 spare energy points. 33.5m long, 33.5m wide,  17m high.<BR>
<BR>
Then you buy 405 dtons of modules, that add up to 17 surface units and 3<BR>
energy points (or you prepare to do Active Energy Management eg not run<BR>
everything that needs power at once).<BR>
<BR>
Note that this isnt that much longer than a High Guard description, and<BR>
includes the good-for-roleplaying description of exactly how big the ship<BR>
is.<BR>
<BR>
Lets do the calculations behind the Big List of Hulls ...<BR>
<BR>
At TL12, a Surface Unit takes 0.01 Mass Units to cover one Surface Unit with<BR>
one Armour Point, so 10 armour points will need 0.1 Mass Units. The ship has<BR>
28 surface units, so we are at 2.8 mass units so far. We will need 2.8<BR>
manuever points per gee just to push the armour.<BR>
<BR>
Next, lets put in the jump-3 drive. A jump-3 drive is 4% of the ship, so<BR>
thats 32 dtons. Drives mass 0.04 mass units per dton, so thats 1.28 mass<BR>
units. The jump fuel is 30% of the ship, for 240 dtons, and 0.24 mass units.<BR>
<BR>
Next, the 40 Energy Points. At TL12, 40 EP will need 40 dtons of fusion<BR>
plant, and 12 surface units for the radiators. Each dton of fusion plant<BR>
masses 56t, so thats 2.2 mass units.<BR>
<BR>
Next, lets put in a maneuver drive. We have 2.8 mass units from the armour,<BR>
1.28 from the J-drive, 0.24 from the J-fuel and 2.2 mass units from the<BR>
power plant - a total of 6.52 mass units. We also have 487 dtons left, so<BR>
thats 4.87 mass units for everything else (NB many of the specific numbers<BR>
may change). The expected mass of the ship is 11.39 mass units. Pushing<BR>
11.39 mass units at 4 gees will need 46 maneuver points.<BR>
<BR>
At TL12, a maneuver point from T-plates needs 1.8 dtons, so 46 maneuver<BR>
points will need 83 dtons. You need 0.8 energy points per maneuver point<BR>
using TL12 t-plates, so running the drives full on will need 37 energy<BR>
points. T-plates need 0.01 surface units per Maneuver Point, so thats<BR>
another 0.5 surface units gone.<BR>
<BR>
Option 2 : You do the in each of the paras above, off a 'Ship Design<BR>
Sequence (TL x)' to get your unique ship<BR>
<BR>
Important note : Why seperate area out ?<BR>
<BR>
Basically, each ship will be rated for Energy Points available when Running<BR>
Dark and Running Black. Running Dark is where you qualify for the Stealth<BR>
bonus. This involves Basic Thermal Masking, and you need to have twice as<BR>
many radiators as you need to prevent overheating. Running Black is Extreme<BR>
Thermal Masking, and needs ten times as many radiators.<BR>
<BR>
Thus, our hypothetical ship can Run Dark at 2 gees. It cant really Run Black<BR>
(it would need 90 surface units worth of radiators to do that at one gee,<BR>
and it only has 28 surface units. Basically, it's hard to have armour and<BR>
stealth. OTOH our ship can shrug off laser fire). If it spent another 10<BR>
surface units on radiators, then it could Run Dark at 3 gees.<BR>
<BR>
Radiators are also going to cost, but I'm not sure how much. Lots of them<BR>
are  going to be fairly expensive.<BR>
<BR>
Also, at TL12, a Small Military PEMS (Sens 14) takes up 1 surface unit,<BR>
while a Large Military PEMS (Sens 14.5) takes up 10 surface units.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 05:14:36 +0100<BR>
From: "Ben Aaronovitch" <bem@imaginaryfilms.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
<BR>
Opens recently purchased reprint:<BR>
<BR>
Book 2 page 13<BR>
<BR>
'As a rough guide, one ton equals 14 cubic meters (the volume of one<BR>
ton of<BR>
liquid hydrogen).<BR>
<BR>
I also remember this from the very early LBB days because the whole<BR>
idea<BR>
made me go 'Eh?'<BR>
<BR>
Ben Aaronovitch<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
'Let's be honest here - you paid for the women.'<BR>
                                       Bill Murrey - Scrooged<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2000 11:07 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Whence come dtons?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> > Are you guys playing the same Traveller I am? I'm at work and so<BR>
can't<BR>
> > reach Book 2 and HG2, but maybe someone can back me up on this:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
> > > BTW, why dtons anyway?  It doesn't seem to serve any purpose.<BR>
Why does<BR>
> one<BR>
> > > > need to know the dtons of a vessel?  Actual mass will be<BR>
required for<BR>
> > > > calculating maneuver, etc.  Is this complexity for it's own<BR>
sake?  The<BR>
> > > whole<BR>
> > > > idea of the number of stere occupied by a metric ton of liquid<BR>
> hydrogen,<BR>
> > > > when did this pop up anyway, TNE?<BR>
><BR>
> Well, a casual glance at my copy of HG only makes reference to tons<BR>
(which<BR>
> represent approximately 14 stere).  I didn't see the term dtons<BR>
used, but it<BR>
> was just a casual glance.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 21:22:19 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >It's probably reasonable to assume that advanced ECM technology at higher<BR>
> >TLs can play all sorts of games with sensors, even passive ones which are<BR>
> >picking up an IR signature <technical digression omitted about<BR>
> the theory of<BR>
> >operation of these ECMs>. In this case, the usual analysis<BR>
> applies only if<BR>
> >the attacker can somehow overcome the ECM defenses of the defender.<BR>
> >Otherwise, all bets are off. At higher TLs, the sensors and ECM<BR>
> >(anti-sensors?) are probably the most important element of ship combat.<BR>
><BR>
>          Again, I would submit that operating any active sensor<BR>
> or jamming<BR>
> system is suicidal, since it effectively simplifies the opponents<BR>
> fire-control process.  "SHOOT THE LIGHTHOUSE!"<BR>
<BR>
Particularly at higher TLs, you should be able to construct LPI/D active<BR>
sensors. My first stab would to use a technique like DS spread-spectrun,<BR>
where your signal is below the noise floor unless you know the right coding<BR>
sequence to recover it, so an adversary can't even detect your signal,<BR>
although it's extremely high-powered. We have systems which work this way<BR>
today, although they are used for communication rather than for sensors.<BR>
<BR>
For ECM, what I envision are techniques like putting extra energy into<BR>
sidelobes of the return signal. Most (all?) sensor systems assume that they<BR>
are getting a reading based on the main beam of a signal. If you put power<BR>
into sidelobes, you can trick the sensor into thinking that the target is<BR>
somewhere it isn't. This is, of course, greatly oversimplified. Even for an<BR>
IR signature, you may be able to play the same games with the help of high<BR>
TL equipment. After all, waves are waves.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 21:16:56 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, Christopher Thrash wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>> Congratulations! You have entered the Star Trek Zone. (I knew someone<BR>
>> would bring this up sooner or later.)<BR>
>> <BR>
>> Let us be clear: "structural integrity fields" are Treknology. They have<BR>
>> never been mentioned in Traveller heretofore, except in the very limited<BR>
>> sense of superdense and bonded superdense materials.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> "Gravitic compensation" exists, all right, but so far it affects the<BR>
>> contents of a vessel, *not* its structure.<BR>
><BR>
> I'm still a bit unclear on why starship builders would go to the trouble<BR>
> of designing a g field that would exclude the ship's structure while<BR>
> affecting everything else in the ship.  From where I'm sitting, exposing<BR>
> the structure to g compensation is almost unavoidable, and I don't see why<BR>
> you would want to avoid it.<BR>
> Also note that this bears no resemblance to Star Trek structural integrity<BR>
> fields, which are based on the considerably more ridiculous notion of<BR>
> surrounding the ship's frame with powerful force fields, rather than<BR>
> using artificial gravity.<BR>
<BR>
I think the two of you are talking at cross purposes. I think you booth<BR>
agree that the field affects the entire ship, which is why you only<BR>
need to design it to handle the max *compensated* acceleration.<BR>
<BR>
Though I could argue that the g-comp fields and artificial gravity are<BR>
confined between "plates", in which case the plates and at least part<BR>
of their support would be *outside* the field.<BR>
<BR>
I rather prefer the "between plates" bit because it provides an<BR>
explanation for why the field doesn't extend beyond the hull (it also<BR>
makes the energy use handwaves a lot simpler).<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 21:33:58 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> On 08/05/00 at 01:04 AM,  "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu> said:<BR>
><BR>
>>How do ships dodge?  Do they move out of the way or spin on an axis.  I<BR>
>>would guess the former since it will dodge a shot at the center which the<BR>
>>latter won't (more dead on the shot is the more useless spinning<BR>
>>is).  If that is true, then ship accel will be the only determiner<BR>
>>of accel.<BR>
><BR>
> Ship accel will be the only determiner of agility...right? <g><BR>
><BR>
> Say, a ship has a 3 g Mdrive.  If, during a turn, her pilot<BR>
> allocates 2 g to movement and 1 g to "dodging around."  Is that<BR>
> going to make targetting (and hitting) her more difficult?<BR>
<BR>
The only way that you could allocate 1g to dodging around would be by<BR>
varying your accel between 2 & 3 g.<BR>
<BR>
> What would that "dodging around" consist of and how would it be<BR>
> accomplished?  Well, if it involved lateral movements off her<BR>
> course, then the rapidity she could turn on her axis *would* come<BR>
> into play.  Ships with shorter axis could turn more quickly having<BR>
> more time during a turn for the effects of their dodging movement to<BR>
> take effect...right?<BR>
<BR>
If you don't bother turning off the main drive while turning the ship<BR>
about it's axis, your vector *is* changing direction as you turn. Just<BR>
not a lot.<BR>
<BR>
> Here's a 2 dimensional representation of a ship with 3 g accel<BR>
> moving straight ahead...<BR>
><BR>
>   ____________________<BR>
>   O-----|-----|-----()<BR>
>   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<BR>
><BR>
> ...it is going to be in the () at the end of it's move.<BR>
><BR>
> If it allocates 2 to forward and 1 to dodging...<BR>
>            ___<BR>
>   ___---~~~ ()<BR>
>   O----|----()<BR>
>   ~~~---___ ()<BR>
>            ~~~<BR>
> ...it is going to be in *one* of the () at the end of it's move.<BR>
<BR>
Nope, the vectors don't add that way. <BR>
<BR>
The acceleration adds to the *velocity* of the ship. The *position*<BR>
depends on how fast it was moving at the start of the turn.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, if the ship *doesn't* accelerate, it keeps moving at<BR>
the same speed in the same direction. That position is easily<BR>
calculated. <BR>
<BR>
So you treat that position as a frame of reference, so any acceleration<BR>
can be treated as being from zero velocity. <BR>
<BR>
So at at end of a given amount of time, the ship can be anywhere with<BR>
in a circle (sphere) center on that *moving* point. The radius is<BR>
.5*A*T^2. Where A is max accel (in m/s^2, not gees), and T is the<BR>
amount of time.<BR>
<BR>
So with the 3 g accel (30 m/s^2), after 1 second:<BR>
<BR>
D=.5*A*T^2<BR>
D=.5*30*1^2<BR>
D=.5*30*1<BR>
D=15<BR>
<BR>
So the center of the ship could be as much as 15 meters from the<BR>
predicted position.<BR>
<BR>
After two seconds, it'd be as much as 60 meters. after 3, 135 meters.<BR>
After 4, 240. <BR>
<BR>
So you need to maintain a thrust direction (which isn't the same as<BR>
your heading, nor your course) for at least a few seconds to move far<BR>
enough to matter. <BR>
<BR>
Also note that thrusting *backwards* works just as well as forwards or<BR>
sideways. And it only takes 30 meters off your speed for every second<BR>
you do it. <BR>
<BR>
> Doesn't that sum up what we're looking for with "agility", making<BR>
> the area that the target is in larger so there the probability of a<BR>
> hit is smaller?  However, notice that the forward movement in the<BR>
> second case is less than 2/3 that of the first case, because some<BR>
> time was occupied in turning the ship off of and back onto it's<BR>
> forward path.  The slower the ship can turn back and forth (longer<BR>
> it is) the more narrow the cone at the end will be...I think.  Of<BR>
> course, I could be wrong about all this. <g><BR>
<BR>
See above.<BR>
<BR>
Larger ships should be less agile in direct proportion to how long they<BR>
are. That's because for the same turning rate (in terms of how long it<BR>
takes to rotate 360) the forces exerted on the hull go up linearly with<BR>
radius. That is, if it's twice as long, the forces are twice as big.<BR>
<BR>
So if we are going to have an agility that's seperate from max accel,<BR>
it *should* be based on the longest dimension of the ship and "turn<BR>
bracing" structure factor. <BR>
<BR>
Which makes the Broadsword a very agile ship, because it's essentially<BR>
spherical. <BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, you *can* argue that a long thin ship should have an<BR>
advantage based on what percentage of the area of a circle that it just<BR>
fits into it covers. But that shouldn't be called agility. <BR>
<BR>
I'd vote for hit probs based on accel, "agility" (turn rate), and "area<BR>
factor".<BR>
<BR>
Area factor should be easy. Agility is more complicated, but I'd think<BR>
it wouldn't be too bad. And accel is easy, as it *has* to be included.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 21:21:44 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 3:54 AM -0800 8/5/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> Well, even at this restriction, you can not have large radiator<BR>
>>> fins, etc.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Huh? The above sentence doesn't make sense...<BR>
>><BR>
>><BR>
>>> And of course the next step is, what difference does just doing<BR>
>>> the same thing at double the rate?  Well, none.  You can do the<BR>
>>> same thing with two black body radiators so you must be able to <BR>
>>up the rate.<BR>
>><BR>
>>No, because that's doubling the rate *and* the area. To be useful you<BR>
>>need to double the rate *per* area, and not raise the temp in the<BR>
>>process. Which is where I start getting doubtful.<BR>
><BR>
> But didn't we just establish that there is no thermodynamic<BR>
> restriction?  If you can do it at double the area, it is<BR>
> thermodynamically possible.  Then it just becomes a matter<BR>
> of doing the same thing a different way and just becuase we<BR>
> can't do it now doesn't mean it isn't possible at higher TLs.<BR>
<BR>
I disagree. The energy per unit area at a given temp is fixed by<BR>
thermodynamics, just like the spectrum. Raising it without changing the<BR>
spectrum or raising the temp is gonna take us back to "non-thermal"<BR>
regime... <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2891<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg02.mx.aol.com (rly-yg02.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.2]) by air-yg05.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Aug 2000 01:20:47 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Aug 2000 01:20:23 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id BAA57104;<BR>
	Sun, 6 Aug 2000 01:20:16 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 6 Aug 2000 01:20:12 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id BAA57065<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 6 Aug 2000 01:20:11 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 01:20:11 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008060520.BAA57065@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2891<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2892</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/6/00 9:03:58 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, August 6 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2892<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: FFS3 : Example of the Modular System<BR>
Imperial citizens<BR>
Max Acceleration<BR>
Re: Max Acceleration<BR>
Re: J. Andrew Keith Memorial site...<BR>
Merciless Heavy Tank<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
EW Relevance to FFS3 (was RE: About Agility)<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: FFS3 : Example of the Modular System<BR>
Re: Fuel question<BR>
Re: Max Acceleration<BR>
Re: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
Re: EW Relevance to FFS3 (was RE: About Agility)<BR>
Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 00:18:16 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 : Example of the Modular System<BR>
<BR>
>They are going to be able to do so, with nothing more complicated than<BR>
>adding, subtracting and multiplying.<BR>
<BR>
>The module/High Guard-ish system will probably work something like this<BR>
>...<BR>
<BR>
Looks good...  I have some comments, but don't take them as<BR>
negative..more devil's advocate than anything, okay?<BR>
<BR>
>1 Energy Point = 28 megawatts (this being roughly the energy needed<BR>
>      by a 100 dton/jump-1 ship.  Coincidentally, it's also what a<BR>
>      dton of TL9-12 fusion plant creates)<BR>
<BR>
Couldn't convince you to just use MW's could I?  No, didn't think<BR>
so.  <g> Okay, suppose we produce 37 MW, how do we rate it..1 EP, 2<BR>
EP, 1.3 EP?  This is going to come up with the other approximations<BR>
too.<BR>
<BR>
>1 armour point = AF20 (the armour on a 'standard' civilian ship) <BR>
<BR>
You're using toughness/density/price/power from the Material list in<BR>
FFS2?  As above, how do you rate an armor value of 47...2, 2.35, 3?<BR>
I won't harp on the point, but this is were modular designs get<BR>
screwed compared to detailed designs.<BR>
<BR>
>1 damage point = DV20 (the penetration of a 'standard' civilian<BR>
>      laser) <BR>
<BR>
What is a 'standard' civilian laser..28 MW, 80 MW?  Whatever it<BR>
takes to takes to do 20 DV? <BR>
<BR>
>1 maneuver point = 10 meganewtons (the thrust needed to push a<BR>
>       1000t/100dton 'standard' ship at one gee)<BR>
<BR>
When it comes time to *use* the design, don't you want this<BR>
expressed in g's, not maneuver points?<BR>
<BR>
>1 surface unit = 60 m^2 (a 'standard' spherical civilian 100<BR>
>       dton/1000t ship has 10 surface units)<BR>
<BR>
>1 mass unit = 1000 t (about the mass of a 'standard' 100 dton ship)<BR>
<BR>
Both of those are as good as any other ratios you could use.<BR>
<BR>
Could I make a plea for some sort of "Structure" entry to cover<BR>
internal bracing and compartmentalization?  The Internal Hit table<BR>
would have an entry for reducing Structure, the way I'm assuming<BR>
surface hits would be able to hit radiators, sensors, weapon mounts<BR>
and armor.<BR>
         <BR>
A different view of your example...<BR>
<BR>
800 dton, TL12, Streamlined Dome.  Jump-3, Maneuver-4.  Armor:  200.<BR>
Power Plant:  1120 MW (224 per jump number:  672 MW, 252 per g:<BR>
1008 MW, Other:  84 MW).  Area:  3220.  (Radiators:  2400, Available<BR>
Area:  1020).  Available dTons:  405.  33.5m long, 33.5m wide, 17m<BR>
high.<BR>
<BR>
...Is this harder to deal with? Less useful?  Why?<BR>
         <BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 22:54:01 -0700<BR>
From: "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu><BR>
Subject: Imperial citizens<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BFFF30.0C33D5E0<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
Given the standard description of the Imperium being the power that =<BR>
rules the sea of space between the stars, how does the Imperium maintain =<BR>
a sense of loyalty and unity for so long? In TNE, specifically, the =<BR>
regency's citizens continue to think of themselves as "Imperials."  It =<BR>
seems to me that with the loose association between the imperial =<BR>
government and individual citizens, that the loyalty would almost always =<BR>
lie with planatary leaders.  If this is not true, then how does the =<BR>
Imperium inspire loyalty in the average man. Is it only with the Navy? =<BR>
If the above situation is true, then did the Imperium only exist for as =<BR>
long as it did because of military strength?=20<BR>
<BR>
Jeffrey Yin  =20<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BFFF30.0C33D5E0<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><HEAD><BR>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =<BR>
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><BR>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2919.6307" name=3DGENERATOR><BR>
<STYLE></STYLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<DIV>Given the standard description of the Imperium being =<BR>
the power=20<BR>
that rules the sea of space between the stars, how does the Imperium =<BR>
maintain a=20<BR>
sense of loyalty and unity for so long? In TNE, specifically, the =<BR>
regency's=20<BR>
citizens continue to think of themselves as "Imperials."&nbsp; It seems =<BR>
to me=20<BR>
that with the loose association between the imperial government and =<BR>
individual=20<BR>
citizens, that the loyalty would almost always lie with planatary =<BR>
leaders.&nbsp;=20<BR>
If this is&nbsp;not true, then how does the Imperium inspire loyalty in =<BR>
the=20<BR>
average man. Is it only&nbsp;with the Navy? If the above situation is =<BR>
true, then=20<BR>
did the Imperium only&nbsp;exist for as long as it did because of =<BR>
military=20<BR>
strength?&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>Jeffrey Yin&nbsp;&nbsp; </DIV><BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0028_01BFFF30.0C33D5E0--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:56:01 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Max Acceleration<BR>
<BR>
In CT, 6G was the max possible acceleration and it came from thruster<BR>
plates.  In MT and/or TNE and/or FFS is there a limit on acceleration from<BR>
thruster plates?  IIRC there is not a hard limit, but there has to be a limit<BR>
as to what is practical.  Any ideas where that is?<BR>
<BR>
Thx,<BR>
WKH<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 00:57:52 -0700<BR>
From: "Jeffrey Yin" <jsyin@cats.ucsc.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Max Acceleration<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Bill Hopper" <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Sunday, August 06, 2000 12:56 AM<BR>
Subject: Max Acceleration<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> In CT, 6G was the max possible acceleration and it came from thruster<BR>
> plates.  In MT and/or TNE and/or FFS is there a limit on acceleration from<BR>
> thruster plates?  IIRC there is not a hard limit, but there has to be a<BR>
limit<BR>
> as to what is practical.  Any ideas where that is?<BR>
><BR>
> Thx,<BR>
> WKH<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
As far as I recall, the 6G limit was maintained, even through TNE which<BR>
switched to that HePLAR (sp?) thing, in place of the thruster plates.<BR>
Jeffrey Yin<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 00:20:16 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: J. Andrew Keith Memorial site...<BR>
<BR>
From: Matthew Bond <mgb@akira.swinternet.co.uk><BR>
<BR>
>> Anyway, *raising mug of Scout's Brew* Here's to Andrew!<BR>
><BR>
><clink of mugs> To Andrew!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    <Raises his Scout's Brew> To Andrew.<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 02:24:47 -0700<BR>
From: Kristian Miller <travellerne@3rd-imperium.com><BR>
Subject: Merciless Heavy Tank<BR>
<BR>
Hi All,<BR>
<BR>
Here is a taste of things to come for the San Jose Traveller Gaming<BR>
Meet:<BR>
http://www.3rd-imperium.com/Military/ogrekiller.html<BR>
or<BR>
http://www.3rd-imperium.com<BR>
and click on 'Military->Armaments->Merciless'<BR>
<BR>
I haven't gotten the burst radius for the CBM round correct yet.  If<BR>
anyone knows that answer let me know.<BR>
<BR>
Why did I create this monstrosity?  I have a few heavy tank miniatures<BR>
from "Ogre," I wanted to put them to good use for our next Striker game,<BR>
and I wondered how close to the Ogre game description I could come.  OK,<BR>
so in Ogre the tanks always fired nuclear rounds, but we know the<BR>
Imperium will not allow that.  Still, have you read the stats for a<BR>
contact hit from a nuclear round in Striker?  :-)<BR>
<BR>
Kristian<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 01:54:47 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 11:07 PM 8/5/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>On 08/05/00 at 10:34 PM,  Michel Vaillancourt <BR>
>><misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> said:<BR>
>> >         If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, you<BR>
>> >simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion.  Lasers<BR>
>> >are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too mind<BR>
>> >bogglingly  big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Well, sure...if the target is within a couple of light seconds.  <g><BR>
>>At longer ranges, though, the circle of probability starts getting<BR>
>>large enough to hide a small ship in.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Eris<BR>
><BR>
>          If the ship is 600,000km away, why is it relevant to you in terms <BR>
> of combat?  At "normal" space speeds of 20km/sec each, flying straight at <BR>
> each other, its about four hours away.  Let him get a bit closer and fire <BR>
> when he's bigger than the COP.  Insta-hit.  Problem solved.<BR>
<BR>
20 km/s is a fairly *low* speed in Traveller. And at *one* g, you can<BR>
cross 300,000 km in 129 minutes, then flip and decelerate to a<BR>
(relative) stop in another 129 for a total of 258 min (4hr, 18 minutes).<BR>
At 6g, it takes 53 minutes, for a total of 105 minutes.<BR>
<BR>
Peak velocity for the 1g trip is 1290 km/sec. For the 6g trip it's 3180<BR>
km/sec.<BR>
<BR>
Now consider that turns are 30 minutes. That makes 600,000 km trip 9<BR>
turns away at 1 g. 4 turns at 6 g.<BR>
<BR>
Oh yeah, the 100 diameter limit is 1.28 *million* km for Earth...<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 02:25:30 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>          Leonard has posted a sphere-of-probability analysis some<BR>
>> time ago,<BR>
>> based on speed vs ship dimensions as a way of determining how far a ship<BR>
>> could have moved in the "flight time" before a laser pulse arrives.  The<BR>
>> short version is "not far enough", even if you are a fighter.<BR>
>>          If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, you<BR>
>> simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion.  Lasers<BR>
>> are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too mind<BR>
>> bogglingly<BR>
>> big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
><BR>
> The typical sphere of probability analysis assumes that you send a pulse<BR>
> out, the pulse bounces off the target, and returns to the original ship, at<BR>
> which time you let fly a laser blast. With passive sensors, you can ignore<BR>
> the first steps, or course.  Note that any aspect of electronic warfare is<BR>
> omitted. EW is critical, even today, and will probably become even more<BR>
> critical at higher TLs.<BR>
<BR>
Nope. It's based on the time it takes the EM radiation (be it emissions<BR>
from the ship, or a returning sensor pulse to reach you and for your<BR>
laser pulse to return.<BR>
<BR>
Passive or active, the position info will be 2*distance/c seconds old<BR>
when the laser pulse gets there.<BR>
<BR>
Unless you are firing blindly, you have to have a position for the<BR>
target before you can fire. And that means that the target will have<BR>
twice the lightspeed interval between you to manuever by the time the<BR>
laser pulse gets there. That's *regardless* of sensor type (AEMS, PEMS,<BR>
neutrino, gravity, they all work at lightspeed).<BR>
<BR>
> It's probably reasonable to assume that advanced ECM technology at higher<BR>
> TLs can play all sorts of games with sensors, even passive ones which are<BR>
> picking up an IR signature <technical digression omitted about the theory of<BR>
> operation of these ECMs>. In this case, the usual analysis applies only if<BR>
> the attacker can somehow overcome the ECM defenses of the defender.<BR>
<BR>
Passive ECM can reduce signtature. But there are limits, mostly in IR. <BR>
<BR>
Active ECM is going to be a real problem, because decoys are going to<BR>
be a lot harder to make believable. They'll have to be look right in<BR>
multiple spectra *and* maneuver reasonably.<BR>
<BR>
> Otherwise, all bets are off. At higher TLs, the sensors and ECM<BR>
> (anti-sensors?) are probably the most important element of ship combat.<BR>
<BR>
Maybe. I think that sensors and ECM will give bonues and penalties on<BR>
the to hit.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 02:47:51 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 (unnecessarily long)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 07:34 PM 8/2/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>>For me, the bottom line is that I really don't believe that tinkering with<BR>
>>>the ship design system will make the game any better, and has some <BR>
> potential<BR>
>>>to make it worse.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Particularly if the plug and play system is poor.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Dom<BR>
><BR>
>          Hi, Dom!  In short, *bingo*.<BR>
>          While I find it intellectually interesting to see these <BR>
> hugely-detailed FFSx designs floating around, the short version is that my <BR>
> players DON"T CARE.  Which is the reason we collectively abandoned the much <BR>
> more detailed design sequences from MT and went back to CT/HG.  It just <BR>
> took too much time away from playing.  If the intention is to create a <BR>
> FFS-Alpha/Omega, it is going to get ignored by folks like me unless I can <BR>
> blow off a "off the shelf" design in short order without getting into <BR>
> silliness like panicking about surface area, radiator coverage and color of <BR>
> the Captain's Chair as it influences the mood and morale of the Bridge Crew.<BR>
>          K.I.S.S.<BR>
<BR>
EWven though it may not be obvious, most of this is aimed at setting<BR>
the "ground rules" that the parts that wind up in a simple system will<BR>
use. Failure to do this is one of the reasons certain aspects of all<BR>
the "simple" systems turn into munchkin heaven.<BR>
<BR>
If we can agree on how all the underlying stuff works, and try to base<BR>
as much as is practical on reality (or reasonable extrapolations from<BR>
reality), then we get a *consistent* system that avoid many of the<BR>
previous problems. Much of this stuff wouldn't be in the design rules<BR>
*you* would be using. Maybe not even in the detail system. But the<BR>
detail system and the simple system would wotrk together a lot better<BR>
than any previous ones would. And the "gearhead" system, which might<BR>
only be a download from SJG's website (though I expect it would be<BR>
sellable) would let the gearheads design stuff for the other levels of<BR>
the system. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 06:35:47 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2000 21:16:56 PST<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
>Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
><BR>
>I think the two of you are talking at cross purposes. I think you booth<BR>
>agree that the field affects the entire ship, which is why you only<BR>
>need to design it to handle the max *compensated* acceleration.<BR>
<BR>
Nope; see my last post (Sat, 05 Aug 2000 16:45:46 -0400). The field affects<BR>
the contents of the ship, not its structure. There is no mention of<BR>
G-compensation in any discussion of hull design at all. <BR>
<BR>
You could, I suppose, argue that the field affects the entire ship equally<BR>
in High Guard, there being no requirement to adjust structural volume (the<BR>
n% remaining at 0-factor armor) for acceleration. But later, more detailed,<BR>
versions don't accept that explanation.<BR>
<BR>
>Though I could argue that the g-comp fields and artificial gravity are<BR>
>confined between "plates", in which case the plates and at least part<BR>
>of their support would be *outside* the field.<BR>
><BR>
>I rather prefer the "between plates" bit because it provides an<BR>
>explanation for why the field doesn't extend beyond the hull (it also<BR>
>makes the energy use handwaves a lot simpler).<BR>
<BR>
It is also implicitly supported in the literature I quoted.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 08:49:52 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: EW Relevance to FFS3 (was RE: About Agility)<BR>
<BR>
At 01:22 AM 8/6/00, you wrote:<BR>
>Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
> >          Again, I would submit that operating any active sensor<BR>
> > or jamming<BR>
> > system is suicidal, since it effectively simplifies the opponents<BR>
> > fire-control process.  "SHOOT THE LIGHTHOUSE!"<BR>
><BR>
>Particularly at higher TLs, you should be able to construct LPI/D active<BR>
>sensors. My first stab would to use a technique like DS spread-spectrun,<BR>
>where your signal is below the noise floor unless you know the right coding<BR>
>sequence to recover it, so an adversary can't even detect your signal,<BR>
>although it's extremely high-powered. We have systems which work this way<BR>
>today, although they are used for communication rather than for sensors.<BR>
<BR>
         By definition of being an active signal, the amount of energy <BR>
required to illuminate a target and get a return, I am skeptical of being <BR>
able to still remain undetected as a threat sensor.  I explained this <BR>
problem to Eris in a previous message;  the amount of power required is <BR>
*stupidly* high to get a return.<BR>
<BR>
>For ECM, what I envision are techniques like putting extra energy into<BR>
>sidelobes of the return signal. Most (all?) sensor systems assume that they<BR>
>are getting a reading based on the main beam of a signal. If you put power<BR>
>into sidelobes, you can trick the sensor into thinking that the target is<BR>
>somewhere it isn't. This is, of course, greatly oversimplified. Even for an<BR>
>IR signature, you may be able to play the same games with the help of high<BR>
>TL equipment. After all, waves are waves.<BR>
<BR>
         <nod>  I'm a Sensor Ops-type with the Canadian Naval Reserve.  I <BR>
do this stuff for a hobby <g>.  Side-lobe jamming, while fun, is easily <BR>
identified by a skilled operator.  At which point his weapons EW teams <BR>
start looking for the transmitter and letting the Weapons team play "pin <BR>
the warhead on the donkey".  <g><BR>
<BR>
         I agree that their should be things that happen in the EW world as <BR>
part of the war.    Having been on the receiving end of a E6-E attack, it <BR>
is effective.  However, anybody with an interest in seeing their spouse and <BR>
kids again will tell you that you stay EMCON: Silent/ Silent until the fan <BR>
gets covered and *then* you go active since it doesn't matter any more.<BR>
<BR>
         Jamming helps.  But it is not a magic shield that renders one <BR>
impervious to the dragon's fire.  It *really* helps if the victim is a TL <BR>
behind.  And does nothing at all if he is a TL ahead.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 08:56:24 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
At 06:54 AM 8/6/00, you wrote:<BR>
> >          If the ship is 600,000km away, why is it relevant to you in terms<BR>
> > of combat?  At "normal" space speeds of 20km/sec each, flying straight at<BR>
> > each other, its about four hours away.  Let him get a bit closer and fire<BR>
> > when he's bigger than the COP.  Insta-hit.  Problem solved.<BR>
><BR>
>20 km/s is a fairly *low* speed in Traveller. And at *one* g, you can<BR>
>cross 300,000 km in 129 minutes, then flip and decelerate to a<BR>
>(relative) stop in another 129 for a total of 258 min (4hr, 18 minutes).<BR>
>At 6g, it takes 53 minutes, for a total of 105 minutes.<BR>
<BR>
         Ok, so the four-hour figure I OTC'd works for 1g.  Point still there.<BR>
<BR>
>Peak velocity for the 1g trip is 1290 km/sec. For the 6g trip it's 3180<BR>
>km/sec.<BR>
><BR>
>Now consider that turns are 30 minutes. That makes 600,000 km trip 9<BR>
>turns away at 1 g. 4 turns at 6 g.<BR>
><BR>
>Oh yeah, the 100 diameter limit is 1.28 *million* km for Earth...<BR>
><BR>
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
<BR>
         Point taken.  So, then instead of being tactically irrelevant <BR>
because of distance, he's close enough to deal with in short order.  The <BR>
answer still is "scoot closer so we can't miss and then fire".  Which was <BR>
my original statement in essence, only for a different reason.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 09:08:32 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 : Example of the Modular System<BR>
<BR>
At 01:08 AM 8/6/00, you wrote:<BR>
>They are going to be able to do so, with nothing more complicated than<BR>
>adding, subtracting and multiplying.<BR>
><BR>
>The module/High Guard-ish system will probably work something like this ...<BR>
<BR>
         Ok, tentatively it looks reasonable.  That isn't any worse -- just <BR>
different -- than HG.  Now, of course, the issue becomes how do I avoid <BR>
invalidating all the custom designs I have done for TNEC.  Particularly the <BR>
deck plans.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 09:14:47 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: Fuel question<BR>
<BR>
At 03:16 AM 8/3/00, you wrote:<BR>
>How would one go about looking at trade and deterimine roughly how<BR>
>many ships pass through and then how much fuel would be used? I have<BR>
>an idea to create something and would need a way to know how much<BR>
>fuel is purchased in a starport over a year. Can anyone toss an idea<BR>
>my way?<BR>
><BR>
>Thanks,<BR>
><BR>
>Terry<BR>
<BR>
         Hi, Terry!  One of the GT supplements covers this off.  I don't <BR>
know if it is STARPORTS or another one.  I have an abstract system I worked <BR>
up some time ago for my CT/HG TNEC milieu.  If you like I can dig it out <BR>
and post it.  I based it on the speculative trade rules in the CT book and <BR>
worked it upwards.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 04:53:54 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Max Acceleration<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> In CT, 6G was the max possible acceleration and it came from thruster<BR>
> plates.  In MT and/or TNE and/or FFS is there a limit on acceleration from<BR>
> thruster plates?  IIRC there is not a hard limit, but there has to be a limit<BR>
> as to what is practical.  Any ideas where that is?<BR>
<BR>
Nope, but it occurs to me that while I can see good reasons for the<BR>
limit on g-comp to be based on gees, I can't see a good reason for the<BR>
limits on thruster plates to be anything other than thrust per square<BR>
meter of plate. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 14:32:00 +0200<BR>
From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk><BR>
Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
<BR>
Glenn Goffin writes:<BR>
>>From: Victor Abraham Delnore <vad9m@unix.mail.virginia.edu><BR>
><BR>
>>But who's paying for the subsector and imperial navies?  In fact, how do<BR>
>>the subsector and imperial (I'm lower-casing because I mean the generic<BR>
>>imperial government of Traveller, the rules, and not the Third Imperium<BR>
>>of Traveller, the universe) governments pay for anything?<BR>
<BR>
I'm going to stick to talking about the 3rd Imperium of the OTU, because<BR>
that is the only imperium we have any common ground for discussing (and any<BR>
previously published information to base our discussion on).<BR>
<BR>
>>... You're assuming<BR>
>>that the planetary government takes the largest chunk out of everybody's<BR>
>>paycheck.  What if it doesn't?  What if the imperium takes the big money<BR>
>>and the planet's share is more like a twentieth-century city government's? <BR>
>>Then "big" planetary navies really do become something like two escorts,<BR>
>>a dozen SBDs, and a bunch of smallcraft.  <BR>
<BR>
According to _Striker_ each world has a military budget equal to between 1<BR>
15% of GWP. The average for the Imperium as a whole is said to be 3% (There<BR>
is no information about the spread). Of this the Imperium gets 30% and the<BR>
world gets 70%. Half the Imperium's cut goes to fund subsector forces, the<BR>
other half to fund the regular forces.<BR>
<BR>
[Note: There are some peculiar effects from this arrangement, most notably<BR>
that the world that contributes most to the Imperium's defense problems (by<BR>
being less able to defend itself) pays the least. I would suggest that<BR>
instead the Imperium gets 1% of GWP, period. This would work out more or<BR>
the same (30% of 3% is ~1%)]<BR>
<BR>
>I've always assumed that the Imperium taxes the member states themselves,<BR>
>not Imperial citizens.  That is, there is no direct Imperial income tax on<BR>
>citizens of the Imperium (although there is one on Licensed Imperial<BR>
>Corporations).  <BR>
<BR>
IIRC that is actually canon, but I can't remember a reference right now.<BR>
 <BR>
>How much money do worlds allocate to naval ship-building?  I don't know,<BR>
>but I do like large ships in a universe of large empires.<BR>
 <BR>
The military budget of member worlds is divided between its army and its<BR>
navy. The exact split varies. On worlds with a breathable atmosphere the<BR>
ground forces gets as much as 40% while on vacuum worlds it can be as low<BR>
as 6%.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
      Hans Rancke<BR>
University of Copenhagen<BR>
     rancke@diku.dk<BR>
- ------------<BR>
        "The referee should determine the nature of subsequent<BR>
         events based on the individual situation."<BR>
                                _76 Patrons_, p. 8<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 07:41:51 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: EW Relevance to FFS3 (was RE: About Agility)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 01:22 AM 8/6/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
>> >          Again, I would submit that operating any active sensor<BR>
>> > or jamming<BR>
>> > system is suicidal, since it effectively simplifies the opponents<BR>
>> > fire-control process.  "SHOOT THE LIGHTHOUSE!"<BR>
>><BR>
>>Particularly at higher TLs, you should be able to construct LPI/D active<BR>
>>sensors. My first stab would to use a technique like DS spread-spectrun,<BR>
>>where your signal is below the noise floor unless you know the right coding<BR>
>>sequence to recover it, so an adversary can't even detect your signal,<BR>
>>although it's extremely high-powered. We have systems which work this way<BR>
>>today, although they are used for communication rather than for sensors.<BR>
><BR>
>          By definition of being an active signal, the amount of energy <BR>
> required to illuminate a target and get a return, I am skeptical of being <BR>
> able to still remain undetected as a threat sensor.  I explained this <BR>
> problem to Eris in a previous message;  the amount of power required is <BR>
> *stupidly* high to get a return.<BR>
<BR>
I'm wondering about the possibility of a "network" of units that emit<BR>
pulses on a particular frequency at a specific time. With the overal<BR>
"pattern" of pulses jumping around in frequency and origin points.<BR>
<BR>
Or else "one shot" pulse emitters that can be triggered by a coded<BR>
laser pulse (more for seeding in a system that you are lurking in than<BR>
for use in a system you "own")<BR>
<BR>
Either way, you'd have a messy analysis problem, checking for the<BR>
returns for potential targets so widely seperated. Especially with<BR>
relative motions and the distances the ships may be at from the<BR>
emitters. <BR>
<BR>
Still, it'd make shooting at emitters singularly unprofitable, since<BR>
it'd give you away and not seriously compromise the sensor capabilities.<BR>
<BR>
The hard part is that the power levels are kinda extreme, since these<BR>
would have to be at least wide angle if not omnidirectional. <BR>
<BR>
There's always the gizmo from "Hammer of God" by Clarke (and t least<BR>
one other story). Basicly a one-shot microwave generator powered by a<BR>
*large* nuke. <BR>
<BR>
Expensive, and visible as all get out. On the other hand, it pretty<BR>
much guarantees detection at combat ranges. As I recall it was supposed<BR>
to allow detection of all natural bodies a meter or large out to Jupiter...<BR>
<BR>
For detecting ships at not *too* far outside combat ranges, a "mere"<BR>
megaton or so nuke out to do just fine (guess, I haven't done the math<BR>
yet). <BR>
<BR>
"Seeing" one of these things go off close enough to generate a decent<BR>
return pulse from your ship would feel a lot like getting speared by a<BR>
spotlight beam in WWII. Or caught in the open when a star shell goes off.<BR>
<BR>
Even if you are "probably" too far away, it's going to rattle you a<BR>
bit. :-)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 09:03:04 -0700 (MST)<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
<BR>
On Sat, 5 Aug 2000, Jeffrey Yin wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Given the standard description of the Imperium being the power that<BR>
> rules the sea of space between the stars, how does the Imperium<BR>
> maintain a sense of loyalty and unity for so long? In TNE,<BR>
> specifically, the regency's citizens continue to think of themselves<BR>
> as "Imperials."  It seems to me that with the loose association<BR>
> between the imperial government and individual citizens, that the<BR>
> loyalty would almost always lie with planatary leaders.  If this is<BR>
> not true, then how does the Imperium inspire loyalty in the average<BR>
> man. Is it only with the Navy? If the above situation is true, then<BR>
> did the Imperium only exist for as long as it did because of military<BR>
> strength?<BR>
<BR>
One, planetary leaders were almost always co-opted into the Imperial<BR>
ruling structure, particularly in the early days of the Imperium. Nobles<BR>
weren't given planets as fiefs, the ones who already ruled them as their<BR>
feifs were given noble titles.<BR>
<BR>
Second, the Imperium could care less about the 'average man'. <BR>
<BR>
There somehow seems to be a misconception on this list that the Imperium<BR>
remotely resembles a democracy, where the masses have any say about how<BR>
things are done. They don't. They _never_ have. Under the rule of the<BR>
Imperium, they never will.<BR>
<BR>
In a true feudal system, which the Imperium is, the top only worries about<BR>
the level beneath it. The Emperor doesn't waste time worrying about Baron<BR>
so'n'so, that's handled many levels down. If Baron so'n'so becomes a<BR>
problem worthy of the Emperor's time, many heads will roll as a result.<BR>
<BR>
Third, loyalty to the planetary government hardly precludes loyalty to the<BR>
Imperium. I am an American citizen; simultaneously I am a Tusconan, and<BR>
feel a rather great deal of concern, loyalty, whatever you call it, to<BR>
this city in the desert.<BR>
<BR>
Fourth, The Imperium protects free trade within its boundaries. This alone<BR>
gives the Imperium the support and backing of huge power blocs separate<BR>
from the Nobility: the Corps, both Mega and Micro: "The Imperium is why<BR>
you can have affordable Moran delicacies on your table!" (note: This does<BR>
not delve into the fact that many, if not all of the heads of the Megas<BR>
are also Imperial Nobles.The first rule of maintaining power: Make<BR>
continuation of your rule in the self-interest of the powerful under you.<BR>
<BR>
Finally, never underestimate the Power of Propaganda:  "The Imperial<BR>
Navy has gloriously defeated the Evil Mind-Raping Zhodani and their<BR>
perfidious Sword Worlder and Vargr allies!"<BR>
<BR>
Note, one basis for the disintegration of the Imperium during the MT<BR>
Rebellion era was exactly what you postulated: that lots of people had<BR>
decided they weren't Imperials any more, but Daibeians, or Vlandians, or<BR>
Antareans and the Imperium no longer could or would protect them from<BR>
thier enemies. Note as well, the Imperial lack of involvement in planetary<BR>
concerns, extending its power to help those nominally its citizens, was<BR>
Archduke Dulinor's main tenet, and the reason he felt he had to assasinate<BR>
Strephon and assume power: so he could make the masses care that they were<BR>
Imperial Citizens.<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2892<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (rly-ye04.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.201]) by air-ye02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:03:58 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Aug 2000 12:03:39 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id MAA78608;<BR>
	Sun, 6 Aug 2000 12:03:28 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 6 Aug 2000 12:03:09 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id MAA78563<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 6 Aug 2000 12:03:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 12:03:08 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008061603.MAA78563@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2892<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2893</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/6/00 3:11:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, August 6 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2893<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
I'm happy<BR>
Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
FFS detailed ship designs and player apathy<BR>
Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
Re: I'm happy<BR>
Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
FFSv3 and software<BR>
[TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 16:52:58 GMT<BR>
From: stephen@stempest.demon.co.uk (Stephen Tempest)<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2000 00:34:25 -0700<BR>
>From: Justice Hypercleats <eris@sierratel.com><BR>
>Subject: Re: Imperial Law?<BR>
>Ok, this makes sense to me. This is what I've always assumed it to mean. But<BR>
>that just raises the question, then, of the *difference* between a Client<BR>
>State and a Member State.<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium has no responsibility for imposing order or supressing<BR>
piracy within the Client State - it's up to the CS's own government to<BR>
do that.  (Although if any pirates start to cross over into Imperial<BR>
space, the Imperium will intervene).<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium doesn't collect taxes within the CS.<BR>
<BR>
Imperial law doesn't apply within the CS.  They might put diplomatic<BR>
pressure on the government to conform to Imperial norms, but it<BR>
wouldn't be compulsory.<BR>
<BR>
Why does the Imperium have client states?  Perhaps as a sop to local<BR>
pride.  Perhaps the Imperium doesn't have the resources to absorb the<BR>
region in a cost-effective way.  Perhaps there is another interstellar<BR>
empire nearby that would regard outright annexation as a casus belli.<BR>
Or perhaps the client state has customs (eg slavery) that wouldn't be<BR>
allowed within the Imperium, and so allowing CS status allows the<BR>
Imperium to trade with the region without getting involved in<BR>
suppressing these local customs.<BR>
<BR>
>But it lacks a<BR>
>crucial element: an agenda. It doesn't try, doesn't even want to rule<BR>
>people. It is a 'meta-government' if you'll pardon the creative English,<BR>
<BR>
That was its original purpose, certainly.  I expect that whether it<BR>
could or should be anything more is a subject of keen debate *within*<BR>
the Traveller Universe.  In fact, didn't Archduke Dulinor have some<BR>
thoughts along this line?<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Now what does it mean to be an Imperial Citizen? <BR>
<BR>
I'd like to know that myself.<BR>
<BR>
One thing I have wondered:  the canon descriptions of the Imperium's<BR>
government lay great emphasis on how the long travel times lead to<BR>
decentralisation and local autonomy.  However, that presumably applies<BR>
more to the outlying areas like the Spinward Marches and Solomani Rim.<BR>
Logically, the Core Sector could be ruled directly by the Emperor and<BR>
his government - so is it?  Or does the local autonomy rule apply<BR>
there too?  Who is the head of the planetary government of<BR>
Capital/Core?<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Then it would not be a difficult matter to engineer de facto slavery on a<BR>
>population and have it pass Imperial muster.<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium isn't big on technical legal definitions - it relies more<BR>
on the personal discretion and judgement of individual subsector<BR>
dukes, who happen to have an Imperial Navy and Marine taskforce on<BR>
call if they need it.  Of course, such a system is open to abuse...<BR>
<BR>
Stephen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 20:06:56 +0300<BR>
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jussi_Kenkkil=E4?= <Jussi.Kenkkila@helsinki.fi><BR>
Subject: I'm happy<BR>
<BR>
I just got back from Ropecon, the biggest finnish RPG-con. Steve Jackson was there, and I liked his guest-speech. During the speech he mentioned Traveller-LARPs, mainly their scarcity. Surprisingly there was someone who was planning such a thing. As I didn't catch hervname, I thought that somehow someone on TML might know something of it (slim chance, but I'm an optimist...). <BR>
<BR>
OT: I GM'd GURPS: Cyberiad during the con, a total of 6 short adventures, and it was loads of fun. Because of this I didn't have time to chat with Steve, although I did give him some finnish fanzines. <BR>
<BR>
And I did get GT: Rim of Fire from the GM-loot table.<BR>
<BR>
- -J2K<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 14:05:10 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
<BR>
Bruce makes some very good points below regarding Imperial Citizenship. I'll<BR>
add a few more points.<BR>
<BR>
I agree with previous posters that one requirement for a world to be a member<BR>
state would be that it would not restrict it's citizens from becoming Citizens<BR>
of the Imperium.  But even without this, the bar to becoming an Imperial<BR>
Citizen would be so high that very few would be able to make it.<BR>
<BR>
Since the Imperium is a feudal society, I would expect that , at a minimum,<BR>
you would have travel to and be presented at an Imperial Court in order to<BR>
become a Citizen.  That could be an adventure in and of itself.  If you were<BR>
of a Noble family, the way would be open, but if not, you might have great<BR>
difficulty.  Bribery skill might be very useful in geting onto the list of<BR>
Court business.<BR>
<BR>
You would have to swear fealty, probably to the Noble who is holding court, or<BR>
possibly to the Emperor, by proxy.  If you swore fealty to the Noble and then<BR>
moved to another Noble's demesne, you would have to swear fealty again to the<BR>
new Noble.  If the two Nobles did not get along, you would want to do so as<BR>
quickly as possible.<BR>
<BR>
If you swore fealty to the Emperor, this would not be necessary.  I would<BR>
expect that the Emperor or His direct  representative, e.g. a member of his<BR>
family, would have to be present in order for you to swear directly to him.<BR>
If you served in the Imperial military, you may have sworn fealty to the<BR>
Emperor.<BR>
<BR>
After swearing fealty, your name would be placed on the Fealty List, along<BR>
with who you were 'in fealty' to, and this list would be distributed<BR>
throughout the Imperium.  You would also have some physical token of your<BR>
fealty, in case the list was not available.<BR>
<BR>
Your 'status' as an Imperial Citizen would depend on who you were 'in fealty'<BR>
to.<BR>
<BR>
The chief benefit, as I see it, of being an Imperial Citizen, would be that<BR>
_somebody_ was keeping track of your well-being.<BR>
<BR>
"Consul, here is your daily Imperial Citizens report.  I'd like to call your<BR>
attention to number 4.  His Imperial ID has not been used for the last 3<BR>
days.  Considering the local situation, should I open an inquiry with the<BR>
local government?"<BR>
<BR>
"Hmmm.  Let me see." Consul checks Fealty List.  "He _is_ in fealty to the<BR>
_Emperor_.  He must be somebody.  Go ahead and open the inquiry."<BR>
<BR>
WKH<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> On Sat, 5 Aug 2000, Jeffrey Yin wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > Given the standard description of the Imperium being the power that<BR>
> ...<BR>
> Second, the Imperium could care less about the 'average man'.<BR>
><BR>
> There somehow seems to be a misconception on this list that the Imperium<BR>
> remotely resembles a democracy, where the masses have any say about how<BR>
> things are done. They don't. They _never_ have. Under the rule of the<BR>
> Imperium, they never will.<BR>
><BR>
> In a true feudal system, which the Imperium is, the top only worries about<BR>
> the level beneath it. The Emperor doesn't waste time worrying about Baron<BR>
> so'n'so, that's handled many levels down. If Baron so'n'so becomes a<BR>
> problem worthy of the Emperor's time, many heads will roll as a result.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 15:19:39 -0400<BR>
From: peersce@mindspring.com<BR>
Subject: FFS detailed ship designs and player apathy<BR>
<BR>
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BFFFB9.BD4C7380<BR>
Content-Type: text/plain;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
    For the next Traveller, have FFS style supplements for those that =<BR>
enjoy it.  A great many Traveller players love the creative freedom to =<BR>
build their best designs.  For the players and refs who like the =<BR>
elegance of a simple system, its easy to include a highly streamlined =<BR>
construction system and standard ship designs for all classes, ready to =<BR>
play.  The new Traveller could give a streamlined system in the main =<BR>
book, with an FFS style supplement.  Just make sure the two systems are =<BR>
compatible.<BR>
<BR>
    In my experience, players like to tinker to get the best they can, =<BR>
be it character generation, starship construction, weapon construction, =<BR>
custom adventuring gear, or vehicle modification.  It gives them a sense =<BR>
of creativity and freedom to test the limits of the game world, to =<BR>
exceed the GM's NPCs, to "win" in a way.  Also, it can heighten the =<BR>
excitement of playing, even if they play only to see how their =<BR>
customized gear performs against standard designs.  If there's no way to =<BR>
push the standards for greater performance, there's no answer to give =<BR>
the players when they inevitably ask, "Why do we always have to get this =<BR>
same crappy gear?  Why can't someone build a better design?"  I'd like =<BR>
to hand them the FFS supplement and say "Go for it!" =20<BR>
<BR>
P<BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BFFFB9.BD4C7380<BR>
Content-Type: text/html;<BR>
	charset="iso-8859-1"<BR>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable<BR>
<BR>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><HEAD><BR>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =<BR>
http-equiv=3DContent-Type><BR>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=3DGENERATOR><BR>
<STYLE></STYLE><BR>
</HEAD><BR>
<BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; For the next =<BR>
Traveller, have FFS=20<BR>
style supplements for those that enjoy it.&nbsp; A great many Traveller =<BR>
players=20<BR>
love the creative freedom to build their best designs.&nbsp; For the =<BR>
players and=20<BR>
refs who like the elegance of a simple system, its easy to include a =<BR>
highly=20<BR>
streamlined construction system and standard ship designs for all =<BR>
classes, ready=20<BR>
to play.&nbsp; The new Traveller could give a streamlined system in the =<BR>
main=20<BR>
book, with an FFS style supplement.&nbsp; Just make sure the two systems =<BR>
are=20<BR>
compatible.</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; In my experience, =<BR>
players like=20<BR>
to tinker to get the best they can, be it character generation, starship =<BR>
<BR>
construction, weapon construction, custom adventuring gear, or vehicle=20<BR>
modification.&nbsp; It gives them a sense of creativity and freedom to =<BR>
test the=20<BR>
limits of the game world, to exceed the GM's NPCs, to "win" in a =<BR>
way.&nbsp;=20<BR>
Also, it can heighten the excitement&nbsp;of playing, even if they play =<BR>
only to=20<BR>
see how their customized gear performs against standard designs.&nbsp; =<BR>
If=20<BR>
there's no way to push the standards for greater performance, there's no =<BR>
answer=20<BR>
to give the players when they inevitably ask, "Why do we always have to =<BR>
get this=20<BR>
same crappy gear?&nbsp; Why can't someone build a better design?"&nbsp; =<BR>
I'd like=20<BR>
to hand them the FFS supplement and say "Go for it!"&nbsp; </DIV><BR>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV><BR>
<DIV>P</DIV><BR>
<BR>
- ------=_NextPart_000_0007_01BFFFB9.BD4C7380--<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 15:30:15 EDT<BR>
From: JFZeigler@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
<BR>
One thing that you folks seem to be forgetting is that the Imperium<BR>
has institutions which doubtless operate to instill a sense of Imperial<BR>
unity in many of its (small-c) citizens.<BR>
<BR>
I suspect that anyone who has ever served in the Navy, the Army, the<BR>
Marines, the IISS, or the Imperial bureaucracy has been put through a<BR>
course of indoctrination into Imperial ideals.  You wouldn't have to be<BR>
a noble to get a double dose of this, in fact nobles might tend to be<BR>
more sophisticated and blase about it.<BR>
<BR>
My take on this (and I hinted at this in Rim of Fire) is that these<BR>
individuals, along with some others who spend a lot of time traveling<BR>
between worlds, form the basis for an "Imperial culture" which tends<BR>
to hold the Imperium together.  People who spend all their lives on<BR>
a single world and never deal much with outsiders can afford to be<BR>
more parochial.<BR>
<BR>
Meanwhile, I know of nothing in canon which suggests that only<BR>
a narrowly limited class of people living within the Imperial borders<BR>
are considered citizens.  As far as I can tell, Imperial law applies to<BR>
everyone, even if some social classes have greater privilege under<BR>
that law.<BR>
<BR>
- ----------<BR>
Jon F. Zeigler: Mathematician, computer geek, amateur historian, freelance<BR>
writer, occasional scribbler of bad poetry<BR>
"For any statement, no matter how innocuous, there exists a nonempty<BR>
set of people who will take offense at it."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 15:32:30 EDT<BR>
From: JFZeigler@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: I'm happy<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 8/6/00 1:13:43 PM Eastern Daylight Time, <BR>
Jussi.Kenkkila@helsinki.fi writes:<BR>
<BR>
> I just got back from Ropecon, the biggest finnish RPG-con. Steve Jackson <BR>
was <BR>
> there, and I liked his guest-speech. During the speech he mentioned <BR>
Traveller-<BR>
> LARPs, mainly their scarcity. Surprisingly there was someone who was <BR>
planning <BR>
> such a thing. As I didn't catch hervname, I thought that somehow someone on <BR>
> TML might know something of it (slim chance, but I'm an optimist...). <BR>
<BR>
He might have been referring to some rules I'm working on designing for<BR>
high-level political roleplaying in the 3I setting.  I don't know if they will<BR>
end up being suited for LARP, but that's one of the design goals.  I<BR>
think SJ knows about the project, although it's not likely to published<BR>
by SJG.<BR>
<BR>
>  And I did get GT: Rim of Fire from the GM-loot table.<BR>
<BR>
Enjoy :-).  <BR>
<BR>
- ----------<BR>
Jon F. Zeigler: Mathematician, computer geek, amateur historian, freelance<BR>
writer, occasional scribbler of bad poetry<BR>
"For any statement, no matter how innocuous, there exists a nonempty<BR>
set of people who will take offense at it."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 12:45:06 -0700 (MST)<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@Pharmacy.Arizona.EDU><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
<BR>
On Sun, 6 Aug 2000, Bill Hopper wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Bruce makes some very good points below regarding Imperial Citizenship. I'll<BR>
> add a few more points.<BR>
> <BR>
> I agree with previous posters that one requirement for a world to be a member<BR>
> state would be that it would not restrict it's citizens from becoming Citizens<BR>
> of the Imperium.  But even without this, the bar to becoming an Imperial<BR>
> Citizen would be so high that very few would be able to make it.<BR>
> <BR>
> Since the Imperium is a feudal society, I would expect that , at a minimum,<BR>
> you would have travel to and be presented at an Imperial Court in order to<BR>
> become a Citizen.  That could be an adventure in and of itself.  If you were<BR>
> of a Noble family, the way would be open, but if not, you might have great<BR>
> difficulty.  Bribery skill might be very useful in geting onto the list of<BR>
> Court business.<BR>
<BR>
Snippo<BR>
<BR>
> Your 'status' as an Imperial Citizen would depend on who you were 'in fealty'<BR>
> to.<BR>
<BR>
Nice scenario, alas, canon states that anyone born on an Imperial world is<BR>
automatically granted citizenship.<BR>
<BR>
Being an Imperial citizen doesn't get you a whole lot, though. You get to<BR>
travel freely through Imperial starports, though non-citizens do as well,<BR>
you get to pay taxes, though it's unlikely that any world lists a line on<BR>
their form 1040 saying 'Imperial Taxes'. <BR>
<BR>
It's up to the noble/and or system leaders to determine how their Imperial<BR>
tax bite (whatever it is) is generated. It's been demonstrated that<BR>
getting no more than a few credits a year is probably sufficient to keep<BR>
the Imperium awash in cash.<BR>
<BR>
Nobles support their station, palaces, personal guard, etc, from their<BR>
fiefs and/or other business ventures. This includes the Emperor, (at least<BR>
IMTU). Of course, the fact the the Emeperor owns 'The Emperor's shares' in<BR>
damn nearly every corporation in the 3I, I'd suggest that the Emperor can<BR>
pretty much spend anything they want.<BR>
<BR>
What you're describing is, in part, the process of becoming a Noble. Only<BR>
nobles swear fealty; that is a very specific term, and is not the same as<BR>
swearing an oath of loyalty, which is what you do if you're in one of the<BR>
Imperial services and are not already a noble. <BR>
<BR>
Finally<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> The chief benefit, as I see it, of being an Imperial Citizen, would be that<BR>
> _somebody_ was keeping track of your well-being.<BR>
> <BR>
> "Consul, here is your daily Imperial Citizens report.  I'd like to call your<BR>
> attention to number 4.  His Imperial ID has not been used for the last 3<BR>
> days.  Considering the local situation, should I open an inquiry with the<BR>
> local government?"<BR>
> <BR>
> "Hmmm.  Let me see." Consul checks Fealty List.  "He _is_ in fealty to the<BR>
> _Emperor_.  He must be somebody.  Go ahead and open the inquiry."<BR>
<BR>
This implies a vastly more intrusive Imperium than even the Ziru Sirkka.<BR>
Citizens of the Imperium are routinely and regularly tracked in their<BR>
daily comings and goings? There are ID checks everywhere? This is<BR>
automated to the point that every Consul gets a daily report?? <BR>
<BR>
Even if this isn't a corrupt and opressive system, Big Mommy isn't much of<BR>
an improvement on Big Brother...<BR>
<BR>
"Never mind, go away. These are not the droids you're looking for" ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> Bruce Johnson wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > On Sat, 5 Aug 2000, Jeffrey Yin wrote:<BR>
> ><BR>
> > > Given the standard description of the Imperium being the power that<BR>
> > ...<BR>
> > Second, the Imperium could care less about the 'average man'.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > There somehow seems to be a misconception on this list that the Imperium<BR>
> > remotely resembles a democracy, where the masses have any say about how<BR>
> > things are done. They don't. They _never_ have. Under the rule of the<BR>
> > Imperium, they never will.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > In a true feudal system, which the Imperium is, the top only worries about<BR>
> > the level beneath it. The Emperor doesn't waste time worrying about Baron<BR>
> > so'n'so, that's handled many levels down. If Baron so'n'so becomes a<BR>
> > problem worthy of the Emperor's time, many heads will roll as a result.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 12:50:06 -0700<BR>
From: "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com><BR>
Subject: FFSv3 and software<BR>
<BR>
<Snyder><BR>
> FFSv3 design:  It should be recognized from the start that the only way for this project to<BR>
> succeed is to assume that the rules will be incorporated into either a dedicated spreadsheet<BR>
> program or a software program. Trying to make it work only with paper, pencil, and <BR>
>calculator is absurd.  FFSv2 is just way tooooooooooo complex for that.  On the other hand <BR>
>a module based system (with components built using FFSv3) should not require a computer <BR>
>otherwise it will have failed.<BR>
<BR>
<Ian Whitchurch><BR>
>Umm, everything Ditzie has been involved with has been done with pen, paper and <BR>
>calculator. And on some of it, we didnt use a calculator :)<BR>
<BR>
<SD Mooney><BR>
>I think if we go this way it should be a java engine. And who is going to check it all if it's too <BR>
>complex? ;-)<BR>
<BR>
I think we all can agree that Ditzie is not a normal person. :)  We should not design FFSv3 <BR>
such that only Ditzie can use it.  Or, is that the plan ?  Is the real reason for the FFSv3 rewrite <BR>
to give FS a major competitive advantage over the other firms that have only normal people as <BR>
staff ? :)<BR>
<BR>
As a result of doing FFSv2 by hand for too many times and of being frustrated by the <BR>
limitations of spreadsheet technology (although Akins spreadsheet is excellent) I decided to <BR>
write a software program. To date it has mostly covered small arms.  Believe me I much prefer <BR>
to spend 5 minutes on a design then hours.  Although, I might add that a fair proportion of <BR>
those hours were spent just interpreting the rules.  When I have gotten it to a reasonable <BR>
facsimile of a commercial application I will make it available to one of the traveller sites.  <BR>
Additionally, I will design it such that it is possible for the user to change some of the <BR>
equations, constants, and data.<BR>
<BR>
I am doing it in Visual Basic 6.0 since it is a very productive language compared with C/C++ <BR>
and Java.  Java & C/C++ are higher performance languages, but that isn't very important for an <BR>
application of this nature.<BR>
<BR>
The most difficult aspect of this project is not converting the FFSv2(v3) rules into code.  It is <BR>
interpreting the FFSv2 (and v3 ?) rules and developing an intuitive user interface.  In regard to <BR>
SD Mooney's comments on complexity, complexity is OK.  What is not OK are ambiguous, <BR>
incomplete, and contradictory rules.  <BR>
<BR>
Additionally, when we develop FFSv3 we need to assume that the user is NOT a weapons <BR>
expert, naval architect, vehicle designer, engineer, or scientist.  The current FFSv2 makes too <BR>
many assumptions (perhaps inadvertantly) on the user's background.  For example, what the <BR>
heck is a bullpup configuration ?  I know that many of you know what this is about, but I have <BR>
no idea.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Free E-mail and Homepage at http://www.prontomail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 22:25:12 +0200 (MET DST)<BR>
From: Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no><BR>
Subject: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
<BR>
Hei all,<BR>
<BR>
I've only loosely followed the many threads about the FFS3 <BR>
project, but anyways here are my 2 credits worth.<BR>
<BR>
What I'm most concearned about is the lack of rules using the <BR>
designs when they are finished. These rules should be laid out <BR>
before the design rules are made. What are the combat rules the<BR>
ships are designed for? What are the sensor rules? What are the<BR>
computer rules? The first step must be to agree on this before <BR>
stepping on. There is no way to make a standard set of design <BR>
rules that make the ships useable to all ship combat rules <BR>
available and so on. <BR>
<BR>
My take on the sequence of the project is:<BR>
   1. Decide the game mechanics rules to use.<BR>
   2. Make the design rules.<BR>
   3. Make conversion rules to other game mechanic rules<BR>
<BR>
With regards <BR>
Tommy Grav<BR>
- -------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
tommy.grav@astro.uio.no     http://www.uio.no/~tommygr/  <BR>
Institute of Astrophysics, UiO, No  <BR>
IMTU tn++t4+tg+ ru+ge++ !3i jt+au+st+ls hi++dr-so++zh-sy-sw++ <BR>
 <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 15:34:06 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
<BR>
I don't necessarily see any conflict with what I wrote earlier and your comments<BR>
below.  Imperial citizens who were merely born on an Imperial world or who have<BR>
merely sworn an oath of loyalty would be the lowest status Citizens.  I am aware of<BR>
the difference in degree between loyalty and fealty.  Loyalty is not fealty.  But<BR>
fealty _is_ loyalty, albeit _intense_ loyalty (OK, that's "intense _fidelity_"<BR>
acording to Merriam-Webster.)<BR>
<BR>
As to the Consul scenario, on re-reading it it does seem a bit radical.  I should<BR>
have made it more clear that I was thinking of a world with _something_ going on<BR>
that might make travel for Imperial Citizens dangerous.  Perhaps an extremely high<BR>
law level or perhaps a rebellion going on.  ( Think US Citizens in Iran or Iraq.)<BR>
In that situation, the Consul would take an interest.  He could easily know when the<BR>
Citizen had left the starport and if he had re-entered.  On a normal world, comings<BR>
and goings of Citizens would not be tracked (Think US citizen at home in US).<BR>
<BR>
WKH<BR>
<BR>
Bruce Johnson wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> On Sun, 6 Aug 2000, Bill Hopper wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> > Bruce makes some very good points below regarding Imperial Citizenship. I'll<BR>
> > add a few more points.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > I agree with previous posters that one requirement for a world to be a member<BR>
> > state would be that it would not restrict it's citizens from becoming Citizens<BR>
> > of the Imperium.  But even without this, the bar to becoming an Imperial<BR>
> > Citizen would be so high that very few would be able to make it.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > Since the Imperium is a feudal society, I would expect that , at a minimum,<BR>
> > you would have travel to and be presented at an Imperial Court in order to<BR>
> > become a Citizen.  That could be an adventure in and of itself.  If you were<BR>
> > of a Noble family, the way would be open, but if not, you might have great<BR>
> > difficulty.  Bribery skill might be very useful in geting onto the list of<BR>
> > Court business.<BR>
><BR>
> Snippo<BR>
><BR>
> > Your 'status' as an Imperial Citizen would depend on who you were 'in fealty'<BR>
> > to.<BR>
><BR>
> Nice scenario, alas, canon states that anyone born on an Imperial world is<BR>
> automatically granted citizenship.<BR>
><BR>
> Being an Imperial citizen doesn't get you a whole lot, though. You get to<BR>
> travel freely through Imperial starports, though non-citizens do as well,<BR>
> you get to pay taxes, though it's unlikely that any world lists a line on<BR>
> their form 1040 saying 'Imperial Taxes'.<BR>
><BR>
> It's up to the noble/and or system leaders to determine how their Imperial<BR>
> tax bite (whatever it is) is generated. It's been demonstrated that<BR>
> getting no more than a few credits a year is probably sufficient to keep<BR>
> the Imperium awash in cash.<BR>
><BR>
> Nobles support their station, palaces, personal guard, etc, from their<BR>
> fiefs and/or other business ventures. This includes the Emperor, (at least<BR>
> IMTU). Of course, the fact the the Emeperor owns 'The Emperor's shares' in<BR>
> damn nearly every corporation in the 3I, I'd suggest that the Emperor can<BR>
> pretty much spend anything they want.<BR>
><BR>
> What you're describing is, in part, the process of becoming a Noble. Only<BR>
> nobles swear fealty; that is a very specific term, and is not the same as<BR>
> swearing an oath of loyalty, which is what you do if you're in one of the<BR>
> Imperial services and are not already a noble.<BR>
><BR>
> Finally<BR>
><BR>
> ><BR>
> > The chief benefit, as I see it, of being an Imperial Citizen, would be that<BR>
> > _somebody_ was keeping track of your well-being.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > "Consul, here is your daily Imperial Citizens report.  I'd like to call your<BR>
> > attention to number 4.  His Imperial ID has not been used for the last 3<BR>
> > days.  Considering the local situation, should I open an inquiry with the<BR>
> > local government?"<BR>
> ><BR>
> > "Hmmm.  Let me see." Consul checks Fealty List.  "He _is_ in fealty to the<BR>
> > _Emperor_.  He must be somebody.  Go ahead and open the inquiry."<BR>
><BR>
> This implies a vastly more intrusive Imperium than even the Ziru Sirkka.<BR>
> Citizens of the Imperium are routinely and regularly tracked in their<BR>
> daily comings and goings? There are ID checks everywhere? This is<BR>
> automated to the point that every Consul gets a daily report??<BR>
><BR>
> Even if this isn't a corrupt and opressive system, Big Mommy isn't much of<BR>
> an improvement on Big Brother...<BR>
><BR>
> "Never mind, go away. These are not the droids you're looking for" ;-)<BR>
><BR>
> Bruce Johnson<BR>
> University of Arizona<BR>
> College of Pharmacy<BR>
> Information Technology Group<BR>
><BR>
> Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 16:03:04 -0500<BR>
From: tim@premier.net<BR>
Subject: Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
<BR>
Tommy Grav<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Hei all,<BR>
Snip.<BR>
> <BR>
> What I'm most concearned about is the lack of rules using the <BR>
> designs when they are finished. These rules should be laid out <BR>
> before the design rules are made. What are the combat rules the<BR>
> ships are designed for? What are the sensor rules? What are the<BR>
> computer rules? The first step must be to agree on this before <BR>
> stepping on. There is no way to make a standard set of design <BR>
> rules that make the ships useable to all ship combat rules <BR>
> available and so on. <BR>
> <BR>
> My take on the sequence of the project is:<BR>
>    1. Decide the game mechanics rules to use.<BR>
>    2. Make the design rules.<BR>
>    3. Make conversion rules to other game mechanic rules<BR>
>  <BR>
<BR>
These are some very good points. I espically like the cross over <BR>
rules idea.  If this could be achived then we can free up tons of <BR>
starships that are not in the same design system.  <BR>
Tim Reynolds<BR>
tim@premier.net <BR>
225-334-5063<BR>
www.premier.net/~tim<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Knowledge, information, power, words...Flying through<BR>
the air, invisible<BR>
And suddenly the world was tap dancing on quicksand.<BR>
In that case, the prize went to the best dancer<BR>
Terry Pratchett: The Fifth Elephant <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 16:31:57 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
<BR>
On 08/06/00 at 10:25 PM,  Tommy Grav <tommy.grav@astro.uio.no> said:<BR>
<BR>
>What I'm most concearned about is the lack of rules using the  designs<BR>
>when they are finished. These rules should be laid out  before the design<BR>
>rules are made. What are the combat rules the ships are designed for?<BR>
>What are the sensor rules? What are the computer rules? The first step<BR>
>must be to agree on this before  stepping on. There is no way to make a<BR>
>standard set of design  rules that make the ships useable to all ship<BR>
>combat rules  available and so on. <BR>
<BR>
>My take on the sequence of the project is:<BR>
>   1. Decide the game mechanics rules to use.<BR>
>   2. Make the design rules.<BR>
>   3. Make conversion rules to other game mechanic rules<BR>
<BR>
I agree with Tommy on this.  Ian has something in mind, it looks<BR>
like it might be HG-like from the example he's shown us, but HG-like<BR>
isn't the same as concrete rules.  I suggest we have *2* game<BR>
mechanics decided before we try producing the actual design rules:<BR>
1 set of game mechanics should be aimed at wargamers and concentrate<BR>
on Fleet/Squadron actions, and 1 set of game mechanics should be<BR>
aimed at roleplayers and concentrate on small actions between 2 to 4<BR>
ships total.<BR>
<BR>
  Questions:<BR>
    1.  Are ranges going to be abstract or actual?<BR>
    <BR>
    2.  Will all weapons/sensors use the same ranges, or will<BR>
        different weapons/sensors have different ranges? <BR>
        <BR>
    3.  Will weapons/sensors have different effects (damage/ability<BR>
        to detect) based on range?  How will that work?<BR>
        <BR>
    4.  Will Armor be degraded on all surface hits, degraded only on<BR>
        penetration, or not be degraded at all?<BR>
    <BR>
    5.  Will hits on external features destroy then or degrade them?<BR>
 <BR>
    6.  What about internal hits?  Does a hit on the power plant<BR>
        destroy it or reduce it and by how much...percents, points,<BR>
        what?  If it's points is it 1 to 1 with weapons..all<BR>
        weapons, or do some types do more than that?<BR>
        <BR>
    7.  How are skills going to be integrated into this?  For<BR>
        roleplaying purposes operator skill needs to be important<BR>
        for sensors, computers, weapons, piloting and so on,<BR>
        realistic or not.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 15:09:23 -0700<BR>
From: "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com><BR>
Subject: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
<BR>
With great trepidation I will raise my hand for navigation aids (table 187).  I may also do flight <BR>
avionics (table 188) as well.  Some years ago I worked as an engineer for the depot <BR>
maintenance of aircraft navigation systems, so I know this area.<BR>
<BR>
With that I now have additional questions:<BR>
(1)  I know that it has been posted to the list in the past, but I don't have it available.  Would <BR>
someone be able to relate Tech Level to Terra Historical Time?<BR>
(2)  What is the value of a credit ?  Is it equal to one US Dollar in 1977 ?  Since I am going to <BR>
try and convert historical costs to credits I would also be interested in inflation figures pre and <BR>
post 1977.  Is there a standard for the FFSv3 project ? <BR>
<BR>
The present cost figures in table 187 (navigation aids) are laughable.  An inertial navigation <BR>
system for the F-4 and F-111 were somewhere around $ 40+ k (1960s dollars).  The inertial <BR>
navigation system for the B-52 was a more complex affair and cost around $120+ k (1960s <BR>
dollars).  The inertial navigation system for the Peacekeeper ICBM cost around $ 12.5 million <BR>
(1980s dollars).  The Minuteman ICBM INS upgrade cost roughly $1-2 million (1990s dollars). <BR>
The aircraft systems above were electromechanical affairs and needed a dedicated separate <BR>
computer (also electromechanical).  Laser based systems became available in the 70s and <BR>
were installed on the F-15 and F-16.  These laser systems are much cheaper than the <BR>
previous electromechanical systems.  The Peacekeeper and Minuteman Upgrade were laser <BR>
based systems and also required an additional dedicated computer.  Present day land <BR>
navigation systems (Lexus automobile) use a GPS receiver and cost several thousand dollars, <BR>
although that price includes the computer and associated geographic software.  Whether or <BR>
not the cost figures for magnetic compass, gyrocompass or transponder are reasonable I am <BR>
not sure.  <BR>
<BR>
The table gives a cost of 5 kcr for both inertial navigation systems and satellite positioning <BR>
systems.  Satellite positioning is obviously referring to a receiver for a Global Positioning <BR>
System.  At techlevel 10 there is something called an integrated IGS positioning.  I don't know <BR>
what IGS stands for, but using table 188 as a guide it would be Inertial/Gravitational System <BR>
Positioning.  This doesn't make any sense.  An inertial navigation system is based on <BR>
measuring the change in acceleration and as we all know gravity is acceleration.  So, the <BR>
TL10 system should be dropped.  Beyond TL8 it is hard to estimate what forms of navigation <BR>
will arise.  The inertial and GPS systems are both pretty much the ultimate.  Additional, tech <BR>
levels will just reduce volume, mass, power, and price.<BR>
<BR>
A vehicle, aircraft, or ship will also have a control system.  Looking at the figures for table 185 <BR>
(the errata) it seems clear that navigation aids volume, mass,  & power will be in the noise <BR>
level compared with the control system.  So, is there any utility to developing accurate figures <BR>
for these attributes ?  Should we just assume that navigation aids volume, mass, power is <BR>
incorporated within the equations for control systems ?  For ICBMs since they don't have a <BR>
control system it is a different matter, but other than ICBMs most missiles will be using a <BR>
seeker rather an inertial/GPS system.<BR>
<BR>
Spacecraft Navigation (in-system & jump):  Navigation beacons will of course be important.  <BR>
However, this cannot be their only source of positioning information.  During wartime, for <BR>
example, worlds will not want to make this information available to potential aggressors.  The <BR>
only alternative will be some sort of inertial navigation system (INS).  The accuracy of an INS <BR>
degrades with time and needs to be periodically recalibrated and this calibration happens very <BR>
frequently.  In the absence of navigation beacons it is likely that the ships sensors will need to <BR>
be used to obtain astrographic information to generate an initial position and to perform the <BR>
periodic recalibration.  The INS will then generate the velocity, acceleration, and position <BR>
information.  Given the timescales involved in Traveller spacecraft navigation (days, weeks) as <BR>
opposed to aircraft (hours), spacecraft INS will be well beyond any current aircraft or ICBM <BR>
system.  Given perfection an INS can be made very small (on a computer chip even), but <BR>
given physical imperfections the only way to compensate would be to make the system large. <BR>
 My initial idea is to make it the size of a PEMS array.  It is difficult to generate an initial <BR>
position when one is in motion, so this is a good reason for ships to jump into a system with <BR>
zero velocity and zero acceleration.  An INS operates by measuring the change in <BR>
acceleration, so this means the g-comp fields will interfere with its operation.  The INS will <BR>
need to be in an a special area that is not g-compensated.  Rather than doing this it might be <BR>
possible for the computer to compensate for the g-compensation, but I think this approach <BR>
would introduce too many errors.  Additionally, I think even with a special area designed to be <BR>
free of g-compensation there will still be g-comp leaks.  It may be impossible to overcome it.<BR>
Finally, I think to accurately plot a jump exit point one needs to have an accurate position fix <BR>
on the jump entry point.<BR>
<BR>
Are there Traveller rules on navigation ? Both in-system and jump ?<BR>
<BR>
Navigation Skill:  Computers will of course be the mainstay of navigation.  Let the computer do <BR>
all the complex calculations.  However, (1) what if the computer goes on the blink, data <BR>
becomes corrupted, etc., and (2) battle-damage/breakdowns of the computer, sensor, INS.  In <BR>
the above the navigator will need to be able to do it by hand.  The navigator will need to know <BR>
how to use a telescope, sextant (?), astrolabe (?), etc. to determine the initial position and <BR>
also compute both an in-system and jump course.  Naturally, this is only for an emergency, <BR>
but he will need to know it !!! <BR>
<BR>
I will do some background research and generate a table on navigation equipment.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Free E-mail and Homepage at http://www.prontomail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2893<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (rly-ye04.mail.aol.com [172.18.151.201]) by air-ye02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Aug 2000 18:11:31 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-ye04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Aug 2000 18:11:13 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA92196;<BR>
	Sun, 6 Aug 2000 18:11:04 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 6 Aug 2000 18:10:49 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA92155<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 6 Aug 2000 18:10:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 18:10:49 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008062210.SAA92155@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2893<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2894</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/6/00 4:31:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Sunday, August 6 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2894<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: FFSv3 and software<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: Ship size limits<BR>
Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
Fw: FFS3 computers<BR>
Re: FFS3 project<BR>
Fw: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Fw: Radiators in space<BR>
re: FFSv3 and software<BR>
Re: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
Fw: Ship size limits<BR>
Fw: Big Ship Questions<BR>
Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
Re: Example of the modular system<BR>
Re: FFS3 Example of Modular System<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 15:14:35 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
At 3:51 PM -0500 8/5/00, eris@pcola.gulf.net wrote:<BR>
>On 08/05/00 at 01:04 AM,  "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu> said:<BR>
><BR>
>  >How do ships dodge?  Do they move out of the way or spin on an axis.  I<BR>
>  >would guess the former since it will dodge a shot at the center which the<BR>
>  >latter won't (more dead on the shot is the more useless spinning<BR>
>  >is).  If that is true, then ship accel will be the only determiner<BR>
>  >of accel.<BR>
><BR>
>Ship accel will be the only determiner of agility...right? <g><BR>
><BR>
>Say, a ship has a 3 g Mdrive.  If, during a turn, her pilot<BR>
>allocates 2 g to movement and 1 g to "dodging around."  Is that<BR>
>going to make targetting (and hitting) her more difficult?<BR>
><BR>
>What would that "dodging around" consist of and how would it be<BR>
>accomplished?  Well, if it involved lateral movements off her<BR>
>course, then the rapidity she could turn on her axis *would* come<BR>
>into play.  Ships with shorter axis could turn more quickly having<BR>
>more time during a turn for the effects of their dodging movement to<BR>
>take effect...right?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
But would you spend time rotating?  By definition, rotation will<BR>
not move a section dead center on your ship out of the way of<BR>
anything.  If you move laterally, you move everything out of<BR>
the way....<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
>Here's a 2 dimensional representation of a ship with 3 g accel<BR>
>moving straight ahead...<BR>
><BR>
>   ____________________<BR>
>   O-----|-----|-----()<BR>
>   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<BR>
><BR>
>...it is going to be in the () at the end of it's move.<BR>
><BR>
>If it allocates 2 to forward and 1 to dodging...<BR>
>            ___<BR>
>   ___---~~~ ()<BR>
>   O----|----()<BR>
>   ~~~---___ ()<BR>
>            ~~~<BR>
...it is going to be in *one* of the () at the end of it's move.<BR>
<BR>
This is moving laterally, not rotating.  You need accel perpendicular <BR>
to the direction of travel.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 15:48:49 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
At 10:34 PM -0300 8/5/00, Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
>         Leonard has posted a sphere-of-probability analysis some <BR>
>time ago, based on speed vs ship dimensions as a way of determining <BR>
>how far a ship could have moved in the "flight time" before a laser <BR>
>pulse arrives.  The short version is "not far enough", even if you <BR>
>are a fighter.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
If the shot was going to be dead on.  OTOH, evasion will mean<BR>
that other shots may miss.  That will be of some use.<BR>
<BR>
Also, assuming ships are a light second apart, a ship can move<BR>
60 meters, at only 3 G's, before the sensor data goes out and<BR>
the return shot comes back.  Not many shis are more than 60 meters<BR>
in all dimensions.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>         If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, <BR>
>you simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion. <BR>
>Lasers are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too <BR>
>mind bogglingly big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
<BR>
Are rof's that fast reasonable?  I don't know....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 17:53:27 -0500 (CDT)<BR>
From: Gregory Carl Kettler <gckettle@midway.uchicago.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3 and software<BR>
<BR>
On Sun, 6 Aug 2000, Robert Snyder wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Additionally, when we develop FFSv3 we need to assume that the user is NOT a weapons <BR>
> expert, naval architect, vehicle designer, engineer, or scientist.  The current FFSv2 makes too <BR>
> many assumptions (perhaps inadvertantly) on the user's background.  For example, what the <BR>
> heck is a bullpup configuration ?  I know that many of you know what this is about, but I have <BR>
> no idea.<BR>
<BR>
Providing definitions certainly doesn't hurt a technical architecture<BR>
sourcebook.  After all, I only learned the definition of bullpup from the<BR>
sidebar in FF&S1.  Perhaps with a longer playtesting period and/or editors<BR>
who cared, FF&S2 would have had similar explanations.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 15:56:35 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 9:01 PM -0800 8/5/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  > How do ships dodge?  Do they move out of the way or spin on an<BR>
>  > axis.  I would guess the former since it will dodge a shot<BR>
>  > at the center which the latter won't (more dead on the shot<BR>
>  > is the more useless spinning is).  If that is true, then ship<BR>
>  > accel will be the only determiner of accel.<BR>
><BR>
>If they are under power, then changing the direction the ship points<BR>
>will also change the direction it is moving. But not all that fast.<BR>
<BR>
This might be a difference between MT and CT.  In CT ships<BR>
can thrust in any direction.  Do they have to actually swivel<BR>
around in MT to change direction?  (Seems a bit crude).<BR>
<BR>
>Given that it takes *seconds* for even 6g to move the ship far enough<BR>
>to matter, dodging is apt to be a matter of varying accel by a small<BR>
>amount (because dropping it very much make you too easy to hit), and<BR>
>making course changes at random intervals (a few seconds).<BR>
<BR>
At 6Gs you can move 60 meters in 2 seconds.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 15:59:30 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 9:21 PM -0800 8/5/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  > But didn't we just establish that there is no thermodynamic<BR>
>  > restriction?  If you can do it at double the area, it is<BR>
>  > thermodynamically possible.  Then it just becomes a matter<BR>
>  > of doing the same thing a different way and just becuase we<BR>
>  > can't do it now doesn't mean it isn't possible at higher TLs.<BR>
><BR>
>I disagree. The energy per unit area at a given temp is fixed by<BR>
>thermodynamics, just like the spectrum. Raising it without changing the<BR>
>spectrum or raising the temp is gonna take us back to "non-thermal"<BR>
>regime...<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I don't see how it can be.  If I take a heat sink and put out<BR>
x photons, the change in energies are the same if goes through<BR>
a 2 m2 fin or by any other process.  I think the per unit area<BR>
_black body_ radiation is fixed (by various physical processes)<BR>
but I don't think thermodynamics say you can't do the same thing<BR>
another way....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:23:27 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations and budgets<BR>
<BR>
> From: Hans Rancke-Madsen <rancke@diku.dk><BR>
> Subject: Re: Ships, fleets, populations, and budgets<BR>
><BR>
> [Note: There are some peculiar effects from this arrangement, most notably<BR>
> that the world that contributes most to the Imperium's defense problems<BR>
(by<BR>
> being less able to defend itself) pays the least. I would suggest that<BR>
> instead the Imperium gets 1% of GWP, period. This would work out more or<BR>
> the same (30% of 3% is ~1%)]<BR>
<BR>
I actually turned this on it's head.<BR>
<BR>
One of the big advantages of the Imperium over the Long Night was that you<BR>
needed to spend a lot less of defence. More resources were thus available<BR>
for investment, education, consumption of luxury goods and similar things<BR>
that help interstellar trade along.<BR>
<BR>
The Imperium thus subtly encourages you to spend less on defense (and thus<BR>
rely on it more - can you imagine an unarmed world leaving the Imperium ?).<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:34:53 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Fw: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
Charles asked me to forward this.<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "Charles R Hensley" <res04u7k@gte.net><BR>
To: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 8:31 AM<BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> Frank G. Pitt wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >Trevor, Peter wrote :<BR>
> >> Eris wrote:<BR>
> >> > I'm focused on roleplaying, not wargaming.  Character skills<BR>
> >> > *have* to matter in operations, and I want a PC to have to<BR>
> >> > worry about juggling software into and out of the computer<BR>
> >> > system.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Didn't see the original, but while I agree with Eris' aim of having<BR>
> PC's<BR>
> >make decisions, juggling software does not make sense in anything but a<BR>
> <BR>
> >jury-rigged ship, I have to agree<BR>
> >with Peter on the swapping of software.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >No modern aircraft changes software in flight, that only happens at<BR>
> >overhauls.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >I very much doubt that this will get _worse_ in the future, in other<BR>
> words,<BR>
> >not only do I suspect software will not be juggled in flight, but it<BR>
> will be<BR>
> >installed when the ship is built and will not change unless there is a<BR>
> major<BR>
> >change to the ship's configuration, such as the addition of turrets<BR>
> where<BR>
> >there weren't any.<BR>
> <BR>
> Program swapping is not a good idea.  No ship should recieve a<BR>
> spaceworthiness certificate if it cannot run all required software<BR>
> simotainiously.<BR>
> <BR>
> But what we may need is three levels of operation for each piece of<BR>
> software (normal, degraded{allow fewer clock cycles, less fequent<BR>
> interupts, etc}, and boosted{allow more clock cycles, etc.}) and allow<BR>
> players to degrade some programs to boost others.  This can be done<BR>
> today on some computer systems, notably Amiga and Unix.<BR>
> <BR>
> Charles<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:40:33 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 project<BR>
<BR>
> From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
> Subject: Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
<stuff snipped><BR>
<BR>
I am thinking the rules for space are going to be the Bruce Macintosh bundle<BR>
of the Definitive Sensor Rules and the Military Combat System.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:37:13 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Fw: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
Charles asked me to forward this.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "Charles R Hensley" <res04u7k@gte.net><BR>
To: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 8:31 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> >Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 10:24:35 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
> >From: Anthony Jackson <ajackson@molly.iii.com><BR>
> <BR>
> ><BR>
> >Having seen the discussion so far, I think its time to stop for a<BR>
> moment<BR>
> and consider what we want from FFS3.  So, some questions:<BR>
> ><BR>
> >Do we want to discourage huge ships?  If so, how heavily?  Possible<BR>
> arguments<BR>
> >against large ships could include<BR>
> >   *Area limits for thruster plates<BR>
> <BR>
> yes I agree with this<BR>
> <BR>
> >   *Harsher radiator rules<BR>
> <BR>
> realistic, with advances for TL<BR>
> <BR>
> >   *Harsher structure requirements.<BR>
> <BR>
> somewhat.<BR>
> <BR>
> >   *Changing offense-defense ratios (if offense significantly outpowers<BR>
> <BR>
> > defense, you're likely to build multiple smaller craft).<BR>
> <BR>
> Again somewhat.<BR>
> <BR>
> >Do we want to encourage fighters?<BR>
> <BR>
> we need to define the roles of fighters better. sensor platforms, convoy<BR>
> <BR>
> duty, anti missle roles, etc.<BR>
> <BR>
> >Basically as above, plus<BR>
> >   *Adjust the rules for grav compensation?<BR>
> <BR>
> no, but defining what can be stacked.<BR>
> i.e. 2 grav compensattors  NO<BR>
>      G-comp + G-suit + G-couch + orientation + G-tollerant    OK<BR>
>      {In space combat terns (30min) these do not work as well as in<BR>
> aircraft times (sec.)  G-suit  +1 G, G-couch +1 G, orientation = certain<BR>
> orientations are better working conditions (g-force twords feet or<BR>
> back), G-tollerant = those with training or experience in high-G<BR>
> conditions (pilot skill, enviromental combat skill, high-G home world).}<BR>
> Thus fighters should be designed at 5G+GComp.  Remember that the combat<BR>
> turns are 20-30 minutes, NOT seconds<BR>
> <BR>
> >How powerful do we want sensors and stealth to be?<BR>
> >   DSR-style sensors are<BR>
> >   sufficiently powerful to make stealth mostly a non-factor in any<BR>
> major<BR>
> >   system.  This could be changed by either making sensors in general a<BR>
> <BR>
> bit<BR>
> >   less powerful, or by changing the scaling formula for sensors;<BR>
> either<BR>
> one<BR>
> >   can be handwaved into making sense relatively easily (for that<BR>
> matter,<BR>
> >   there's several possible sensor _upgrades_ which can be handwaved<BR>
> pretty<BR>
> >   easily too).<BR>
> <BR>
> >What is the relative importance of<BR>
> >   *Completeness.<BR>
> First<BR>
> <BR>
> >   *Technical accuracy.<BR>
> second<BR>
> <BR>
> >   *Quickness of use.<BR>
> third<BR>
> <BR>
> Charles<BR>
> Gearhead<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 08:34:30 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Fw: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
Charles asked me to forward this, as the list-server isnt co-operating with<BR>
him at the moment.<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Charles R Hensley" <res04u7k@gte.net><BR>
To: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 8:32 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Jones, Dean wrote:<BR>
><BR>
> >Don't radiators mostly work by conduction and convection within an<BR>
> >atmosphere? Sure, I guess there would be plenty of radiation from a big<BR>
><BR>
> >enough array, but wouldn't the efficiency of a radiator be severly<BR>
> limited<BR>
> >in a vaccuum, with only an average 4 Hydrogen atoms per square meter?<BR>
> >Physicists, please comment.<BR>
> ><BR>
><BR>
> Radiators in a vacuum are limited to black body radiation as a means to<BR>
> disipate heat.  FFS and FFS2 give modifiers for the use of radiators in<BR>
> an atmosphere.  The droplet radiators and the sail radiator have serious<BR>
><BR>
> problems in an atmosphere. Droplet: contamiation and loss of coolant.<BR>
> Sail: structural.<BR>
> But both would be very good in space (I believe that NASA<BR>
> has looked at both for a manned mission to mars)<BR>
><BR>
> Charles<BR>
> not a physicist, but a Mechanical Engineering Grad<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 00:09:43 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: re: FFSv3 and software<BR>
<BR>
At 18:10 -0400 6/8/00, "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com> wrote:<BR>
>I am doing it in Visual Basic 6.0 since it is a very productive <BR>
>language compared with C/C++<BR>
>and Java.  Java & C/C++ are higher performance languages, but that <BR>
>isn't very important for an<BR>
>application of this nature.<BR>
<BR>
Java has a massive advantage over Visual Basic in this sort of <BR>
application - Portability. You can run it on MacOS, Windows, <BR>
Linux.....<BR>
<BR>
Visual Basic is locked to Windows.<BR>
<BR>
>SD Mooney's comments on complexity, complexity is OK.  What is not <BR>
>OK are ambiguous,<BR>
>incomplete, and contradictory rules.<BR>
<BR>
Said complexity must be clearly laid out and organised, and logical <BR>
to ensure design programs are capable of being validated.<BR>
<BR>
>Additionally, when we develop FFSv3 we need to assume that the user <BR>
>is NOT a weapons<BR>
>expert, naval architect, vehicle designer, engineer, or scientist. <BR>
>The current FFSv2 makes too<BR>
>many assumptions (perhaps inadvertantly) on the user's background. <BR>
>For example, what the<BR>
>heck is a bullpup configuration ?  I know that many of you know what <BR>
>this is about, but I have<BR>
>no idea.<BR>
<BR>
Magazine for rifle behind the trigger (eg UK SA 80 as opposed to US M16),<BR>
<BR>
FFS3 needs a glossary and more explanation than FFS2.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 09:04:28 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
<BR>
> From: "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com><BR>
> Subject: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
><BR>
> With great trepidation I will raise my hand for navigation aids (table<BR>
187).  I may also do flight<BR>
> avionics (table 188) as well.  Some years ago I worked as an engineer for<BR>
the depot<BR>
> maintenance of aircraft navigation systems, so I know this area.<BR>
><BR>
> With that I now have additional questions:<BR>
> (1)  I know that it has been posted to the list in the past, but I don't<BR>
have it available.  Would<BR>
> someone be able to relate Tech Level to Terra Historical Time?<BR>
<BR>
Roughly ? WW2 was TL5-6. Vietnam was TL7. Modern is TL8, with a couple of<BR>
significant things missing.<BR>
<BR>
> (2)  What is the value of a credit ?  Is it equal to one US Dollar in 1977<BR>
?  Since I am going to<BR>
> try and convert historical costs to credits I would also be interested in<BR>
inflation figures pre and<BR>
> post 1977.  Is there a standard for the FFSv3 project ?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
Values for goods are all in local credits.<BR>
<BR>
I am working out of Striker. According to it, the US should have a GWP of<BR>
about Cr 9000 per year (local credits). From memory, that was pretty close<BR>
to per capita income in the US in 1977.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<really really cool stuff snipped><BR>
> Are there Traveller rules on navigation ? Both in-system and jump ?<BR>
<BR>
This is my call on it.<BR>
<BR>
In-system navigation is pretty trivial at high TLs. At least, say, compared<BR>
to what people used to do on Earth when sailing out of the sight of land<BR>
without all the neat modern kit.<BR>
<BR>
Jump navigation is more difficult. Basically, with a new, well maintained<BR>
ship, your Navigator basically has to run down the checklist and watch the<BR>
pretty lights. When things get ugly and a misjump may or may not occour,<BR>
thats when your Navigator (and your Engineer) earn their money with<BR>
heel-and-toe work, massaging the jump drives and power plant so that<BR>
disaster is avoided.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Navigation Skill:  Computers will of course be the mainstay of navigation.<BR>
Let the computer do<BR>
> all the complex calculations.  However, (1) what if the computer goes on<BR>
the blink, data<BR>
> becomes corrupted, etc., and (2) battle-damage/breakdowns of the computer,<BR>
sensor, INS.  In<BR>
> the above the navigator will need to be able to do it by hand.  The<BR>
navigator will need to know<BR>
> how to use a telescope, sextant (?), astrolabe (?), etc. to determine the<BR>
initial position and<BR>
> also compute both an in-system and jump course.  Naturally, this is only<BR>
for an emergency,<BR>
> but he will need to know it !!!<BR>
<BR>
Me, I think this is a good use for Bribery skill. Sure, the regs *say* you<BR>
need it, but no-one has used that stuff outside of recreation in, well,<BR>
centuries ...<BR>
<BR>
Finally, this is an excellent start Robert. The cost at higher TLs of nav<BR>
gear has always bugged me. Thank you for doing the work to fix it.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 09:06:11 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Fw: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
More Charles stuff.<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "Charles R Hensley" <res04u7k@gte.net><BR>
To: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 8:33 AM<BR>
Subject: RE: Ship size limits<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Steven Bonneville wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >Actually, the big ships help -- they capture a lot of Naval funding in<BR>
> >a few places.  To some extent, capital ship size in High Guard is<BR>
> driven<BR>
> >by spinal mounts.  Abolish spinal mounts.  Now it probably makes sense<BR>
> >to optimize for massive numbers of escort-scaled ships built around<BR>
> things<BR>
> >like missile-9 bays.  (It's not a question of "an AHL or a Kinunir",<BR>
> it's<BR>
> >a question of "an AHL or fifty Kinunirs".)  This has the disadvantage<BR>
> that<BR>
> >the Navy now has more ships to patrol with and harass players and so<BR>
> on.<BR>
> >Rather than the "AHL in the wrong system" you have "twenty Kinunirs<BR>
> here<BR>
> >and thirty in the wrong systems".<BR>
> <BR>
> EXACTLY.<BR>
> <BR>
> I don't want the Imperium to have that many ships.  I want the fleet off<BR>
> <BR>
> on manuevers somewhere<BR>
> <BR>
> Charles<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 09:06:29 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Fw: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
More Charles stuff.<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message ----- <BR>
From: "Charles R Hensley" <res04u7k@gte.net><BR>
To: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 8:33 AM<BR>
Subject: Re: Big Ship Questions<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> Ian could you please forward this to the TML<BR>
> Thanks  <BR>
> Charles<BR>
> <BR>
> sorry this reply is late<BR>
> <BR>
> John Snead wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> >The biggest RW ship anyone has mentioned is the Montana, which<BR>
> >weighs in at around 8,000 dtons.  How big (in dtons) is the largest<BR>
> >aircraft carrier anyone has ever built?<BR>
> <BR>
> OK here are some real large ships<BR>
> <BR>
> USS Nimitz<BR>
> disp. 98557 tons (metric)<BR>
> length: 332.85 m<BR>
> beam: 40.84 m<BR>
> flight deck width: 76.8 m<BR>
> <BR>
> Bulk Cargo freighters<BR>
> <BR>
> DWT:       172000 T     170974 T     171039 T     172904 T<BR>
> length:       289 m         278 m        289 m        289 m<BR>
> beam:          45 m          45 m         45 m         45 m<BR>
> D:           17.8 m       17.6 m       17.6 m       17.8 m<BR>
> freebd        6.2 m        6.2 m        6.2 m        6.3 m<BR>
> crew:                        22<BR>
> Trav dTon   23120         22055        22927       23216<BR>
> <BR>
> Container ships<BR>
> <BR>
> DWT:       81819 T       59984 T        55604 T           69285 T<BR>
> L:         299.9 m       292 m            294 m              280 m<BR>
> B:         40 m            32.2 m           32.2 m            39.8 m<BR>
> D:         14 m             13 m           12.6 m             14 m<BR>
> F:         9.9 m           8.2 m          8.4 m              9.6 m<BR>
> Cont:       5700            4062              4211            5250<BR>
> Trav dTon  21237 dT        14765 dT        14900 dT         19481 dT<BR>
> ext cont   +19316dT        +13766 dT       +14270 dT        +17792 dT<BR>
> <BR>
> Tankers:<BR>
> <BR>
> DWT:     300000 T      258000 T        258000 T        306009 T<BR>
> L:        332.9 m         318 m           325 m           333 m<BR>
> B:           60 m          60 m            60 m            58 m<BR>
> D:        18.75 m        18.8 m         18.96 m          22.2 m<BR>
> F:          9.8 m        11.5 m          10.6 m           9.1 m <BR>
> CargoVol:  340025m^3    326246m^3<BR>
> Crew:        38             34<BR>
> Trav dTon  43720 dT      42866 dT        43720 dT        44780 dT<BR>
> <BR>
> Trav dTon = bounding volume not including superstructure, should be<BR>
> close as these are streamlined boxes.<BR>
> <BR>
> Largest Cruise ship:<BR>
> Explorer of the Sea<BR>
> Royal Caribbean<BR>
>  length:   311 m<BR>
>  Beam:    38.7 m<BR>
>  Draft:     8.8 m<BR>
>  Crew:    1181<BR>
>  Passengers:  3114<BR>
>  15 decks above the waterline (at 3 m / deck = 45 m + 8.8 m = 53.8 m<BR>
> total height)<BR>
> <BR>
> Charles<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 16:15:18 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: Ship Size limits<BR>
<BR>
At 11:34 PM -0300 8/5/00, Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
>At 09:37 PM 7/30/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>They are excellent as pickets, targets covering capital ships and <BR>
>>killing escorts. They are also useful as missile defense, <BR>
>>particulerly if you use JTAS' expansions.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Dom<BR>
><BR>
>         Why do we care about any of these?<BR>
>         Pickets?  You can't mount a big enough sensor on 'em.<BR>
>         Capital Ships don't need fighter cover, since fighters can't <BR>
>hurt Capital Ships.<BR>
>         Killing Escorts?  Why bother?  The only thing a Capital Ship <BR>
>can't incinerate in one shot is another Capital Ship.<BR>
>         Missile Defense?  TL15 Dampers and Repulsors make this irrelevant.<BR>
>         At MCr 10 plus the man, fighters are *dumb* in the TL15 3i. <BR>
>Just the way it is, Supp-9 carrier designs not withstanding.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Actually, even with smaller sensors, fighters can spread out<BR>
and cover more territory.  Add in the fact that they have (in<BR>
GT at least) a smaller signature, the make very nice pickets.<BR>
<BR>
What can you do to other capitol ships?  Well the ship that<BR>
launched the fighters now can observe the enemy without being<BR>
seen itself and can do things like guide missiles in without<BR>
the enemy knowing where they are being shot at from.  Also,<BR>
fighters can be pressed into service in point defense also.<BR>
<BR>
What else can they do?  They can support attacks on ground<BR>
targets and they can help chase down small targets (smugglers,<BR>
the enemies pickets, etc.).  All, in all quite useful....<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 09:14:58 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: Example of the modular system<BR>
<BR>
> From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3 : Example of the Modular System<BR>
><BR>
> At 01:08 AM 8/6/00, you wrote:<BR>
> >They are going to be able to do so, with nothing more complicated than<BR>
> >adding, subtracting and multiplying.<BR>
> ><BR>
> >The module/High Guard-ish system will probably work something like this<BR>
...<BR>
><BR>
>          Ok, tentatively it looks reasonable.  That isn't any worse --<BR>
just<BR>
> different -- than HG.  Now, of course, the issue becomes how do I avoid<BR>
> invalidating all the custom designs I have done for TNEC.  Particularly<BR>
the<BR>
> deck plans.<BR>
<BR>
The ships probably arent going to be very different at the low levels.<BR>
<BR>
The only thing I can see changing are maneuver drives - and even then, most<BR>
of the changes will be with thruster plates taking up more external surface<BR>
area.<BR>
<BR>
The key is going to be the different starship design worksheets for each TL.<BR>
If you are building a TL11 ship, you dont need to know the rules for fusion<BR>
plants at TL9.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 09:27:58 +1000<BR>
From: "Katharine Whitchurch" <katts@globalfreeway.com.au><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 Example of Modular System<BR>
<BR>
> From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
> Subject: Re: FFS3 : Example of the Modular System<BR>
><BR>
> >1 Energy Point = 28 megawatts (this being roughly the energy needed<BR>
> >      by a 100 dton/jump-1 ship.  Coincidentally, it's also what a<BR>
> >      dton of TL9-12 fusion plant creates)<BR>
><BR>
> Couldn't convince you to just use MW's could I?  No, didn't think<BR>
> so.  <g> Okay, suppose we produce 37 MW, how do we rate it..1 EP, 2<BR>
> EP, 1.3 EP?  This is going to come up with the other approximations<BR>
> too.<BR>
><BR>
> >1 armour point = AF20 (the armour on a 'standard' civilian ship)<BR>
><BR>
> You're using toughness/density/price/power from the Material list in<BR>
> FFS2?  As above, how do you rate an armor value of 47...2, 2.35, 3?<BR>
> I won't harp on the point, but this is were modular designs get<BR>
> screwed compared to detailed designs.<BR>
<BR>
I'm going to be using the amended Material list. Who was in charge of<BR>
amending it again ?<BR>
<BR>
As to the shaving points thing, thats why the Big :o get the price discount.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> >1 damage point = DV20 (the penetration of a 'standard' civilian<BR>
> >      laser)<BR>
><BR>
> What is a 'standard' civilian laser..28 MW, 80 MW?  Whatever it<BR>
> takes to takes to do 20 DV?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
You got it. 30.8 megajoules, by my maths.<BR>
<BR>
> >1 maneuver point = 10 meganewtons (the thrust needed to push a<BR>
> >       1000t/100dton 'standard' ship at one gee)<BR>
><BR>
> When it comes time to *use* the design, don't you want this<BR>
> expressed in g's, not maneuver points?<BR>
<BR>
Well, yes. But not when you are working thru the design worksheet.<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> >1 surface unit = 60 m^2 (a 'standard' spherical civilian 100<BR>
> >       dton/1000t ship has 10 surface units)<BR>
><BR>
> >1 mass unit = 1000 t (about the mass of a 'standard' 100 dton ship)<BR>
><BR>
> Both of those are as good as any other ratios you could use.<BR>
><BR>
> Could I make a plea for some sort of "Structure" entry to cover<BR>
> internal bracing and compartmentalization?  The Internal Hit table<BR>
> would have an entry for reducing Structure, the way I'm assuming<BR>
> surface hits would be able to hit radiators, sensors, weapon mounts<BR>
> and armor.<BR>
><BR>
> A different view of your example...<BR>
><BR>
> 800 dton, TL12, Streamlined Dome.  Jump-3, Maneuver-4.  Armor:  200.<BR>
> Power Plant:  1120 MW (224 per jump number:  672 MW, 252 per g:<BR>
> 1008 MW, Other:  84 MW).  Area:  3220.  (Radiators:  2400, Available<BR>
> Area:  1020).  Available dTons:  405.  33.5m long, 33.5m wide, 17m<BR>
> high.<BR>
><BR>
> ...Is this harder to deal with? Less useful?  Why?<BR>
<BR>
Seriously, if you want that level of detail, dont use the Big List of Hulls.<BR>
You would build it yourself using the TL12 Starship worksheet.<BR>
<BR>
The Big List of Hulls is for people who go 'I want an armoured jump-3 800<BR>
dton destroyer. Then I want to shoe-horn a 100 dton Missile Bay into it,<BR>
plus a Small Miltary Sensor and 8 military laser turrets. Add enough sensors<BR>
for it to Run Dark at 3 gees, and then pad out the rest of the space with<BR>
staterooms for the Marine detachment'.<BR>
<BR>
The idea is that it should be a one-pass design system that comes within 5%<BR>
of the values of doing it in a detailed manner.<BR>
<BR>
Ian Whitchurch<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2894<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (rly-yb03.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.3]) by air-yb01.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:31:40 2000<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:31:14 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id TAA95566;<BR>
	Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:31:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:31:03 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id TAA95528<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:31:03 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:31:03 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008062331.TAA95528@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2894<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2895</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/6/00 10:07:43 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, August 7 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2895<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Traveller LARP (was Re: I'm happy) [long]<BR>
Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
Re: About Agility<BR>
FFS3 Weapon Limits? (was: Re: FFS3 Example of Modular System)<BR>
Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
RE: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
What Are the Fundamental Tenets of the Imperial Culture? (was Re: Imperial Citizens)<BR>
Re: FFS3 Weapon Limits? (was: Re: FFS3 Example of Modular System)<BR>
RE: EW Relevance to FFS3<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:40:07 -0400<BR>
From: Christopher Thrash <thrash@io.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller LARP (was Re: I'm happy) [long]<BR>
<BR>
>Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 20:06:56 +0300<BR>
>From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jussi_Kenkkil=E4?= <Jussi.Kenkkila@helsinki.fi><BR>
>Subject: I'm happy<BR>
><BR>
>I just got back from Ropecon, the biggest finnish RPG-con. Steve Jackson<BR>
was there, and I liked his guest-speech. During the speech he mentioned<BR>
Traveller-LARPs, mainly their scarcity. <BR>
<BR>
I don't know the project or the person you're talking about (I'd like to,<BR>
if anyone else does). SJ probably has no idea, but I posted a draft of my<BR>
Live Action Traveller on JTAS about a week ago. Keith Johnson has said that<BR>
he may try it out at GenCon; I hope so.<BR>
<BR>
Baron Munchausen also has great potential for Traveller, for those of you<BR>
familiar with the good Baron's game.<BR>
<BR>
Here is my draft, for the amusement of the list. The goal is to test it,<BR>
expand it with an original scenario, and submit it as a JTAS article:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Live Action Traveller<BR>
Copyright (c) 2000 Christopher B. Thrash<BR>
<BR>
Here is a quick-and-dirty version of Live Action Traveller. It is mostly <BR>
designed for one-shot, convention-type scenarios (_Murder on Arcturus <BR>
Station_ springs readily to mind), but could be used to provide an <BR>
appropriate interlude in an ongoing campaign -- grand balls, high-level <BR>
negotiations, and common rooms in jumpspace are all good candidates. <BR>
Remember that live action games are very grainy and low-res compared to <BR>
pen-and-pencil. When in doubt: improvise, adapt, overcome.<BR>
<BR>
If anyone is inspired to try it out, I'd love to hear the results.<BR>
<BR>
(1) Create characters using Really Classic Traveller: Book 1 or Supplement <BR>
4 (or equivalent), only. (The number of skills in later versions makes <BR>
them unwieldy. Conversions are up to the referee to allow or not.)<BR>
<BR>
(2) Convert characteristics to skills, using the following table:<BR>
<BR>
Score     Skill<BR>
1-3       (-1)<BR>
4-A         0<BR>
B           1<BR>
C           2<BR>
D           3<BR>
E           4<BR>
F           5<BR>
<BR>
So Social 7 becomes Social-0, while Strength B becomes Strength-1.<BR>
<BR>
(3) Record each character on a 3x5 card. <BR>
<BR>
(a) At the top, write the character's name and UPP. Record titles, ranks, <BR>
and former occupations normally.<BR>
<BR>
(b) List skills, including 0-level skills, in two columns. Next to each <BR>
skill, make a number of open boxes equal to the skill level. If the Skill <BR>
is (-1), make one box but in red or with a double outline to distinguish <BR>
it. Optional: increase or decrease the skill level of weapons skills to <BR>
reflect advantageous or disadvantageous Strength or Dexterity.<BR>
<BR>
(c) At the bottom, write "Wounds" and make a row of boxes. There should be <BR>
six boxes, plus the total of Strength, Dexterity, and Endurance skills<BR>
(note that this might be a negative number). Divide the row into thirds, <BR>
and lable them "Light", "Serious", and "Critical".<BR>
<BR>
(4) Skill use is based on tasks. Task difficulties are set by the referee.<BR>
<BR>
(a) A task is simple if its difficulty is at or below the character's <BR>
skill level; simple tasks are accomplished automatically. The more the <BR>
character's skill exceeds the requirement, the easier, more completely, or <BR>
more impressively he can accomplish the task.<BR>
<BR>
(b) More difficult tasks, or those that need to be executed with style or <BR>
finesse, require checking off one box of the requisite skill for each <BR>
level of difference.<BR>
<BR>
(c) If two characters oppose one another on a task, the difficulty for <BR>
each is the opponent's skill. Each character can check off boxes to add to <BR>
their effective skill (thus increasing their chances and their opponent's <BR>
difficulty at the same time).<BR>
<BR>
(d) Jack-of-all-Trades skill acts as a Skill-0 in any skill the character <BR>
does not otherwise possess; however, only one box may be checked on a <BR>
single task.<BR>
<BR>
(e) The referee has the option to use a (-1) skill *against* the character <BR>
once per session; that box is marked off on the character card and cannot <BR>
be used again. <BR>
<BR>
Tasks:<BR>
Level     Difficulty<BR>
(-1)      Easy<BR>
0         Average<BR>
1         Routine	<BR>
2         Hard<BR>
3         Very Hard<BR>
4         Formidable<BR>
5         Impossible<BR>
<BR>
(5) Attacks in combat are tasks. The referee must set the difficulty <BR>
levels, making generous use of situational modifiers (both tactical and <BR>
environmental). Hitting a stationary, man-sized target at effective range <BR>
in daylight when there are no distractions is a Routine task; hitting a <BR>
fleeting target under cover in a dark alley while being shot at in turn is <BR>
probably Formidable. [Most real combats are decided by a very small number <BR>
of actual hits, usually when one side or the other runs low on ammunition.]<BR>
<BR>
(6) Weapons and hand-to-hand attacks do one wound for each die of damage; <BR>
each wound received marks off a box on the victim's wound row.<BR>
<BR>
(a) "Light" wounds have no effect on the character.<BR>
<BR>
(b) "Serious" wounds render the character unable to fight, and possibly <BR>
unconscious.<BR>
<BR>
(c) "Critical" wounds render the character unconscious, and in real danger <BR>
of dying without prompt medical attention.<BR>
<BR>
(d) Once all wounds have been marked off, the character is dead. Depending <BR>
on the medical technology available, they may still be revived (referee's <BR>
call, based on their companion's actions).<BR>
<BR>
(7) All boxes are restored at the beginning of a new playing session, <BR>
unless the referee declares the session to be a continuation of the <BR>
previous one. (This is appropriate for cliff-hanger situations, and should <BR>
not be abused.) It is recommended that players start off each session with <BR>
a new character card, and maintain a separate character sheet between <BR>
sessions.<BR>
<BR>
(8) Since this is Really Classic Traveller, the only way that characters <BR>
improve in skills is if the referee allows it. Such a system is at his <BR>
complete discretion.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 18:53:36 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
<BR>
On 08/06/00 at 04:31 PM,  eris@pcola.gulf.net said:<BR>
<BR>
>>My take on the sequence of the project is:<BR>
>>   1. Decide the game mechanics rules to use.<BR>
>>   2. Make the design rules.<BR>
>>   3. Make conversion rules to other game mechanic rules<BR>
<BR>
In fact, let me tell you *exactly* what I want...<BR>
<BR>
  An armor value that scales from personal to ship<BR>
<BR>
  A damage value for weapons that scale from personal to ship<BR>
  <BR>
  A damage resistance or hit points on equipment that scales from<BR>
    personal to ship<BR>
    <BR>
  The same mechanic for armor, damage and damge resistance for all<BR>
    equipment from personal to ship, (and if it's the same as for<BR>
    the characters I'd consider that a big advantage).<BR>
    <BR>
    ( As an aside, GURPS...and GURPS Traveller does this much, so<BR>
      something compatable with that would be a good starting point.<BR>
      Neither FFS do, although FFS1 comes close. )<BR>
      <BR>
  ...and the hard part...<BR>
  <BR>
  A dirt *simple* Ranging procedure!  Simpler than DSR, Simpler than<BR>
    GURPS, but still capable of giving me a table that I can print<BR>
    on my Ship/Vehicle/Weapon sheet.  The table needs to be<BR>
    something like.<BR>
    <BR>
 Task-->  Auto   Easy     Rout/Avg  Diff    Form     Stagg   Hopeless<BR>
 <BR>
                 Very                                 Very     <BR>
 Range--> Close  Short     Short   Medium    Long     Long    Extreme<BR>
 Device   0 - a  a+1 - b  b+1 - c  c+1 - d  d+1 - e  e+1 - f  f+1 - g<BR>
 <BR>
 If we rate each device against a set of standard Task Levels we can<BR>
 use the BITS conversions to pick target numbers and once target<BR>
 numbers are picked then CT, MT, TNE, T4, and GT can *all* use them.<BR>
 <BR>
 IMPORTANT!!!  Having a standard set of task descriptors is what<BR>
 allows easy conversion. Please, please, use the tasks!  <BR>
 <BR>
Okay here are some off the cuff examples, not intended to represent<BR>
any actual device, just to show what I mean.  <BR>
<BR>
The 30,000 km hexes in my examples, are just a suggestion.  They<BR>
give a 30 min turn and reasonably small numbers.  If someone is<BR>
*insistant* on a 50,000 km scale, then either use 30 or 40 minutes.<BR>
If you want shorter turns, 10 minutes match with 3,000 km and 20<BR>
minutes matches with 10,000 km.  None of the above are perfect, but<BR>
of the choices I think, 30,000km/30min works best. <BR>
<BR>
Anyway, here are the examples...<BR>
<BR>
                  Very                            Very     <BR>
          Close   Short   Short   Medium   Long   Long   Extreme<BR>
 PEMS-12    0      3         6      11      16     21      26<BR>
  max range 2      5        10      15      20     25      30<BR>
 <BR>
Where the ranges are 30,000 km hexes and the detection task is:<BR>
<BR>
  To Detect a target with a particular sensor.<BR>
    (Difficulty for a given range) < Sensor skill + DM's<BR>
    <BR>
    DMs:  Target Size, Previous detection, Target Active, etc (and <BR>
            frankly there shouldn't be too many)<BR>
<BR>
  To Lock a target with a Passive sensor.<BR>
    (2 Difficulties higher for a given range) < Sensor skill + DM's<BR>
    <BR>
    DMs:  Target Size, Previous lock, Programs, etc (and <BR>
            frankly there shouldn't be too many)<BR>
<BR>
  Example:  A skill 12 Sensor Operator tries to detect and lock a<BR>
            Size 3 ship at 300,000 km with the above sensor.<BR>
  <BR>
            Detect:  This is Short Range for *this* sensor so it is,<BR>
            (Routine or Average) < 12+3<BR>
  <BR>
            Lock: Short+2 is Medium for this sensor so it is,<BR>
            (Difficult) < 12+3<BR>
            <BR>
                                  Very                        Very<BR>
             damage    HP  Close  Short  Short  Medium  Long  Long<BR>
 Laser-250   5dx50(2)  20    2      4      8      16     30*   na<BR>
  (atmosphere)              1km    2km    4km     8km    16km  40km*<BR>
  * absolute max range<BR>
<BR>
    Example:  A skill 12 Gunner tries to hit a Size 3 ship with 400<BR>
              armor at 300,000 km with the above sensor, he has a +2<BR>
              Predict program running<BR>
<BR>
              To Hit: This is Medium Range for this weapon so it is<BR>
              (Difficult) < 12+3+2. <BR>
              <BR>
              If the weapon hits, roll 5dx50(2)...875. <BR>
                 875 Surface hit (roll)...Laser Turret-100hp (100hp)<BR>
                 775 Armor...400/2 (200 hp)<BR>
                 575 Internal hit (roll) Power Plant-1200hp (575hp)<BR>
                 <BR>
              This hit destroyed a Laser Turret and damaged one<BR>
              Power Plant (might want to have damage/destroy numbers<BR>
              or blow though for equipment).  It penetrated the<BR>
              Armor, so the armor is reduced by some number...let's<BR>
              say 10% of the points needed to penetrate, or 20.<BR>
<BR>
If we did this, just about everything needed would be<BR>
*precalculated* and on the Vehicle/Ship Card.  Damage, detection,<BR>
and weapon ranges would be scalable from top to bottom.  And it<BR>
would meet my goal of being dirt simple to use. <g><BR>
<BR>
I'll let someone that is interested in large scale battles look at<BR>
this and tell me how they would scale it. It shouldn't be hard.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
              <BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:31:26 -0500<BR>
From: tim@premier.net<BR>
Subject: Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
> <BR>
> I agree with Tommy on this.  Ian has something in mind, it looks<BR>
> like it might be HG-like from the example he's shown us, but HG-like<BR>
> isn't the same as concrete rules.  I suggest we have *2* game<BR>
> mechanics decided before we try producing the actual design rules:<BR>
> 1 set of game mechanics should be aimed at wargamers and concentrate<BR>
> on Fleet/Squadron actions, and 1 set of game mechanics should be<BR>
> aimed at roleplayers and concentrate on small actions between 2 to 4<BR>
> ships total.<BR>
> <BR>
>   Questions:<BR>
>     1.  Are ranges going to be abstract or actual?<BR>
<BR>
How about making differnt range scales.  Having one in km, <BR>
thousands of km ten of thousands kms and then AUs.  With each <BR>
scales having short meddium long ect.  This way you can handle <BR>
many differnt ranges and situations without going abstract.<BR>
<BR>
So that sensors can work at AU scales but weapons are not <BR>
effective till one gets in the thousands of km or even km scale.<BR>
<BR>
>     2.  Will all weapons/sensors use the same ranges, or will<BR>
>         different weapons/sensors have different ranges? <BR>
>         <BR>
Ok if you make fire control systems seprate from sensors then yes <BR>
they need to work on different ranges.  Its one thing to see it but to <BR>
hit it requires better firer control systems.<BR>
<BR>
>     3.  Will weapons/sensors have different effects (damage/ability<BR>
>         to detect) based on range?  How will that work?<BR>
<BR>
Are you suggesting that weapons degrade over range, if so I would <BR>
say yes for beam base weapons but not missiles. See above for <BR>
detection.<BR>
   <BR>
<BR>
>     4.  Will Armor be degraded on all surface hits, degraded only on<BR>
>         penetration, or not be degraded at all?<BR>
>     <BR>
Well we can get into Battle Tech/Star Fleet Battles here.  Yes its <BR>
more accurate  t ohave it degrade based on hit location  but how <BR>
complicated do you want this.  This also applies to the internal <BR>
structure rules.<BR>
<BR>
>     5.  Will hits on external features destroy then or degrade them?<BR>
<BR>
See above<BR>
<BR>
>     6.  What about internal hits?  Does a hit on the power plant<BR>
>         destroy it or reduce it and by how much...percents, points,<BR>
>         what?  If it's points is it 1 to 1 with weapons..all<BR>
>         weapons, or do some types do more than that?<BR>
>         <BR>
See above<BR>
<BR>
>     7.  How are skills going to be integrated into this?  For<BR>
>         roleplaying purposes operator skill needs to be important<BR>
>         for sensors, computers, weapons, piloting and so on,<BR>
>         realistic or not.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
This is a role playing game so skills should be very important to <BR>
the game.  The question is how much does technology/automation <BR>
matter<BR>
Tim Reynolds<BR>
tim@premier.net <BR>
225-334-5063<BR>
www.premier.net/~tim<BR>
- ------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
Knowledge, information, power, words...Flying through<BR>
the air, invisible<BR>
And suddenly the world was tap dancing on quicksand.<BR>
In that case, the prize went to the best dancer<BR>
Terry Pratchett: The Fifth Elephant <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 20:54:03 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility<BR>
<BR>
In order to dodge, a ship has to add a vector to its present vector.  This<BR>
vector will ideally have a random direction.  In order to add a vector<BR>
off the present direction of travel, you must spin the ship about its<BR>
center of mass using small thrusters and point the drive in a different<BR>
direction. Then you thrust with the main drive. (Actually, the main drive<BR>
would continue to thrust as you spun).<BR>
<BR>
It's just like Asteroids. :-)  Actually a pretty good sense of what a<BR>
dodging ship would look like is given in Appollo-13, when the ship goes<BR>
haywire and the attitude jets start firing off all over the place trying<BR>
to compensate for momentums they were never meant for.  Love that scene.<BR>
<BR>
Moving laterally isn't your best bet unless you've got big honking drives<BR>
pointing in all directions.  Unless your attitude jets can move you<BR>
side-ways at the same gs your main drive can move you, you're better to<BR>
use the main drive, and that requires spinning the ship about its center<BR>
of mass.<BR>
<BR>
Now, the ship wouldn't be slowly spinning about its axis, it would be<BR>
whipping around as fast as possible.  This is where the higher agility of<BR>
small ships comes from (or should):  It's easier to spin a light thing<BR>
than heavy thing, and the lateral forces involved are exponentially<BR>
smaller.<BR>
<BR>
Note, in MT it says that thruster plates can produce thrust off the main<BR>
axis at reduced efficiencies: 30% to the sides and 10% forward.  You would<BR>
still do the "asteroids thing" because that gives you better acceleration<BR>
for the dodge. <BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:25:09 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: FFS3 Weapon Limits? (was: Re: FFS3 Example of Modular System)<BR>
<BR>
Katharine Whitchurch wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
<<snip>><BR>
> <BR>
> The Big List of Hulls is for people who go 'I want an armoured jump-3 800<BR>
> dton destroyer. Then I want to shoe-horn a 100 dton Missile Bay into it,<BR>
> plus a Small Miltary Sensor and 8 military laser turrets. Add enough sensors<BR>
> for it to Run Dark at 3 gees, and then pad out the rest of the space with<BR>
> staterooms for the Marine detachment'.<BR>
<BR>
This example brings up another issue:  Should FFS3 impose LBB2/5 limits<BR>
on weapons mounts?<BR>
<BR>
IMHO, the arbitrary "one turret per 100 tons, and one bay per 1000 tons"<BR>
is a rule-of-thumb, created to ensure that ships had reasonable numbers<BR>
of weapons mounts.  FFS2 achieved this goal by imposing a surface area<BR>
requirement on both weapons mounts and power plants, and basing armor<BR>
mass on both thickness and surface area armored.  Admittedly, FFS2 ships<BR>
can have a higher ratio of weapon space:non-weapon space than HG ships,<BR>
but they pay the price in other ways.  For instance, ships with lots of<BR>
high-powered weapons need larger power plants, which require more<BR>
surface area, which can require the ship to use a surface-area-intensive<BR>
configuration such as Airframe Wedge, which means more armor is needed<BR>
to achieve a given level of protection, which affects maneuver drive<BR>
performance....<BR>
<BR>
Personally, I prefer the FFS2 approach to limiting weapons over the<BR>
LBB2/5 approach.  I do believe that the issue needs to be addressed, if<BR>
for no other reason than to ensure that the rationale of whichever<BR>
approach is taken is clearly explained in the text.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:48:35 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.<BR>
<BR>
tim@premier.net wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> >     4.  Will Armor be degraded on all surface hits, degraded only on<BR>
> >         penetration, or not be degraded at all?<BR>
> ><BR>
> Well we can get into Battle Tech/Star Fleet Battles here.  Yes its<BR>
> more accurate  t ohave it degrade based on hit location  but how<BR>
> complicated do you want this.  This also applies to the internal<BR>
> structure rules.<BR>
<BR>
I would vote for not degraded at all.  How many times would the second<BR>
laser hit in the same place as the first?  I would also argue against<BR>
overly detailed hit location tables.  Yes, they can help in role-playing,<BR>
but they can _really_ slow down the game.  Perhaps this could be a<BR>
difference between the fleet and small-action rules.<BR>
<BR>
Internal structure should be one value which is degraded on penetration.<BR>
Perhaps there could also be a rule that armor value could not exceed<BR>
internal structure values.  So if the internal structure was reduced by<BR>
penetration damage, it would eventually also reduce the armor value.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 23:16:59 -0400<BR>
From: "Chris Seamans" <semo@pil.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
Alright. Thanks a lot, Todd. Your help has been been valuable to me. I'll be<BR>
sure to name an important NPC after you. :)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 22:24:17 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: What Are the Fundamental Tenets of the Imperial Culture? (was Re: Imperial Citizens)<BR>
<BR>
Jon Zeigler wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Meanwhile, I know of nothing in canon which suggests that only<BR>
> a narrowly limited class of people living within the Imperial borders<BR>
> are considered citizens.  As far as I can tell, Imperial law applies to<BR>
> everyone, even if some social classes have greater privilege under<BR>
> that law.<BR>
><BR>
> ----------<BR>
<BR>
I've suspected this over the years and have often wondered/speculated on<BR>
what "Imperial Culture" is like.<BR>
<BR>
- -What are its ideals? (I think that many of these can be inferred from M:0<BR>
and the MT/Regency Sourcebook,<BR>
  especially Norris awe-inspiring "Keep the Flame" oratory)<BR>
- -Its modes of acceptable dress and comportment?<BR>
- -I suspect that there is little or no gender bias, but my guess is that less<BR>
than 25% of the quoted military figures are<BR>
  female?  Is there gender differentiation?  Do men wear dresses like they<BR>
do in ST:TNG? (apologies to you<BR>
  Trekkers out there, but its true)  (BTW, for all you Caledonian<BR>
highlanders, kilts are not skirts as you well know)<BR>
- -Is there gender differentiation or separate role-definitions?<BR>
- -Are there any resemblences to the Imperia of other literature (say Niven &<BR>
Pournelle)?<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 23:05:17 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 Weapon Limits? (was: Re: FFS3 Example of Modular System)<BR>
<BR>
John Groth wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> ...  Should FFS3 impose LBB2/5 limits<BR>
> on weapons mounts?<BR>
<BR>
> ...Admittedly, FFS2 shipscan have a higher ratio of weapon space:non-weapon<BR>
> space than HG ships,<BR>
<BR>
This is one of the reasons that custom ships have such an advantage over modular<BR>
ships.  In the new incarnation, I would like to see a consistent limit on weapons<BR>
mounts across design systems.  This might be accomplished in a modular system by a<BR>
list of available hulls.<BR>
<BR>
Personally, I would prefer the LBB/HG limits.  They're simple and consistent, and<BR>
they're canon.<BR>
<BR>
> Personally, I prefer the FFS2 approach to limiting weapons over the<BR>
> LBB2/5 approach.  I do believe that the issue needs to be addressed, if<BR>
> for no other reason than to ensure that the rationale of whichever<BR>
> approach is taken is clearly explained in the text.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:10:44 -0700<BR>
From: Luther Martin <lwmarti@pacbell.net><BR>
Subject: RE: EW Relevance to FFS3<BR>
<BR>
Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>          By definition of being an active signal, the amount of energy<BR>
> required to illuminate a target and get a return, I am skeptical of being<BR>
> able to still remain undetected as a threat sensor.  I explained this<BR>
> problem to Eris in a previous message;  the amount of power required is<BR>
> *stupidly* high to get a return.<BR>
<BR>
I pulled out some of my wife's books (she used to be a radar engineer) and<BR>
did some calculations. At the ranges you get in ship-to-ship combat, the<BR>
losses you get are huge for any kind of sensor signal. Although you can<BR>
*theoretically* get as much gain as you want from direct sequence spread<BR>
spectrum, to overcome the losses you get at these distances is just not<BR>
feasible. On the other hand, you need to get some gain somewhere. Lots of<BR>
gain. You are losing hundreds and hundreds of dB.<BR>
<BR>
On the other hand, it looks like spread spectrum technology is already used<BR>
in radars.<BR>
<BR>
>          Jamming helps.  But it is not a magic shield that renders one<BR>
> impervious to the dragon's fire.  It *really* helps if the victim is a TL<BR>
> behind.  And does nothing at all if he is a TL ahead.<BR>
<BR>
I'm also a big believer in greater differences in capability due to TL<BR>
difference. The difference between WWII-era stuff and modern stuff is only 2<BR>
to 3 TLs, but that E6-E which you have encountered will kick the butt of<BR>
WWII stuff. They probably don't stand any chance at all against it.<BR>
<BR>
So what about this idea. We "know" that laser weapons use gravitic lensing<BR>
to focus their beams. If you can tweak gravity that much near your ship,<BR>
maybe you can also change the sensor signature of your ship using the same<BR>
general grav technology, perhaps by altering how the IR signature of the<BR>
ship propagates, in some pseudorandom way, making it impossible to get a<BR>
sensor lock on you. FFS3 writers?<BR>
<BR>
Another possibility is using the output of the nearby star as your<BR>
transmitter. If you are closer to the star than the opponent, you may be<BR>
able to look for a return from the radiation which the star gives you for<BR>
free. The benefits of active sensors without the drawbacks?<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:24:21 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 9:01 PM -0800 8/5/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>> How do ships dodge?  Do they move out of the way or spin on an<BR>
>>> axis.  I would guess the former since it will dodge a shot<BR>
>>> at the center which the latter won't (more dead on the shot<BR>
>>> is the more useless spinning is).  If that is true, then ship<BR>
>>> accel will be the only determiner of accel.<BR>
>><BR>
>>If they are under power, then changing the direction the ship points<BR>
>>will also change the direction it is moving. But not all that fast.<BR>
><BR>
> This might be a difference between MT and CT.  In CT ships<BR>
> can thrust in any direction.  Do they have to actually swivel<BR>
> around in MT to change direction?  (Seems a bit crude).<BR>
<BR>
Actually, CT doesn't say one way or the other. But reaction drive ships<BR>
have no choice. And in spite of the stuff in Starship Operator's<BR>
Manual, I don't really think thruster plates would be any different. <BR>
<BR>
You see, since without g-comp you can *feel* the acceleration, that<BR>
means it's applied to the ship where the plates are mounted, not to the<BR>
ship as a whole. Thus, having them deliver thrust along multiple axes<BR>
wpuld require bracing you don't even want to *think* about. Also,<BR>
thrying to move the ship sideways via thrust applied to a point offset<BR>
from the center of mass would spin the spin around.<BR>
<BR>
So the thruster plates pretty much *have* to exert their thrust along a<BR>
line that extends from them thru the center of mass of the ship.<BR>
<BR>
>>Given that it takes *seconds* for even 6g to move the ship far enough<BR>
>>to matter, dodging is apt to be a matter of varying accel by a small<BR>
>>amount (because dropping it very much make you too easy to hit), and<BR>
>>making course changes at random intervals (a few seconds).<BR>
><BR>
> At 6Gs you can move 60 meters in 2 seconds.<BR>
<BR>
And 60 meters isn't all that *long* a ship. <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 19:41:22 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> With that I now have additional questions:<BR>
> (1)  I know that it has been posted to the list in the past, but I<BR>
> don't have it available.  Would someone be able to relate Tech Level<BR>
> to Terra Historical Time?<BR>
<BR>
From the Traveller Book<BR>
<BR>
TL 0 	Stone Age, Primitive<BR>
TL 1	Bronze to Middle Ages<BR>
TL 2	circa 1400 to 1700<BR>
TL 3	circa 1700 to 1860<BR>
TL 4	circa 1860 to 1900<BR>
TL 5	circa 1900 to 1939<BR>
TL 6	circa 1940 to 1969<BR>
TL 7	circa 1970 to 1979<BR>
TL 8	circa 1980 to 1989<BR>
TL 9	circa 1990 to 2000<BR>
<BR>
Just think, next year we'll be TL 10. :-)<BR>
<BR>
> Spacecraft Navigation (in-system & jump):  Navigation beacons will of<BR>
> course be important.  However, this cannot be their only source of<BR>
> positioning information.  During wartime, for example, worlds will<BR>
> not want to make this information available to potential aggressors.<BR>
<BR>
True, but see below.<BR>
<BR>
> The only alternative will be some sort of inertial navigation system<BR>
> (INS).  <BR>
<BR>
Not true. You can naviagate quite well with what amounts to an<BR>
automated "star sight" system. <BR>
<BR>
You determine your orientation by the positions of bright stars. You<BR>
combine that with the direction and size of the star(s) in the system<BR>
to give you a rough position (good to within 100,000 km or so I'd<BR>
guess). <BR>
<BR>
You then check the empheris for the system, and check the positions of<BR>
the planets, comets, and/or major asteroids. That'll fine down the<BR>
position a lot. <BR>
<BR>
And you can bounce radar off the nearer bodies to get accurate<BR>
distances to go with the angles.<BR>
<BR>
Sure, you can't fine down your position much more than +/- 10,000 km<BR>
until you are within 100,000 km or so of the planet you are interested<BR>
in. So what? <BR>
<BR>
Between the huge amounts of delta-V available at higher TLs and the<BR>
sheer *scale* of a star system, you don't *need* to know your position<BR>
all that closely. 100,000 km is *very* accurate when dealing with<BR>
distances measured in AU (1 AU = 150,000,000 km).<BR>
<BR>
Note that there's no way an INS can tell you anything useful when you<BR>
jump into the system because it's been isolated from the universe for a<BR>
week. So it'd have to be set via nav beacons, or by the sort of<BR>
observations listed above. Not worth it.<BR>
<BR>
> Navigation Skill:  Computers will of course be the mainstay of<BR>
> navigation.  Let the computer do all the complex calculations.<BR>
> However, (1) what if the computer goes on the blink, data becomes<BR>
> corrupted, etc.,<BR>
<BR>
If the data is corrupted, you are in trouble, since the ephemeris<BR>
data just isn't that suited to hard copy. On the other hand, even now,<BR>
it could be stored in small card or cartridge, with a reader/calculator<BR>
the size of a palm pilot or the like. More likely, it'd be a data card<BR>
and a normal laptop/palmtop unit. <BR>
<BR>
This means that besides the copy in the ship's database, it's likely<BR>
that there's a copy "shelved" in the control room, and in the cabins of<BR>
all navigating officers, as well as loaded into their personal system<BR>
(in their pocket or a belt "holster"). <BR>
<BR>
Navigation skill mostly consists of taking the bearing and distance<BR>
info for each reference point (star, planet, etc) and taking the<BR>
"confusion" (area in which they intersect each other, and note that<BR>
they *won't* intersect in a nice neat point. each bearing will<BR>
intersect some others at different points) and being able to say "we<BR>
are *here* (pointing at a point somewhere in that volume of<BR>
intersecting lines), for no reason that he could explain to anyone.<BR>
<BR>
Doing plots by hand would be a *real* mess, because not only is the<BR>
scale so big, but the reference points aren't coplanar, so you have to<BR>
plot in three dimensions. <BR>
<BR>
> and (2) battle-damage/breakdowns of the computer, sensor, INS.  In<BR>
> the above the navigator will need to be able to do it by hand.  The<BR>
> navigator will need to know how to use a telescope, sextant (?),<BR>
> astrolabe (?), etc. to determine the initial position and also<BR>
> compute both an in-system and jump course.  Naturally, this is only<BR>
> for an emergency, but he will need to know it !!!<BR>
<BR>
It'd be a telescope, as there's no pitching deck to make a handheld<BR>
device superior to a ship mounted one. Also, he needs both altitude<BR>
*and* azimuth data for each sighting. <BR>
<BR>
That's why the scout ship variant I've been designing off and on (it<BR>
lands vertically, sort of like a short, fat DC-X or a cone with a<BR>
rounded off nose) has a clear "dome" as the walls and ceiling of the<BR>
control deck. You can take sightings from there.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2895<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zd03.mx.aol.com (rly-zd03.mail.aol.com [172.31.33.227]) by air-zd04.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 01:07:43 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zd03.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 01:07:07 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id BAA07352;<BR>
	Mon, 7 Aug 2000 01:06:59 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 7 Aug 2000 01:06:15 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id BAA07218<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 01:06:15 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 01:06:15 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008070506.BAA07218@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2895<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2896</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/7/00 8:06:44 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, August 7 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2896<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
map/combat scales (was Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.)<BR>
Re: Fw: Radiators in space<BR>
Re: FFSv3 and software<BR>
Re: FFSv3 and software<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
Re: What Are the Fundamental Tenets of the Imperial Culture? (was Re:  Imperial Citizens)<BR>
Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
RE: Reverse Engineering (was Re: GT Starship Modules )<BR>
Jump initiation<BR>
RE: Jump initiation<BR>
RE: Max Acceleration<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:40:29 +0200<BR>
RE: Jump initiation<BR>
Re: <BR>
RE: Jump initiation<BR>
RE: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 20:30:41 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: map/combat scales (was Re: [TML] FFS3 project. My view.)<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>>   Questions:<BR>
>>     1.  Are ranges going to be abstract or actual?<BR>
><BR>
> How about making differnt range scales.  Having one in km, <BR>
> thousands of km ten of thousands kms and then AUs.  With each <BR>
> scales having short meddium long ect.  This way you can handle <BR>
> many differnt ranges and situations without going abstract.<BR>
><BR>
> So that sensors can work at AU scales but weapons are not <BR>
> effective till one gets in the thousands of km or even km scale.<BR>
<BR>
I rather like 30:1 scaling steps (actually sqrt(1000)). This makes one<BR>
hex a large but not overwhelming chunk of a map at the next scale down.<BR>
And vice versa.<BR>
<BR>
Using the 30,000 km hex from space combat we get:<BR>
<BR>
18          30 Gpc (limit of Observable universe?)<BR>
17           1 Gpc <BR>
16          30 Mpc<BR>
15           1 Mpc (Local group?)<BR>
14          30 kpc (the galaxy is roughly 100 kpc in diameter)<BR>
13           1 kpc ("known space"?)<BR>
12          30 pc ("sector")<BR>
11     200,000 AU (1 parsec)<BR>
10        6000 AU ("Oort cloud")<BR>
 9         200 AU ("outer system")<BR>
 8           6 AU ("inner system")<BR>
 7  30,000,000 km (1/5th AU)<BR>
 6   1,000,000 km <BR>
 5      30,000 km (standard space combat hex)<BR>
 4        1000 km (~600 miles)<BR>
 3          30 km (~20 miles)<BR>
 2        1000 m  (1 km)<BR>
 1          30 m  (~100 feet)<BR>
 0           1 m  (~1 yard)<BR>
<BR>
I'm rather amazed that it fits so many scales so well! <BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 21:02:04 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Fw: Radiators in space<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> Radiators in a vacuum are limited to black body radiation as a means to<BR>
> disipate heat.  FFS and FFS2 give modifiers for the use of radiators in<BR>
> an atmosphere.  The droplet radiators and the sail radiator have serious<BR>
> problems in an atmosphere. Droplet: contamiation and loss of coolant.<BR>
> Sail: structural.<BR>
<BR>
They aren't intended for atmosphere. <BR>
<BR>
In atmosphere, conduction/convection do wonders.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 20:21:35 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3 and software<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 18:10 -0400 6/8/00, "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com> wrote:<BR>
>>I am doing it in Visual Basic 6.0 since it is a very productive <BR>
>>language compared with C/C++<BR>
>>and Java.  Java & C/C++ are higher performance languages, but that <BR>
>>isn't very important for an<BR>
>>application of this nature.<BR>
><BR>
> Java has a massive advantage over Visual Basic in this sort of <BR>
> application - Portability. You can run it on MacOS, Windows, <BR>
> Linux.....<BR>
><BR>
> Visual Basic is locked to Windows.<BR>
<BR>
How about the FPK Pascal compiler? It's available for DOS, OS/2,<BR>
Windows, Linux, and the Mac. I've got the DOS version, and the OS/2<BR>
version. It's as Delphi compatible as anything that runs on so many<BR>
OSes can be.<BR>
<BR>
I rather prefer Pascal, simply because the strong typing keeps you from<BR>
shooting yourself in the foot so much.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 01:05:26 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3 and software<BR>
<BR>
On 08/06/00 at 08:21 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>How about the FPK Pascal compiler? It's available for DOS, OS/2, Windows,<BR>
>Linux, and the Mac. I've got the DOS version, and the OS/2 version. It's<BR>
>as Delphi compatible as anything that runs on so many OSes can be.<BR>
<BR>
>I rather prefer Pascal, simply because the strong typing keeps you from<BR>
>shooting yourself in the foot so much.<BR>
<BR>
Me too!  Pascal is a good language, IMO, much easier to work with<BR>
than C/C++, and FPK Pascal is a good implimentation of it.  Of<BR>
course, if you're going for a GUI based rather than a commandline<BR>
based, then it's the API's and design tools that are the driver.<BR>
<BR>
Java is okay, given a fast enough machine to run it on.  I don't<BR>
really like its syntax, though, but I'm an old proceduralist. <g><BR>
<BR>
Has Borland released the Linux Delphi yet? <BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 23:20:39 -0700<BR>
From: "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
At 7:24 PM -0800 8/6/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
><BR>
>  > At 9:01 PM -0800 8/5/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>  >>> How do ships dodge?  Do they move out of the way or spin on an<BR>
>  >>> axis.  I would guess the former since it will dodge a shot<BR>
>  >>> at the center which the latter won't (more dead on the shot<BR>
>  >>> is the more useless spinning is).  If that is true, then ship<BR>
>  >>> accel will be the only determiner of accel.<BR>
>  >><BR>
>  >>If they are under power, then changing the direction the ship points<BR>
>  >>will also change the direction it is moving. But not all that fast.<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > This might be a difference between MT and CT.  In CT ships<BR>
>  > can thrust in any direction.  Do they have to actually swivel<BR>
>  > around in MT to change direction?  (Seems a bit crude).<BR>
><BR>
>Actually, CT doesn't say one way or the other. But reaction drive ships<BR>
>have no choice. And in spite of the stuff in Starship Operator's<BR>
>Manual, I don't really think thruster plates would be any different.<BR>
<BR>
Not if they have vectored thrust.<BR>
<BR>
>You see, since without g-comp you can *feel* the acceleration, that<BR>
>means it's applied to the ship where the plates are mounted, not to the<BR>
>ship as a whole. Thus, having them deliver thrust along multiple axes<BR>
>wpuld require bracing you don't even want to *think* about.<BR>
<BR>
What bracing?  Of the plates?  We don't even know how they work<BR>
let alone if they need bracing....<BR>
<BR>
>  Also,<BR>
>thrying to move the ship sideways via thrust applied to a point offset<BR>
>from the center of mass would spin the spin around.<BR>
<BR>
Not if it is balance with trust from the other side (like a Harrier).<BR>
<BR>
>  >>Given that it takes *seconds* for even 6g to move the ship far enough<BR>
>  >>to matter, dodging is apt to be a matter of varying accel by a small<BR>
>  >>amount (because dropping it very much make you too easy to hit), and<BR>
>  >>making course changes at random intervals (a few seconds).<BR>
>  ><BR>
>  > At 6Gs you can move 60 meters in 2 seconds.<BR>
><BR>
>And 60 meters isn't all that *long* a ship.<BR>
<BR>
Of course then you would just design ships the are flat along<BR>
their axis of thrust (or you have to decide that whoever designed<BR>
almost every ship was too dumb to do it in a way that let them<BR>
evade fire).  The problem is that you are getting into<BR>
something that was not considered in the beginning (deck plans were<BR>
made up without thinking about whether the engines really should<BR>
all be stuck in back, etc.)  No matter how you follow<BR>
it, something isn't going to be consistent.  You really can't<BR>
prove it one way or the other, you can just choose where<BR>
you don't look too closely.<BR>
<BR>
______________________________<BR>
summers@alum.mit.edu<BR>
(This is the net.  My e-mail address may be in Boston, but I'm in California.)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 00:07:31 -0700<BR>
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: What Are the Fundamental Tenets of the Imperial Culture? (was Re:  Imperial Citizens)<BR>
<BR>
Dan Lane wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> I've suspected this over the years and have often wondered/speculated on<BR>
> what "Imperial Culture" is like.<BR>
><BR>
> -What are its ideals?<BR>
<BR>
Getting really drunk and sleeping with Bimbos?.... At least that is the culture<BR>
most of my<BR>
characters live in...<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Evyn...<BR>
<BR>
C-Space home http://home.att.net/~wmacdude/<BR>
<BR>
When Spring comes back with rustling shade,<BR>
And apple blossoms fills the air,<BR>
I have a rendezvous with Death,<BR>
When spring brings back blue days and fair.<BR>
 Legionnaire Alan Seeger, KIA the Somme.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 19:42:00 +1200<BR>
From: "Andrew Moffatt-Vallance" <a.vallance@netaccess.co.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial citizens<BR>
<BR>
On 6 Aug 00, at 15:30, JFZeigler@aol.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Meanwhile, I know of nothing in canon which suggests that only<BR>
> a narrowly limited class of people living within the Imperial borders<BR>
> are considered citizens.  As far as I can tell, Imperial law applies to<BR>
> everyone, even if some social classes have greater privilege under<BR>
> that law.<BR>
<BR>
Actually canon (the Warrant of Restoration in M0) is quite specific on who <BR>
is and isn't a citizen. You're a citizen if: a) you're born on a world that is a <BR>
member of the Imperium, b) if you're naturalised as a citizen of an Imperial <BR>
World or c) if you render honourable service to the Imperium (basically the <BR>
Roman auxilary concept). Therefore the vast majority of people living within <BR>
the Imperium are citizens.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 13:35:38 +0300<BR>
From: Antti Lahtinen <lahtinen@ee.tut.fi><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
Chris Seamans wrote:<BR>
<BR>
 > What effect, if any, does sawing off the barrel have.<BR>
<BR>
	When the barred of a firearm is cut down below the optimal<BR>
	length, some of the propellant may not have completely combusted<BR>
	before the projectile exists the barrel. The result is decrease<BR>
	in projectile velocity and highly visible and loud muzzle blast.<BR>
	Shortening the barrel will also reduce the weapon mass and<BR>
	usually cause stronger felt recoil.<BR>
<BR>
	All these effects decrease the weapon performance.<BR>
<BR>
	The advantage of a short shotgun is maneuverability and 	<BR>
	concealability. Sawed-off shotguns are usually two-barrel break<BR>
	action guns (very few pump-action or self-loaders can be<BR>
	shortened), and have low range and are unpleasant to shoot with.<BR>
<BR>
	One way to make a short shotgun with full-length barrel is to<BR>
	build it in bullpup configuration. The Neostead NS2000 and<BR>
	Pancor Jackhammer are good examples of bullpup shotguns. My<BR>
	personal favorite is a custom-made (based on Benelli action)<BR>
	self-loading bullpup shotgun with 12-shot box magazine. The<BR>
	basic weapon is 55 cm long, and the total length is 64 cm with<BR>
	Reflex suppressor installed.<BR>
<BR>
	A short shotgun is somewhat more manageable when it is used to<BR>
	fire "teleshot" ammunition. In teleshot the propellant is packed<BR>
	inside a collapsed metal container which stretches (or<BR>
	"telescopes") into full side when the propellant combusts. Since<BR>
	no gas exists for the barrel, there is no muzzle flash or blast.<BR>
	However, teleshot can only be used in break-action shoguns,<BR>
	since the metal container extends far into the barrel and there<BR>
	may be troubles in trying to eject the shell sideways.<BR>
- --<BR>
       Antti Lahtinen                lahtinen@ee.tut.fi<BR>
       Researcher, MSc (Eng)         http://www.ee.tut.fi/~lahtinen<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 04:03:55 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
on 8/7/00 3:35 AM, Antti Lahtinen at lahtinen@ee.tut.fi wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> When the barred of a firearm is cut down below the optimal<BR>
> length, some of the propellant may not have completely combusted<BR>
> before the projectile exists the barrel. The result is decrease<BR>
<BR>
Actually, in modern firearms (i.e. firing smokeless powder), all the powder<BR>
combusts in the cartridge case.  Shortening the barrel limits the working<BR>
time of the expanding gas on the projectile.  Muzzle velocity is reduced and<BR>
pressure of propellant gases is increased. Any propellant not combusted at<BR>
the muzzle, is likely to remain so regardless of barrel length.  This is a<BR>
common misconception that is true of black powder only.<BR>
<BR>
> in projectile velocity and highly visible and loud muzzle blast.<BR>
> Shortening the barrel will also reduce the weapon mass and<BR>
> usually cause stronger felt recoil.<BR>
> <BR>
> All these effects decrease the weapon performance.<BR>
> <BR>
> The advantage of a short shotgun is maneuverability and<BR>
> concealability. Sawed-off shotguns are usually two-barrel break<BR>
> action guns (very few pump-action or self-loaders can be<BR>
> shortened), and have low range and are unpleasant to shoot with.<BR>
<BR>
The US marshal's service (and other federal law enforcement agencies)<BR>
utilized the 13" bbl Remington 870 pump shotgun.  Benelli sells a 14"<BR>
semi-automatic 'entry gun', etc. etc. The only limitation on manually<BR>
operated (pump) shotguns is the operating mechanism's physical dimensions.<BR>
Shot pump-gun can be abbreviated directly in front of the magazine, and<BR>
specimens exist when the magazine has been shortened so that the forward<BR>
movement of the forend becomes the limiting factor.<BR>
<BR>
With semi-automatic shotguns, if they are gas operated, then the gas port<BR>
location will limit the shortening of the barrel.  Recoil operated guns can<BR>
be shortened only to the point that the various masses involved are no<BR>
longer properly balanced.<BR>
<BR>
The Benelli M1 and M3 series are unique in that the bolt unlocking is via<BR>
inertia, and these guns can be made to function with extremely short<BR>
barrels.  Here, magazine length is usually the limiting factor.<BR>
<BR>
In the case of single or multi-barrel guns, these can be cut anywhere<BR>
forward of the receiver, but most are limited by the forend, which serves to<BR>
hold the barrels to the receiver.  Cut the barrels too shot, and there's<BR>
nothing to hold them in place.  Also the short moment arm created by<BR>
over-shortening a 'break-open' shotgun makes opening the action difficult.<BR>
<BR>
> A short shotgun is somewhat more manageable when it is used to<BR>
> fire "teleshot" ammunition. In teleshot the propellant is packed<BR>
> inside a collapsed metal container which stretches (or<BR>
> "telescopes") into full side when the propellant combusts. Since<BR>
> no gas exists for the barrel, there is no muzzle flash or blast.<BR>
> However, teleshot can only be used in break-action shoguns,<BR>
> since the metal container extends far into the barrel and there<BR>
> may be troubles in trying to eject the shell sideways.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, teleshot silent shotgun ammunition (developed by AAI), when fired,<BR>
is exactly the length of a fired standard (2 3/4") 12 gauge shotgun shell,<BR>
and hence can be used in any shotgun that fires standard 12 gauge<BR>
ammunition.  I have a photo of teleshot sectionalized and fired on my<BR>
website.  See: http://weapons.travellercentral.com/media/teleshot.gif . Note<BR>
that it will not function most semi-automatic shotguns, but works quite well<BR>
in manually operated gun.  While teleshot has been fully developed, it<BR>
should be noted that there are believed to be no live round in existance.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 12:09:59 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Reverse Engineering (was Re: GT Starship Modules )<BR>
<BR>
Sadly, my contribution to this'll be delayed due to some problems at the<BR>
weekend<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: eris@pcola.gulf.net [mailto:eris@pcola.gulf.net]<BR>
> Sent: 04 August 2000 19:50<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: RE: Reverse Engineering (was Re: GT Starship Modules )<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> On 08/04/00 at 12:41 PM,  "Jones, Dean" <BR>
> <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com> said:<BR>
> <BR>
> >I'll do it over the weekend and post it Monday<BR>
> <BR>
> Thank you very much!<BR>
> <BR>
> Dris<BR>
> -- <BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
> http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
> -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 12:23:09 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
Anyone know the energy requirements to actually initiate Jump? I assume that<BR>
actually going to jump requires you charge up a big HPG which discharges<BR>
through the jump grid, then you rely on your fusion reactor (or whatever) to<BR>
maintain the Jump field for the necessary 168-odd hours. <BR>
I ususally work with an S-type scout for my calculations-I'm used to them-<BR>
so assume the ship has 100 Dt.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:24:25 +0800<BR>
From: "Antony Farrell" <Skaran@bigpond.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Jones, Dean<BR>
> Sent: Monday, 7 August 2000 7:23 PM<BR>
> To: 'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
> Subject: Jump initiation<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Anyone know the energy requirements to actually initiate Jump? I<BR>
> assume that<BR>
> actually going to jump requires you charge up a big HPG which discharges<BR>
> through the jump grid, then you rely on your fusion reactor (or<BR>
> whatever) to<BR>
> maintain the Jump field for the necessary 168-odd hours.<BR>
> I ususally work with an S-type scout for my calculations-I'm used to them-<BR>
> so assume the ship has 100 Dt.<BR>
<BR>
I actually worked some figures out for this some time ago and posted them on<BR>
the list. Basically it showed an anomoly in that high tech jump drives<BR>
required more energy to charge their capacitors for a given jump range.<BR>
<BR>
In case you havnt access to this I have posted it again below;<BR>
<BR>
Using FFS1<BR>
While taking apart a series of jump-1 drives of tech levels 9 through 15 in<BR>
order to determine the energy required for alternative power sources the<BR>
following figures emerged;<BR>
<BR>
For a 100 ton displacement hull a jump-1 drive displaces 2 tons (28kl) and<BR>
FFS1 states that 35% is jump capacitor or 9.8kl<BR>
<BR>
At TL9 Jump Capacitor capacity is 98 Mj<BR>
At TL10 122.5 Mj<BR>
At TL11 163.3 Mj<BR>
At TL12 196 Mj<BR>
At TL13 217.8 Mj<BR>
At TL14 245 Mj and<BR>
At TL15 280 Mj<BR>
<BR>
This raises a number of questions<BR>
1. Why do the higher tech level drives require more energy for the jump?<BR>
2. Why did the Vilani need to practice jump dimming since the energy for the<BR>
jump came from a capacitor bank?<BR>
3. Why do jump drives not get smaller at higher tech levels since the volume<BR>
required by capacitors for a given amount of energy gets smaller?<BR>
<BR>
For example a jump-1 drive at TL12 would need only half the capacitor volume<BR>
of the equivalent TL9 model. Any comments?<BR>
<BR>
Antony<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:24:56 +0800<BR>
From: "Antony Farrell" <Skaran@bigpond.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Max Acceleration<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Bill Hopper<BR>
> Sent: Sunday, 6 August 2000 3:56 PM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Max Acceleration<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> In CT, 6G was the max possible acceleration and it came from thruster<BR>
> plates.  In MT and/or TNE and/or FFS is there a limit on acceleration from<BR>
> thruster plates?  IIRC there is not a hard limit, but there has<BR>
> to be a limit<BR>
> as to what is practical.  Any ideas where that is?<BR>
><BR>
> Thx,<BR>
> WKH<BR>
><BR>
Well in TNE thruster plates are not used. There is no actual upper<BR>
acceleration, but inertial compensation is limited by tech level so that<BR>
high accelerations at lower tech levels results in insufficient<BR>
compensation. Also you could probably reach a limit where their is<BR>
insufficient surface area in various hull locations for increased thrusters.<BR>
<BR>
Also as grav compensation at high tech levels was greater than 6G ergo<BR>
accelerations of greater than 6G must have been possible.<BR>
<BR>
Antony<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:40:29 +0200<BR>
From: "Davide Piacentini" <davide-piacentini@libero.it><BR>
Subject: Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:40:29 +0200<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest davide-piacentini@libero.it<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 06:47:09 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
IIRC That the J-Drive itself was a included a huge generator that provided<BR>
all of the power that it needed to initate jump and maintain it.<BR>
<BR>
In other words - 0 is needed.<BR>
<BR>
However - according to HG you _can_ use other sources to power the JDrive if<BR>
you want (such as a black globe). The JDrive has .5% of the ships<BR>
displacment per JN (ie, 100 ton jump 2 ship = 1% or 1 dton of capacitors).<BR>
Each ton of capacitors holds 36 EP's and each EP is 250 MW. So a scout<BR>
courier needs to have 9000 MWs in its capacitators to initate a jump<BR>
(weither generated by the jump drive or by black globes)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Clear as mud?<BR>
<BR>
;)<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Jones, Dean<BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 4:23 AM<BR>
To: 'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
Subject: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Anyone know the energy requirements to actually initiate Jump? I assume that<BR>
actually going to jump requires you charge up a big HPG which discharges<BR>
through the jump grid, then you rely on your fusion reactor (or whatever) to<BR>
maintain the Jump field for the necessary 168-odd hours.<BR>
I ususally work with an S-type scout for my calculations-I'm used to them-<BR>
so assume the ship has 100 Dt.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 07:05:31 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: <BR>
<BR>
on 8/7/00 5:40 AM, Davide Piacentini at davide-piacentini@libero.it wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> unsubscribe traveller-digest davide-piacentini@libero.it<BR>
> <BR>
send this message to majorodomo@imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 13:00:29 +0100 <BR>
From: Matt Bond <MBOND@karpad.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: Jones, Dean [mailto:Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com]<BR>
> Sent: 07 August 2000 12:23<BR>
> To: 'traveller@lists.imagiconline.com'<BR>
> Subject: Jump initiation<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> Anyone know the energy requirements to actually initiate <BR>
> Jump? I assume that<BR>
> actually going to jump requires you charge up a big HPG which <BR>
> discharges<BR>
> through the jump grid, then you rely on your fusion reactor <BR>
> (or whatever) to<BR>
> maintain the Jump field for the necessary 168-odd hours. <BR>
> I ususally work with an S-type scout for my calculations-I'm <BR>
> used to them-<BR>
> so assume the ship has 100 Dt.<BR>
<BR>
From HG2 you need the two turns output of a powerplant of rating the<BR>
same as the jump number. This must be supplied in no more than 2 HG<BR>
combat turns (40 minutes), and the vessel can jump after one turn<BR>
providing it has been supplied with the required energy.<BR>
<BR>
The formula is:<BR>
<BR>
Jump Energy = 0.01 x dtons x Jn<BR>
<BR>
Which is the same as the energy point formula using Jn instead of Pn<BR>
<BR>
So a 100 ton scout trying for J-2 needs 2EP for 40 minutes (or 4EP for<BR>
20 minutes).<BR>
<BR>
From Striker et al we know that an EP is 250MW, so the scout needs 2 x<BR>
250 x 40(minutes) x 60(seconds) = 1.2x10^12 Joules<BR>
<BR>
or the energy released from a ~0.3 kiloton bomb (IIRC a kilo of TNT is<BR>
~4x10^6 Joules)<BR>
<BR>
Conversely, a 500,000dton Tigress trying for J-6 needs 30,000EP for 40<BR>
minutes, or the energy from a ~9 Megaton bomb...<BR>
<BR>
Matt<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:35:12 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible?<BR>
<BR>
John Snead writes:<BR>
>>>Retroviruses most definately do fiddle around with the genome, but<BR>
>>>generally operate on a tiny scale, even compared to the scales we are<BR>
>>>looking at. However, there _is_ some suggestion that they may really<BR>
>>>be involved in evolutionary stages in punctuated equilibrium of<BR>
>>>species.<BR>
>>This is entirely new to me.  Could you point me to a source?<BR>
>There was an article in Discover Magazine a few months ago about <BR>
>something called transposons.  Basically, these were gene <BR>
>sequences which could quite literally hop between species, <BR>
>independent of normal reproduction.  In effect, a flea or tick drinks <BR>
>your blood and either you get a few flea or tick genes, or it gets <BR>
>some of yours, or possibly both.  This sort of thing seems fairly <BR>
>rare, and there were mechanisms in place that normally (but not <BR>
>always) "turned off" this DNA as soon as it was in place.  In fact, it <BR>
>was suggested that since the markers to turn off genes could <BR>
>sometime affect other nearby genes that having a transposon insert <BR>
>itself in a particular portion of DNA could easily turn off a few of the <BR>
>surrounding genes.<BR>
>How this whole bizarre process may have affected evolution is still <BR>
>under investigation.<BR>
<BR>
	I'm sorry, I was not clear: what I meant to ask was how<BR>
	retroviruses might be involved in punctuated equilibrium.<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 06:09:37 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3: POLL<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> At 7:24 PM -0800 8/6/00, Leonard Erickson wrote:<BR>
>>In mail you write:<BR>
>><BR>
>>> This might be a difference between MT and CT.  In CT ships<BR>
>>> can thrust in any direction.  Do they have to actually swivel<BR>
>>> around in MT to change direction?  (Seems a bit crude).<BR>
>><BR>
>>Actually, CT doesn't say one way or the other. But reaction drive ships<BR>
>>have no choice. And in spite of the stuff in Starship Operator's<BR>
>>Manual, I don't really think thruster plates would be any different.<BR>
><BR>
> Not if they have vectored thrust.<BR>
<BR>
>>You see, since without g-comp you can *feel* the acceleration, that<BR>
>>means it's applied to the ship where the plates are mounted, not to the<BR>
>>ship as a whole. Thus, having them deliver thrust along multiple axes<BR>
>>wpuld require bracing you don't even want to *think* about.<BR>
><BR>
> What bracing?  Of the plates?  We don't even know how they work<BR>
> let alone if they need bracing....<BR>
<BR>
The mere fact that you can feel the acceleration means that the plates<BR>
are pushing/pulling on the place(s) they are attached to the hull. If<BR>
they exerted the thrust as a field that affected the whole ship, then<BR>
you and the ship would both be pushed equally, resultion in no<BR>
sensation of acceleration at all.<BR>
<BR>
This has nothing to do with how the plates work, merely with how the<BR>
thrust is transfered to the ship. <BR>
<BR>
>>  Also,<BR>
>>thrying to move the ship sideways via thrust applied to a point offset<BR>
>>from the center of mass would spin the spin around.<BR>
><BR>
> Not if it is balance with trust from the other side (like a Harrier).<BR>
<BR>
Which would require another set of plates *there*. The ships *aren't*<BR>
designed that way. <BR>
<BR>
>>>>Given that it takes *seconds* for even 6g to move the ship far enough<BR>
>>>>to matter, dodging is apt to be a matter of varying accel by a small<BR>
>>>>amount (because dropping it very much make you too easy to hit), and<BR>
>>>>making course changes at random intervals (a few seconds).<BR>
>>><BR>
>>> At 6Gs you can move 60 meters in 2 seconds.<BR>
>><BR>
>>And 60 meters isn't all that *long* a ship.<BR>
><BR>
> Of course then you would just design ships the are flat along<BR>
> their axis of thrust (or you have to decide that whoever designed<BR>
> almost every ship was too dumb to do it in a way that let them<BR>
> evade fire).<BR>
<BR>
Not "flat" and not in *that* axis.<BR>
<BR>
Long and thin minimizes exposed area if you are moving straight away<BR>
from the enemy. If he is off to the side, things get more complicated.<BR>
<BR>
> The problem is that you are getting into<BR>
> something that was not considered in the beginning (deck plans were<BR>
> made up without thinking about whether the engines really should<BR>
> all be stuck in back, etc.)<BR>
<BR>
True, but if g-comps are reliable enough, that's not a huge problem. <BR>
<BR>
Remember, I'm talking about strain on the hull, not stuff that g-comps<BR>
can handle.<BR>
<BR>
> No matter how you follow<BR>
> it, something isn't going to be consistent.  You really can't<BR>
> prove it one way or the other, you can just choose where<BR>
> you don't look too closely.<BR>
<BR>
We can shoot for minimum incosistency consonant with established<BR>
background. That's why I say dropping thrust vectoring or at least<BR>
limiting the hell out of it is the best course.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2896<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-za01.mx.aol.com (rly-za01.mail.aol.com [172.31.36.97]) by air-za02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 11:06:44 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-za01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 11:06:17 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id LAA28495;<BR>
	Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:06:09 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:05:56 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id LAA28460<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:05:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 11:05:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008071505.LAA28460@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2896<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2897</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/7/00 3:54:18 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, August 7 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2897<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (long)<BR>
values<BR>
Vectored Thrust (includes Big Ships connection)<BR>
Military data<BR>
RE: Military data<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
Re: FFS3 Weapon Limits? (was: Re: FFS3 Example of Modular System)<BR>
TML close to TNS? ;-)<BR>
RE: Jump initiation<BR>
Re: Jump initiation<BR>
RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (long)<BR>
RE: Military data<BR>
FFS3: Power Systems<BR>
Re: Definite Articles (OT) <BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Chat<BR>
Re: Chat<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:35:24 +0100 <BR>
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3 computers<BR>
<BR>
Michel Vaillancourt wrote:<BR>
> ...after fifth combat:<BR>
> <BR>
> >Ref: "Navigator: G40 and G45."<BR>
> <BR>
>          Gunner:  I fire lasers in anti-missile and deploy sand.<BR>
> <BR>
>          Ref:  What?<BR>
> <BR>
>          Gunner:  You just gave him the codes that makes him yell <BR>
> "INCOMING" and that is what I do after he does that.  Just <BR>
> trying to speed <BR>
> things up.<BR>
> <BR>
>          <weg>  Same problem, different language<BR>
<BR>
There are two schools  of  thought  for  this  suggested  in  the<BR>
original  article:   On  the  one  hand  it  suggested  that  you<BR>
rearrange the codes from time to time to  prevent  this.  On  the<BR>
other hand everyone on the bridge would recognise certain sounds,<BR>
like the missile proximity alert anyway.<BR>
<BR>
My view is that a missile proximity alert sounds a claxon on  the<BR>
bridge ... ie the players  recognise  the  code,  but  there  are<BR>
enough other codes that most of them will remain a mystery.<BR>
<BR>
Regards PLST<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 11:50:55 -0400<BR>
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca><BR>
Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (long)<BR>
<BR>
Mark Preston writes:<BR>
<unsnipped><BR>
>>>There is a vast amount of the 'junk' DNA that the story is based on in<BR>
>>>our genome - about 40 to 60% according to recent papers. Of what's<BR>
>>>left, we understand what around 10% of it does (thats around 5% of the<BR>
>>>total DNA that we have mapped to date).<BR>
</unsnipped><BR>
>>Current estimates are that about 10% of our total DNA are<BR>
>>functional genes.  Such estimates are very approximate as we<BR>
>>have not yet mapped or analysed the whole thing.  A lot of DNA<BR>
>>that is not part of a gene is in spacers (segments separating<BR>
>>genes), pseudogenes (degenerate copies of functonal genes), and<BR>
>>repetitive sequences (pieces of DNA that seem to have copied<BR>
>>themselves to various parts of the chomosomes, with as many as<BR>
>>10^7 copies).<BR>
>That's what I said...<BR>
<BR>
	Not exactly.  You said that 40-60% of our DNA is 'junk' DNA, while<BR>
	I explained that as much as 90% may be 'junk' DNA (plus I added a<BR>
	little detail for those who might be interested).<BR>
<BR>
>>>Of that 5% we understand, only 4% of it is different from equivalent<BR>
>>>chimp DNA and probably accounts for why we are what we are (instead of<BR>
>>>chimps).<BR>
>[snip]<BR>
>>Looking at a hemoglobin pseudogene found in the primates, it was<BR>
>>found that 98% of the sequence was the same in humans and chimps.<BR>
>>This confirms that the two species are closely related, but does<BR>
>>not give us much of an idea of just what makes humans human and<BR>
>>chimpanzees chimps.  I am not aware of any estimate of how<BR>
>>different the functional DNA is between these species.  Any such<BR>
>>estimate would be hazardous until the entire genome of each species<BR>
>>has been sequenced.<BR>
>The work is an early estimate & if I can find the reference for you, I<BR>
>will.<BR>
<BR>
	I would warn against early estimates in this regard.  Estimating<BR>
	changes in 'junk' DNA from a small sample is considered valid<BR>
	because the changes are thought to be essentially random, but<BR>
	extrapolating from samples of functional DNA could be misleading.<BR>
<BR>
>>flawed or worse.  If there was some hidden mechanism that<BR>
>>copied the special DNA much, much more accurately than the<BR>
>>rest of the human DNA (insert magic here), then the sequence<BR>
>>would stand out like a sore thumb as soon as the sequence<BR>
>>was analysed by scientists ("Why is it that everyone on earth<BR>
>>has this exact same non-coding sequence?").<BR>
>Agreed, that's why you get rapid multiple speciation in the 'steps' of<BR>
>punctuated evolution - which I mentioned later on.<BR>
<BR>
	I'm sorry, but I do not follow you here.  Why is it you get<BR>
	"rapid multiple speciation?"<BR>
<BR>
>>>Retroviruses most definately do fiddle around with the genome, but<BR>
>>>generally operate on a tiny scale, even compared to the<BR>
>><BR>
>[snip]<BR>
>><BR>
>> 	This is entirely new to me.  Could you point me to a source?<BR>
><BR>
>No problem - check any of the new HIV work for the operation of the<BR>
>virus genome in the human during its growth and proliferation within<BR>
>the cell.<BR>
<BR>
	Whoops!  The part that you snipped was the part that was<BR>
	entirely new to me.  That's my fault, as I was not very clear<BR>
	with that comment/question.  Is there a source for the<BR>
	connection between retroviruses and punctuated equilibrium?<BR>
<BR>
<unsnipped><BR>
>>>So much so, in fact, that there is even a strong suggestion<BR>
>>>that our view of species as such may be wrong and there may be no<BR>
>>>'true' species in the objective sense. In other words, that too is<BR>
>>>feasible.<BR>
</unsnipped><BR>
>>Species were originally thought of as discrete, fundamental<BR>
>>units.  However, biologists have long recognized that they<BR>
>>are actually arbitrary units with indistinct edges.  That<BR>
>>does not mean that the concept of species is not useful, but<BR>
>>one must always be careful when using the term.<BR>
>Again, that's what I said...<BR>
<BR>
	Again, not exactly.  When you refered to "our view of species"<BR>
	I took it to mean the current view of species held by the<BR>
	biological community.  As I tried to explain, the ideas being<BR>
	discussed here do not suggest in any way that our (biologists')<BR>
	view of species is wrong.<BR>
<BR>
<unsnipped><BR>
>>>Genome and virus responses to ecological stress are well documented -<BR>
>>>the Peppered Moth is a superb example (as well as a traditional<BR>
>>>teaching reference, so you should find it easily). All of which adds<BR>
>>>up to the story being quite reasonable.<BR>
>>The Peppered Moth story is a classic case of evolution by<BR>
>>natural selection, but I don't know of any involvement of<BR>
>>any kind of virus.<BR>
>I didn't say there was - I said that genetic responses and viral<BR>
>responses to evironmental stress were well known and gave the Peppered<BR>
>Moth as an example of getic change in response to environmental<BR>
>stress.<BR>
<snipped><BR>
<BR>
	My appology, I read too much into your comments.  Just to be<BR>
	clear, then: when you are refering to virus responses to<BR>
	ecological stress, are you refering to simple natural selection<BR>
	on the virus or to viral involvement in the transfer of genetic<BR>
	material between reproductively isolated species?<BR>
<BR>
Peez<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 09:28:27 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Kiri Aradia Morgan <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
Subject: values<BR>
<BR>
On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Evyn MacDude wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> Dan Lane wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > I've suspected this over the years and have often wondered/speculated on<BR>
> > what "Imperial Culture" is like.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > -What are its ideals?<BR>
> <BR>
> Getting really drunk and sleeping with Bimbos?.... At least that is<BR>
> the culture most of my characters live in...<BR>
> <BR>
Hey.  Just because a girl likes to sleep with pilots and soldiers when<BR>
they are on leave does not mean you should call her a bimbo. <BR>
<BR>
right, Seiji?<BR>
right, Mitsuru?<BR>
<BR>
:P<BR>
<BR>
Kiri@bimbo.ja.nai.com<BR>
******************************************************************************<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan                                  93!  Thou Art God<BR>
tiamat@tsoft.com<BR>
<BR>
"If time passes, everything turns into beauty<BR>
If the rains stop, tears clean the scars of memory away<BR>
Everything starts wearing fresh colors<BR>
Every sound begins playing a heartfelt melody<BR>
Jealousy embellishes a page of the epic<BR>
Desire is embraced in a dream..."              -- X-JAPAN<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 12:32:17 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
Subject: Vectored Thrust (includes Big Ships connection)<BR>
<BR>
<David P. Summers><BR>
>  > This might be a difference between MT and CT.  In CT ships<BR>
>  > can thrust in any direction.  Do they have to actually swivel<BR>
>  > around in MT to change direction?  (Seems a bit crude).<BR>
</DPS><BR>
<BR>
Where did you read that ships could thrust in any direction in CT? <BR>
I don't recall seeing anything to suggest that. Or is that IYTU?  As for<BR>
crude, I disagree.  You're probably thinking about all those NASA shots of<BR>
spinning then thrusting.  This is very low tech and painstakingly careful.<BR>
At Traveller ship combat TLs things are going to look more like B5<BR>
star-fires whipping about their axes.  Very cool.<BR>
<BR>
In the MT SOM it mentions some degree of vectored thrust. But as<BR>
others have pointed out, the thrust, originating from the back end of<BR>
the ship, should spin it rather than shift it laterally (but see below). I<BR>
always figured this vectored thrust was _meant_ to spin the ship,<BR>
avoiding the need for pesky sets of attitude thrusters.  The vectored<BR>
thrust is used to make attitude changes and the rearward thrust is then<BR>
used to make velocity changes.<BR>
<BR>
Now, since thruster plates are magitech anyways, you could just<BR>
arbitrarily assume that they can be used to produce lateral shifts, but<BR>
even at that the 30% lateral thrust is going to limit your dodging. <BR>
You're better to spin and then thrust using the full force of the<BR>
t-plates. If you want 100% vectored thrust in all directions, you can<BR>
declare that t-plates produce ship-enveloping fields that move it this<BR>
way, but then either way, why mount them on the back?  The SOM's<BR>
explanation sounds really weak to me on this point. <BR>
<BR>
The best option, IMHO, is to allow for 100% vectored thrust, but<BR>
originating from the t-plate.  The thrust in this case is "real", that is<BR>
it's some form of radiation that will hurt the ship and/or crew if it<BR>
washes across them. That's why you put the tplates on the back.  But the<BR>
thrust can be pointed in any direction from the plate (except back at the<BR>
ship of course). <BR>
<BR>
In terms of attitude change, this means a 20 m fighter with 6g accel can<BR>
whip it's tail around 180 degrees (a distance of 31.4 m, assuming center<BR>
of mass is in the middle)  in a little over a second.  That's the kind of<BR>
zippy Starfire fighter I want!  OTOH (drifting back into the big ships<BR>
question) a 500 m ship with 6g is going to take over 10 seconds to pull<BR>
the same maneuver.  (Note:  I'm assuming accel to mid-point orientation,<BR>
flip vector of thrust, decel to new orientation. Check my math.)<BR>
<BR>
Note that under this regime, you'd want to be "back heavy". This explains<BR>
the popularity of wedge designs! :-)<BR>
<BR>
Charles C.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:07:35 +0100<BR>
From: "MJ Dougherty" <martinjd@globalnet.co.uk><BR>
Subject: Military data<BR>
<BR>
I urgently need URLs for any and all defense contracting firms dealing with<BR>
naval weapon and sensor systems.<BR>
<BR>
Thats's right, I'm building my own navy... or something.<BR>
<BR>
MJD<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:48:42 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Military data<BR>
<BR>
well, I know US Subs handles contracts for the US Military to build<BR>
submarines.Their website is www.ussubs.com<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: MJ Dougherty [mailto:martinjd@globalnet.co.uk]<BR>
> Sent: 07 August 2000 18:08<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Military data<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> I urgently need URLs for any and all defense contracting <BR>
> firms dealing with<BR>
> naval weapon and sensor systems.<BR>
> <BR>
> Thats's right, I'm building my own navy... or something.<BR>
> <BR>
> MJD<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2000 21:21:52 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/06/00 at 03:14 PM,  "David P. Summers" <summers@alum.mit.edu> said:<BR>
<BR>
>>If it allocates 2 to forward and 1 to dodging...<BR>
>>            ___<BR>
>>   ___---~~~ ()<BR>
>>   O----|----()<BR>
>>   ~~~---___ ()<BR>
>>            ~~~<BR>
>...it is going to be in *one* of the () at the end of it's move.<BR>
<BR>
>This is moving laterally, not rotating.  You need accel perpendicular  to<BR>
>the direction of travel.<BR>
<BR>
Which you get by turning. or rotating, the ship laterally. That's what *I* meant.  Did you mean rotating parallel to the axis of thrust?<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:26:54 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3 Weapon Limits? (was: Re: FFS3 Example of Modular System)<BR>
<BR>
At 1:06 -0400 7/8/00, Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com> wrote:<BR>
>Personally, I would prefer the LBB/HG limits.  They're simple and <BR>
>consistent, and<BR>
>they're canon.<BR>
<BR>
How about getting an average value for the surface area of a fitting <BR>
(maybe include a handwave for reinforcement of the hull locally) that <BR>
corresponds to the HG/Bk 2 limits? Maybe the space is for (1) <BR>
radiators for losses in lasing and vents for missile launches?<BR>
<BR>
This also means you can shoe horm more weapons on a custom design...<BR>
<BR>
Or just think of an appropriate handwave reason that the Imperium <BR>
would have legislated that weapons mounts need a minimum area, and <BR>
use this for the standard designs. Allow different areas for <BR>
custom/none Imperial designs.<BR>
<BR>
'We have to leave that much space around the turret to allow the <BR>
repair dock to lift and tip the weapon clear using an LSP Grav-o-lift <BR>
Mk 2345 without risk of damaging another turret.'<BR>
<BR>
"But no one uses the Mk 2345 anymore!"<BR>
<BR>
'I know, but there was a really nasty accident when a turret magazine <BR>
went off on the docks in Ton Vorn and killed a  lot of people. <BR>
They've never repealed the law since, but sometimes you see Navy <BR>
Ships that ignore it. BuShips won't clear a civilian ship for use in <BR>
the Imperium if it breaks the rules'.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 10:50:23 -0700<BR>
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu><BR>
Subject: TML close to TNS? ;-)<BR>
<BR>
Someone's been paying attention to the list!<BR>
<BR>
http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/traveller/news.html<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Bruce Johnson<BR>
University of Arizona<BR>
College of Pharmacy<BR>
Information Technology Group<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 14:37:20 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Robert Conley <estar@toolcity.net><BR>
Subject: RE: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
> In other words - 0 is needed.<BR>
> <BR>
> However - according to HG you _can_ use other sources to power the JDrive if<BR>
> you want (such as a black globe). The JDrive has .5% of the ships<BR>
> displacment per JN (ie, 100 ton jump 2 ship = 1% or 1 dton of capacitors).<BR>
> Each ton of capacitors holds 36 EP's and each EP is 250 MW. So a scout<BR>
> courier needs to have 9000 MWs in its capacitators to initate a jump<BR>
> (weither generated by the jump drive or by black globes)<BR>
<BR>
Doesn't this mean that you could built a High Guard Ship without hydrogen<BR>
fuel and have extra power plants to generate the EPs to charge the<BR>
capacitators.<BR>
<BR>
Rob Conley<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:17:44 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
How about udsing the globe as a giant solar radiation collector?<BR>
At the orbital radius of earth, the mean solar flux is ~ 1353 Watts/square<BR>
meter.  Collector side  surface area would be 2(pi)r^2 (hemisphere surface<BR>
area).<BR>
<BR>
For a Tigress at 119m radius, this gives about 120.4 MW assuming no losses,<BR>
which there would be.<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Robert Conley" <estar@toolcity.net><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 2:37 PM<BR>
Subject: RE: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > In other words - 0 is needed.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > However - according to HG you _can_ use other sources to power the<BR>
JDrive if<BR>
> > you want (such as a black globe). The JDrive has .5% of the ships<BR>
> > displacment per JN (ie, 100 ton jump 2 ship = 1% or 1 dton of<BR>
capacitors).<BR>
> > Each ton of capacitors holds 36 EP's and each EP is 250 MW. So a scout<BR>
> > courier needs to have 9000 MWs in its capacitators to initate a jump<BR>
> > (weither generated by the jump drive or by black globes)<BR>
><BR>
> Doesn't this mean that you could built a High Guard Ship without hydrogen<BR>
> fuel and have extra power plants to generate the EPs to charge the<BR>
> capacitators.<BR>
><BR>
> Rob Conley<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:19:07 +0100<BR>
From: "Mark Preston" <mark@mpreston.demon.co.uk><BR>
Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (long)<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of<BR>
> Ian Ferguson<BR>
> Sent: 07 August 2000 16:51<BR>
> To: traveller@mpgn.com<BR>
> Subject: RE: Darwin's Radio plausible? (long)<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> Mark Preston writes:<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> Not exactly.  You said that 40-60% of our DNA is 'junk' DNA, while<BR>
> I explained that as much as 90% may be 'junk' DNA (plus I added a<BR>
> little detail for those who might be interested).<BR>
><BR>
My apologies - I misunderstood your point. You are quite correct about<BR>
the total amount of possible 'junk' DNA, but given the growth of<BR>
knowledge about transposons, activators and inter-related gene<BR>
'switches', Celera estimates are now in the 40% to 60% range. The<BR>
estimate from the Human Genome Project is 60% - 75%, but I was using<BR>
the lower estimate to point out just how much potential the book has<BR>
to play with.<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> 	I would warn against early estimates in this regard.<BR>
><BR>
Agreed, and for the same reasons. There is also the high possibility<BR>
of simple statistical errors at this stage as well as experimental<BR>
issues and the potential for an underlying non-random element.<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	I'm sorry, but I do not follow you here.  Why is it you get<BR>
> 	"rapid multiple speciation?"<BR>
><BR>
You get it because punctuated evolution depends on the assumption that<BR>
at periods of high evolutionary activity, there is an increase in the<BR>
rate of mutation expression (if not actual mutation) and of<BR>
environmental selection on these new phenotypes. Such selection<BR>
pressure in an effectively isolated group (due to the pressure rather<BR>
than gepgraphic features) will result in rapid multiple speciation<BR>
from a single species. Obviously, for this the classical documented<BR>
example is the Galapagos finches - provided you remember the current<BR>
thinking on 'species'.<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	Whoops!  The part that you snipped was the part that was<BR>
> 	entirely new to me.  That's my fault, as I was not very clear<BR>
> 	with that comment/question.  Is there a source for the<BR>
> 	connection between retroviruses and punctuated equilibrium?<BR>
><BR>
Ah - this time you misundertood. AFAIK, there is none and I certainly<BR>
didn't suggest it - just that they could mess around with the genetic<BR>
strand.<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	Again, not exactly.  When you refered to "our view of species"<BR>
> 	I took it to mean the current view of species held by the<BR>
> 	biological community.  As I tried to explain, the ideas being<BR>
> 	discussed here do not suggest in any way that our<BR>
> (biologists')<BR>
> 	view of species is wrong.<BR>
><BR>
No - the biological community has, which is what I said. Refer to the<BR>
New Scientist archives for a good reference.<BR>
><BR>
[snip]<BR>
><BR>
> 	My appology, I read too much into your comments.  Just to be<BR>
> 	clear, then: when you are refering to virus responses to<BR>
> 	ecological stress, are you refering to simple natural<BR>
> selection<BR>
> 	on the virus or to viral involvement in the transfer<BR>
> of genetic<BR>
> 	material between reproductively isolated species?<BR>
><BR>
I was thinking of the genetic transfer work in non-related species and<BR>
the evolutionary pressure on the amended organisms.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 13:36:01 -0700<BR>
From: "Koji Suzuki" <kzuke@compuserve.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Military data<BR>
<BR>
Try the FAS site. http://www.fas.org/man/index.html  They have the best<BR>
complete database on mil equiment, US and ROW, that I've seen for free on<BR>
the net.  If anyone knows a better site, I'd be interested<BR>
<BR>
> -----Original Message-----<BR>
> From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> [mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of MJ Dougherty<BR>
> Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 10:08 AM<BR>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
> Subject: Military data<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
><BR>
> I urgently need URLs for any and all defense contracting firms<BR>
> dealing with<BR>
> naval weapon and sensor systems.<BR>
><BR>
> Thats's right, I'm building my own navy... or something.<BR>
><BR>
> MJD<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 16:50:35 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: FFS3: Power Systems<BR>
<BR>
Just a quick suggestion...<BR>
<BR>
We normally figure power plant volume by multiplying MWs by some<BR>
factor for MW/m^3 for the type and TL of the plant.  FFS2 introduced<BR>
an economy of scale factor to give large installations a volume<BR>
break.<BR>
<BR>
I'd like to propose a simplified way of handling the "economy of<BR>
scale" factor.  The "extra" volume could be thought of as the<BR>
required overhead for controls, access and so on, and would be an<BR>
additional volume equal to the square root of the plant itself, ie.<BR>
<BR>
  Power Plant Volume = MW * factor + sqrt(MW * factor)<BR>
  <BR>
Thus if we are building a 900 MW power plant at 1 MW/m^3, and we<BR>
build it as...<BR>
<BR>
 1 engine = 900 * 1 + sqrt(900*1) = 930 m^3<BR>
<BR>
 2 engines = 450 * 1 + sqrt(450*1) = 472 + 472 = 944 m^3<BR>
<BR>
 3 engines = 300 * 1 + sqrt(300*1) = 318 * 3 = 954 m^3<BR>
<BR>
 10 engines = 90 * 1 + sqrt(90*1) = 100 * 10 = 1,000 m^3<BR>
<BR>
So, building several smaller engines requires proportionally more<BR>
overhead than building one large one, and we get our economy of<BR>
scale.  The downside of doing this is that smaller engines take up<BR>
more volumn that before and cost more, so everyone would want to<BR>
build one big engine...right?. Maybe not...<BR>
<BR>
With one big power plant, if it gets knocked out your ship is done,<BR>
but with 2 or more power plants losing one power plant only reduces<BR>
your possible output.  Tradeoff time!  <BR>
<BR>
Commercial ships might want to have one big power plant and save a<BR>
couple of tons for another cabin or more cargo.  Warships would want<BR>
to have several power plants so they could keep fighting if one or<BR>
more is knocked out.  Non-warships that "go in harm's way" might<BR>
want to have more than one engine as well, just in case, they lose<BR>
one from natural...or...um...unnatural causes.  <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:01:56 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Definite Articles (OT) <BR>
<BR>
>From: trentfs@ix.netcom.com<BR>
<BR>
>Which brings to mind an apparently-uncommented-upon feature <BR>
>of Northern Californian linguistics that I've noticed -- <BR>
>the tendency for these types to abbreviate words down to <BR>
>their first syllable (i.e. "CalTrain," "SamTrans," et numerous <BR>
>al).  Here in the southern part of the state we don't do <BR>
<BR>
NoCal was for a long time the site of a major naval base (Alameda) and had<BR>
several ships based here.  No doubt the tendency to use first syllables<BR>
came from naval personnel who settled here.  (E.g., CINCLANT, CINCPAC,<BR>
NAVINT, et cetera (usu. abbr. etc., like a navabbr) or et alia (usu. abbr.<BR>
et al., another forerunner of navabbr).<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 10:14:57 +1200<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
On 7 Aug 2000, at 4:03, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> on 8/7/00 3:35 AM, Antti Lahtinen at lahtinen@ee.tut.fi wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> > When the barred of a firearm is cut down below the optimal<BR>
> > length, some of the propellant may not have completely combusted<BR>
> > before the projectile exists the barrel. The result is decrease<BR>
> <BR>
> Actually, in modern firearms (i.e. firing smokeless powder), all the powder<BR>
> combusts in the cartridge case.  Shortening the barrel limits the working time<BR>
> of the expanding gas on the projectile.  Muzzle velocity is reduced and pressure<BR>
> of propellant gases is increased. Any propellant not combusted at the muzzle, is<BR>
> likely to remain so regardless of barrel length.  This is a common misconception<BR>
> that is true of black powder only.<BR>
<BR>
Are you sure of that? I've seen sone very blackpowder like streaks of fire from <BR>
smokeless rilfes fired at night. Admitedly they were rather overbore magnums <BR>
with maxed out loads.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 10:14:57 +1200<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
On 7 Aug 2000, at 13:35, Antti Lahtinen wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Chris Seamans wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
>  > What effect, if any, does sawing off the barrel have.<BR>
> <BR>
>  When the barred of a firearm is cut down below the optimal<BR>
>  length, some of the propellant may not have completely combusted<BR>
>  before the projectile exists the barrel. The result is decrease<BR>
>  in projectile velocity and highly visible and loud muzzle blast.<BR>
>  Shortening the barrel will also reduce the weapon mass and<BR>
>  usually cause stronger felt recoil.<BR>
> <BR>
>  All these effects decrease the weapon performance.<BR>
> <BR>
>  The advantage of a short shotgun is maneuverability and 	<BR>
>  concealability. Sawed-off shotguns are usually two-barrel break<BR>
>  action guns (very few pump-action or self-loaders can be<BR>
>  shortened), and have low range and are unpleasant to shoot with.<BR>
<BR>
Most hunting pump-actions can be sawn-off. The limit with pumps is the length <BR>
of the magazine, and most hunting guns have 2 or 3 round magazine, so they can <BR>
be shortened a fair bit. Police/Military pumps tend to have longer magazines <BR>
and shorter barrels so often they're the same length and there's no point <BR>
shortening the barrel.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:47:06 EDT<BR>
From: JFZeigler@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Chat<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 7/25/00 10:08:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time, lkw@io.com <BR>
writes:<BR>
<BR>
> I need a vict . . . er . . . volunteer to conduct a chat on JTAS --<BR>
>  possibly using the "chat in character" notion Steve floated in his poll<BR>
>  recently.<BR>
>  <BR>
>  Any takers?<BR>
<BR>
I'm game, although I wonder if I'm not serving as the chat guest a bit<BR>
too often. . .<BR>
<BR>
Hmmm.  What persona to take on?  I've been playing a Vegan businessman<BR>
in our PBEM game.  Or I could do Archduke Adair. . .<BR>
<BR>
- ----------<BR>
Jon F. Zeigler: Mathematician, computer geek, amateur historian, freelance<BR>
writer, occasional scribbler of bad poetry<BR>
"For any statement, no matter how innocuous, there exists a nonempty<BR>
set of people who will take offense at it."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:52:41 EDT<BR>
From: JFZeigler@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Chat<BR>
<BR>
That was meant to go to LKW, not the list.  Apologies.  Bloody reply-to<BR>
function. . .<BR>
<BR>
- ----------<BR>
Jon F. Zeigler: Mathematician, computer geek, amateur historian, freelance<BR>
writer, occasional scribbler of bad poetry<BR>
"For any statement, no matter how innocuous, there exists a nonempty<BR>
set of people who will take offense at it."<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2897<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-zb01.mx.aol.com (rly-zb01.mail.aol.com [172.31.41.1]) by air-zb02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 18:54:18 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-zb01.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 18:53:53 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id SAA46194;<BR>
	Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:53:46 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:53:22 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id SAA46147<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:53:22 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 18:53:22 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008072253.SAA46147@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2897<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2898</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/7/00 8:47:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest       Monday, August 7 2000       Volume 1999 : Number 2898<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
(Update) J.A. Keith Memorial site<BR>
Re: Owch <BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
RE: Jump initiation<BR>
OT: Iain Bank's Next Culture Novel<BR>
Re: Minis Questions<BR>
re: Soylent sigs<BR>
Re: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
Re: values<BR>
Archduke Adair (was Re: Chat)<BR>
Re: Imperial Law ?<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2897<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Jump initiation<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 16:07:02 -0700<BR>
From: "J. Paul Sanders" <timmon@primenet.com><BR>
Subject: (Update) J.A. Keith Memorial site<BR>
<BR>
Did a major update to the new J. Andrew Keith memorial site today...<BR>
<BR>
Added a photo. of Andrew that was sent by Bill Keith and added a partial<BR>
bibliography that was compiled by Timothy Collinson and sent by Bryan<BR>
Borich (my thanks to all three). Also added "The Eternal Legionnaire" - a<BR>
flik that Andrew wrote for inclusion in the never published fourth Fifth<BR>
Foreign Legion novel.<BR>
<BR>
The url is: www.primenet.com/~timmon/andrewkeith.html<BR>
<BR>
Any comments/suggestions for improvement are welcome.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Cordially,<BR>
Paul Sanders<BR>
Clans MacAlasdair, Comyn, and O'Delany<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:19:09 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Owch <BR>
<BR>
>From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
<BR>
>>>"Homines est! Dici omnes! Soylens viridi1s HOMINES EST!">> <BR>
>> Ningen da!  Ningen da!  Soylent no midori wa honto ni ningen da!<BR>
>Translation please?<BR>
<BR>
Sure:  "C'est des gens!  Dites tous le monde! Soylente verte EST DES<BR>
GENS!"  "Est ist Leute!  Reden Sie jedemmann!  Soylendegrn IST LEUTE!" <BR>
(Those are pretty close, I think.)  (I'll work on Finnish and Thai for you<BR>
later; someone should take a stab at Vilani.)<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:45:13 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
>From: "Sir Sabat" <sir_sabat@hotmail.com><BR>
<BR>
>>25mm vehicles for use with the above --<BR>
>* I would prefer military vehicles. It's rare for a civil vehicle to<BR>
>enter into mini combat. Unless you combine Car Wars & Traveller (another<BR>
>SJG  x-over idea!)<BR>
<BR>
Au contraire, civilian vehicles are often involved in combat.  What else<BR>
do you call it when you in your air/raft are chasing the Zhodani spy in a<BR>
grav speeder and you're shooting at each other all the while? or when the<BR>
police join the fray and knock both of you out of the sky before you reach<BR>
the extrality line?  Or when your meeting in the parking lot to score some<BR>
contraband turns bad and the police show up and start shooting at the<BR>
sellers, who start shooting back, and you're in the middle?  <BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:53:46 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
> Are you sure of that? I've seen sone very blackpowder like streaks of fire<BR>
from<BR>
> smokeless rilfes fired at night. Admitedly they were rather overbore<BR>
magnums<BR>
> with maxed out loads.<BR>
<BR>
I am so informed be several individuals in the ammo manufacturing business,<BR>
and it is noted in the literature (see "understanding firearms ballistics"<BR>
by Robert Rinker).  I understand that there are sometimes artifacts from the<BR>
propellant and primer compound that can be seen, and the combustion products<BR>
are incandescent themselves, unless flash suppressants are added to the<BR>
propellant.  Nitrocellulose propellants rapidly deflagrate, as opposed to<BR>
black powder, which is a low explosive. The burn rate of BP is slow enough<BR>
that unburnt powder can be ejected from the muzzle.<BR>
<BR>
I highly recommend Rinker's book to anyone interested in the technical<BR>
aspects of ballistics, but it's pretty dry reading to someone who's not into<BR>
guns and has a technical (and mathematical) bent. I'm basing a lot of my<BR>
revised gun design system on it, and so far, the results are tracking pretty<BR>
well with real world firearms (no 18kg .458).  The only problem is that the<BR>
modeling is getting really complex, so I expect I'll end up creating some<BR>
generalized tables that are good approximations.<BR>
<BR>
Do you have excel? I'd love to have someone else who's gun knowledgeable<BR>
check my work.<BR>
<BR>
BTW, Rinker's book sort of reminds me of all the chat on FFS3 and ships<BR>
that's been posted on the tml lately.  I always thought that book 5 was<BR>
complex enough.  Thank heavens for excel.<BR>
<BR>
I can get citations for interior ballistics, if you're interested.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 00:47:51 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
At 18:53 -0400 7/8/00, Robert Conley <estar@toolcity.net> wrote:<BR>
>Doesn't this mean that you could built a High Guard Ship without hydrogen<BR>
>fuel and have extra power plants to generate the EPs to charge the<BR>
>capacitators.<BR>
<BR>
The Power Plant would need hydrogen fuel  too.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 00:53:01 +0100<BR>
From: SD Mooney <dom@cybergoths.u-net.com><BR>
Subject: OT: Iain Bank's Next Culture Novel<BR>
<BR>
Just a head up that the latest (September 2000) issue of SFX has an <BR>
in depth interview with Iain Banks which includes discussion of 'Look <BR>
to Windward', the next Culture novel. Apparently he's taking a break <BR>
for a while after this one.<BR>
<BR>
I haven't checked to see the release date yet.<BR>
<BR>
Dom<BR>
- ----------Dom Mooney---dom@cybergoths.u-net.com------------<BR>
"We tell the tales of heroes to remind ourselves that we too<BR>
can be great" - John Wick, 7th Sea<BR>
http://www.cybergoths.u-net.com   http://www.bits.org.uk/ <BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 16:57:03 -0700<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Minis Questions<BR>
<BR>
><BR>
> Au contraire, civilian vehicles are often involved in combat.  What else<BR>
> do you call it when you in your air/raft are chasing the Zhodani spy in a<BR>
> grav speeder and you're shooting at each other all the while? or when the<BR>
> police join the fray and knock both of you out of the sky before you reach<BR>
> the extrality line?  Or when your meeting in the parking lot to score some<BR>
> contraband turns bad and the police show up and start shooting at the<BR>
> sellers, who start shooting back, and you're in the middle?<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
The exact reason that Military Technologies, LIC offers armored panels for a<BR>
wide variety of civilian vehicles.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:33:34 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: re: Soylent sigs<BR>
<BR>
>From: Charles Collin <charles@hebb.psych.mcgill.ca><BR>
>Okay, this is very cool.  But it would be even better if we could come up<BR>
>with the latin for "soy" and "lentil".  Probably a tall order though.  Am<BR>
>I right in my assumptions about the derivation of Soylent?  <BR>
<BR>
The English word lentil is derived from the Latin word lens, which means<BR>
lense (if I recall my plant taxonomy class correctly).  Soy we'll have to<BR>
look up.  I have no idea if your idea of the derivation is correct.<BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:23:45 -0700<BR>
From: "Robert Snyder" <robert_snyder@prontomail.com><BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
  <BR>
<Snyder><BR>
>Would someone be able to relate Tech Level to Terra Historical Time?<BR>
<BR>
<Erickson><BR>
>From the Traveller Book<BR>
>TL 0 Stone Age, Primitive<BR>
>TL 1 Bronze to Middle Ages<BR>
>TL 2 circa 1400 to 1700<BR>
>TL 3 circa 1700 to 1860<BR>
>TL 4 circa 1860 to 1900<BR>
>TL 5 circa 1900 to 1939<BR>
>TL 6 circa 1940 to 1969<BR>
>TL 7 circa 1970 to 1979<BR>
>TL 8 circa 1980 to 1989<BR>
>TL 9 circa 1990 to 2000<BR>
<BR>
Tech Level is a fundamental concept in Traveller.  It is important that the tech level relationship <BR>
to Terra Historical Time is explicitly defined in FFSv3.<BR>
<BR>
I recognize the above table as CT's relationship; however, I know that this relationship has <BR>
changed as Traveller has evolved.  Unfortunately, I do not have T4's table--I passed on the IG <BR>
books because of the quality issues.  I've been waiting for T5 to come out.  So, what is the <BR>
generally accepted canonical relationship ?  (This time I will write it down :) ).<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
SPACECRAFT NAVIGATION:<BR>
<BR>
<Snyder><BR>
> The only alternative will be some sort of inertial navigation system (INS).  <BR>
<BR>
I was premature in my earlier post .  Most of my experience has been with INS and I did not <BR>
really consider stellar navigation.  <BR>
<BR>
<Erickson><BR>
> Not true. You can naviagate quite well with what amounts to an automated "star sight" <BR>
>system. You determine your orientation by the positions of bright stars. You combine that <BR>
>with the direction and size of the star(s) in the system to give you a rough position (good to <BR>
>within 100,000 km or so I'd guess). You then check the empheris for the system, and check <BR>
>the positions of the planets, comets, and/or major asteroids. That'll fine down the position a <BR>
>lot.  And you can bounce radar off the nearer bodies to get accurate distances to go with the <BR>
>angles.  Sure, you can't fine down your position much more than +/- 10,000 km until you are <BR>
>within 100,000 km or so of the planet you are interested in. So what? Between the huge <BR>
>amounts of delta-V available at higher TLs and the sheer *scale* of a star system, you don't <BR>
>*need* to know your position all that closely. 100,000 km is *very* accurate when dealing <BR>
>with distances measured in AU (1 AU = 150,000,000 km).  Note that there's no way an INS <BR>
>can tell you anything useful when you jump into the system because it's been isolated from <BR>
>the universe for a week. So it'd have to be set via nav beacons, or by the sort of observations <BR>
>listed above. Not worth it.<BR>
<BR>
On the Navy's Trident missile submarine the SLBMs used a combination INS and stellar <BR>
navigation (the D-5 if I recall).  This combination was sufficient for SLBMs to achieve strategic <BR>
scale accuracy--not as good as land-based systems, but good.  Stellar navigation has the <BR>
potential to be very accurate, much more accurate then you are stating above.<BR>
<BR>
Below is an overview discussion of how INS's operate:<BR>
An INS (inertial navigation system) is composed of an IMU (inertial measurement unit).  The <BR>
IMU measures acceleration.  Given acceleration and time we can compute (through calculus) <BR>
velocity and the position change.  The early IMU's had a dedicated computer perform these <BR>
calculations.  Note that the IMU is generating the change in position and NOT the position.  <BR>
For the INS to generate the position an initial position fix is needed.  The position will be the <BR>
change in position (supplied by the IMU) plus the initial position.  The position accuracy will <BR>
be based on these two components.  The initial position fix can be generated several ways.  <BR>
For land-based ICBMs the launch silo is surveyed and the initial position data fed into the <BR>
computer system.  For aircraft the airbase has been surveyed and this data will be input into <BR>
the computer.  For carrier aircraft the initial position will ultimately be supplied by the aircraft <BR>
carrier's navigation system.  For submarine launched ICBMs things get tricky.  Because a <BR>
submarine moves it is not possible to survey a position;  additionally, relying on the <BR>
submarine's navigation system will not be sufficient to enable the SLBM to achieve strategic <BR>
scale accuracy.  So, SLBMs use a built-in telescope (stellar navigation) during launch to <BR>
obtain an initial position fix.     <BR>
<BR>
An INS will always need to have the initial position information fed to it.  As an INS rapidly <BR>
loses accuracy over time it will need frequent position updates as well.  For Traveller <BR>
spacecraft this will either be via navigational beacons or stellar navigation (telescope). <BR>
<BR>
A good question could be "Why not ditch the INS and use a strictly stellar system ?"  A <BR>
stellar system would start with initial position/position change and would use calculus to <BR>
generate the velocity and acceleration -- the exact opposite of the INS.  Which way to go <BR>
would hinge on accuracy losses and costs.  My guess is that Traveller spacecraft will use a <BR>
system similar to submarine launched ICBMs--a combination stellar and INS system.  The <BR>
stellar system would directly measure the position, the INS would directly measure the <BR>
acceleration, and both would use calculus to derive the velocity.  I believe a combination <BR>
approach would generate the highest accuracy at the lowest cost compared with a pure <BR>
system.<BR>
<BR>
How accurate does it have to be ?<BR>
I think accuracy has to be high for the following reasons:<BR>
(1)  ortillery (planetary bombardment):  modern day artillery needs accurate information on <BR>
their position so that they can place their rounds in the right place.  I don't think ortillery with <BR>
deadfall ordnance will be anything different.  PADS (position azimuth determination system) is <BR>
or was used by the US Army.<BR>
(2) jump:  there is little written about jump procedures other than how finicky, tricky, and <BR>
dangerous it all is.  I think accurately knowing the jump entry position/velocity/acceleration <BR>
will be very important in achieving the predicted jump exit position/velocity/acceleration.  We <BR>
could even assume that jump is heavily dependent on sensitive initial starting conditions, so <BR>
that small jump entry errors can generate huge jump exit errors (Misjump!?).<BR>
(3) jump (some more):  there are dangerous jump locations (the 10 and 100 planetary <BR>
diameters limits) which need to be navigated safely.  Jumping within the 100 planetary <BR>
diameter limit when one thinks they are safely at 110 diameters can create a disaster.  This is <BR>
the Traveller equivalent of the historical record of wet nautical ships running aground.  In the <BR>
US Navy it is (or was) a court-martial offense to run a ship aground.  I think the Imperial Navy <BR>
and Merchant Marine will have similar ideas.  Jumping within 10 diameters should be a major <BR>
Imperial crime.  <BR>
(4) Merchant Traffic Management:  To prevent collisions and efficiently handle dense traffic <BR>
there will probably be flight paths and other administrativia.  Space is big, but you absolutely <BR>
want to avoid any possibility of collisions.  These ships are hugely expensive. Excellent <BR>
position/velocity/acceleration information needed especially near the up-port, down-port, world, <BR>
etc.<BR>
(5) Naval Fleet Manuevers:  Complex manuevers of multiple ships require excellent <BR>
position/velocity/acceleration information. <BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
______________________________________________________________<BR>
Get Your Free E-mail and Homepage at http://www.prontomail.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:38:53 -0700<BR>
From: "Legate Legion" <legate@futureone.com><BR>
Subject: Re: values<BR>
<BR>
From: Kiri Aradia Morgan <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
<BR>
>Hey.  Just because a girl likes to sleep with pilots and soldiers when<BR>
>they are on leave does not mean you should call her a bimbo.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
    Kira, you brought this up, so you cannot blame me for saying this, but<BR>
as a Marine, the only women I know of who would sleep with a member of the<BR>
Airforce or Army is not called a bimbo, but hooker.  *weg*<BR>
<BR>
    I bid you peace.<BR>
<BR>
Legate Legion, Section 31 Agent at Large.<BR>
ICQ # 8973001<BR>
legate@futureone.com<BR>
<BR>
"I am a Ranger. We live for the One, we die for the One. We go to the dark<BR>
places where no one else dares venture! We stand on the bridge and no one<BR>
passes. Entil'zha Veni!"<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:38:03 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Archduke Adair (was Re: Chat)<BR>
<BR>
J. F. Zeigler wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Hmmm.  What persona to take on?  I've been playing a Vegan businessman<BR>
> in our PBEM game.  Or I could do Archduke Adair. . .<BR>
- ---<BR>
Adair would be interesting.  I always though of him being Afrikaaner,<BR>
specifically like Joss Ackland both physically and in terms of expression.<BR>
Like the character he played in Lethal Weapon II perhaps.<BR>
<BR>
I had this vision on him sort of being  a host and commentator of a<BR>
hypothetical Traveller TV series about the Rebellion.<BR>
<BR>
For those of you that remember the "Prisoner" TV series, it was bracketed by<BR>
a couple of PBS or ABC folkswho provided a "social commentary" on the show.<BR>
<BR>
I always imagined Adair doing something similar to this, except that he was<BR>
speaking to "us," a 20th century audience as an something of Imperial<BR>
advocate cum apologist.  His 5 minute commentaries were meant to do 2<BR>
things:<BR>
<BR>
- -Provide a more detailed glance at the 3I than one might guess from the<BR>
context of the show alone.<BR>
- -Challenge the viewers us to question and defend the basic tenets of OUR<BR>
society in the same way that the those responsible for Rebellion questioned<BR>
theirs.<BR>
<BR>
I thought that he would address such points as: (these are his controversial<BR>
points, not mine)<BR>
<BR>
- -The irrationality of mass democracy, which forces our political system to<BR>
appeal to the lowest common denominator and leaves it vulnerable to special<BR>
interest influence.<BR>
- -The irrational trust we place in our mass media to be the guardian of truth<BR>
when it is primarily interetsed in profit and sensationalism, and is<BR>
therefore an inherently destabilizing force to our society.<BR>
- -The de-emphasis that our modern values system places on honor, stability<BR>
and tradition.<BR>
<BR>
In the process, he could expound on the differing characters of 3I society<BR>
from that of the Zhodani and Solomani.<BR>
<BR>
In the end I envisioned the whole thing as a prompt for the viewers to do<BR>
some critical thinking and justify for themselve sthat our system(s) of<BR>
government are really better than that of the 3I.<BR>
<BR>
I though that it could be quite thought provoking.<BR>
<BR>
Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 17:55:59 -0700 (PDT)<BR>
From: Glenn Goffin <gmgoffin@yahoo.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Law ?<BR>
<BR>
Further to our discussion about why Imperial membership and citizenship<BR>
are attractive, I have a few thoughts.  These are my understanding, and<BR>
used in my Traveller universe, so caveat soylens mangitor.<BR>
<BR>
Imperial citizenship has some value outside the Imperium.  The Imperium<BR>
has an interest in the safety of its citizens (and their property) who are<BR>
travelling outside the Imperium, and might very well send its powerful<BR>
navy to protect them.  (The Don Pacifico affair, involving the British<BR>
Empire, comes to mind, but I'm sure this sort of issue occurred in Roman<BR>
times as well.)  Within the Imperium, once one has an Imperial passport,<BR>
one may travel freely within the Imperium (at least within Imperial<BR>
starports; worlds don't have to let you across the extrality line).  <BR>
<BR>
Imperial membership confers more benefits than client status does.  For<BR>
example, the Imperium pledges itself to provide to its members naval and<BR>
military defense from external enemies in perpetuity.  Client states may<BR>
not even get written treaties (just a course of conduct that indicates an<BR>
Imperial intention to protect), and these will only provide for defense<BR>
for as long as mutually beneficial.  On the other hand, client states<BR>
don't pay any taxes to the Imperium.  <BR>
<BR>
- --Glenn<BR>
<BR>
__________________________________________________<BR>
Do You Yahoo!?<BR>
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.<BR>
http://invites.yahoo.com/<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 20:24:44 -0400<BR>
From: "Dan Lane" <danielrlane@home.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
Sounds awesome Tod, could you discuss it?  (Better yet, could I get a copy<BR>
of your system when it's done?<BR>
<BR>
 I tried to do this research years and years (about a decade) ago but<BR>
couldn't get a satisfactory equation to model ballistic penetration.  Same<BR>
problem with damage.   Just don't have time to fiddle with this anymore.<BR>
<BR>
How do you model penetration and damage (living organism and inanimate<BR>
objects)?<BR>
Any thoughts of how to model laser and HE weapons?<BR>
<BR>
- -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
- ----- Original Message -----<BR>
From: "Tod Glenn" <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 7:53 PM<BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
> > Are you sure of that? I've seen sone very blackpowder like streaks of<BR>
fire<BR>
> from<BR>
> > smokeless rilfes fired at night. Admitedly they were rather overbore<BR>
> magnums<BR>
> > with maxed out loads.<BR>
><BR>
> I am so informed be several individuals in the ammo manufacturing<BR>
business,<BR>
> and it is noted in the literature (see "understanding firearms ballistics"<BR>
> by Robert Rinker).  I understand that there are sometimes artifacts from<BR>
the<BR>
> propellant and primer compound that can be seen, and the combustion<BR>
products<BR>
> are incandescent themselves, unless flash suppressants are added to the<BR>
> propellant.  Nitrocellulose propellants rapidly deflagrate, as opposed to<BR>
> black powder, which is a low explosive. The burn rate of BP is slow enough<BR>
> that unburnt powder can be ejected from the muzzle.<BR>
><BR>
> I highly recommend Rinker's book to anyone interested in the technical<BR>
> aspects of ballistics, but it's pretty dry reading to someone who's not<BR>
into<BR>
> guns and has a technical (and mathematical) bent. I'm basing a lot of my<BR>
> revised gun design system on it, and so far, the results are tracking<BR>
pretty<BR>
> well with real world firearms (no 18kg .458).  The only problem is that<BR>
the<BR>
> modeling is getting really complex, so I expect I'll end up creating some<BR>
> generalized tables that are good approximations.<BR>
><BR>
> Do you have excel? I'd love to have someone else who's gun knowledgeable<BR>
> check my work.<BR>
><BR>
> BTW, Rinker's book sort of reminds me of all the chat on FFS3 and ships<BR>
> that's been posted on the tml lately.  I always thought that book 5 was<BR>
> complex enough.  Thank heavens for excel.<BR>
><BR>
> I can get citations for interior ballistics, if you're interested.<BR>
><BR>
> Tod<BR>
><BR>
><BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:40:22 EDT<BR>
From: GDWGAMES@aol.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2897<BR>
<BR>
In a message dated 07-Aug-00 5:54:18 PM Central Daylight Time, <BR>
owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
<BR>
> >Which brings to mind an apparently-uncommented-upon feature <BR>
>  >of Northern Californian linguistics that I've noticed -- <BR>
>  >the tendency for these types to abbreviate words down to <BR>
>  >their first syllable (i.e. "CalTrain," "SamTrans," et numerous <BR>
>  >al).  Here in the southern part of the state we don't do <BR>
>  <BR>
>  NoCal was for a long time the site of a major naval base (Alameda) and had<BR>
>  several ships based here.  No doubt the tendency to use first syllables<BR>
>  came from naval personnel who settled here.  <BR>
<BR>
Or German. Kripo . . . Stalag . . . Kapo . . . Stuka there are non-military <BR>
ones, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.<BR>
<BR>
LKW<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 14:17:54 +1200<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
On 7 Aug 2000, at 16:53, Tod Glenn wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > Are you sure of that? I've seen sone very blackpowder like streaks of fire<BR>
> from<BR>
> > smokeless rilfes fired at night. Admitedly they were rather overbore<BR>
> magnums<BR>
> > with maxed out loads.<BR>
> <BR>
> I am so informed be several individuals in the ammo manufacturing business, and<BR>
> it is noted in the literature (see "understanding firearms ballistics" by Robert<BR>
> Rinker).  I understand that there are sometimes artifacts from the propellant<BR>
> and primer compound that can be seen, and the combustion products are<BR>
> incandescent themselves, unless flash suppressants are added to the propellant. <BR>
> Nitrocellulose propellants rapidly deflagrate, as opposed to black powder, which<BR>
> is a low explosive. The burn rate of BP is slow enough that unburnt powder can<BR>
> be ejected from the muzzle.<BR>
> <BR>
> I highly recommend Rinker's book to anyone interested in the technical<BR>
> aspects of ballistics, but it's pretty dry reading to someone who's not into<BR>
> guns and has a technical (and mathematical) bent. I'm basing a lot of my revised<BR>
> gun design system on it, and so far, the results are tracking pretty well with<BR>
> real world firearms (no 18kg .458).  The only problem is that the modeling is<BR>
> getting really complex, so I expect I'll end up creating some generalized tables<BR>
> that are good approximations.<BR>
> <BR>
> Do you have excel? I'd love to have someone else who's gun knowledgeable<BR>
> check my work.<BR>
<BR>
Yes, I have excel, and I'd be happy to have a look at anything you've done. <BR>
Just don't expect any proofing of maths, as it's been 10 years since I've done <BR>
anything involving such.<BR>
 <BR>
> BTW, Rinker's book sort of reminds me of all the chat on FFS3 and ships<BR>
> that's been posted on the tml lately.  I always thought that book 5 was<BR>
> complex enough.  Thank heavens for excel.<BR>
> <BR>
> I can get citations for interior ballistics, if you're interested.<BR>
<BR>
Somewhat, though the chances of my actually getting my hands on that sort of <BR>
literature to read isn't great.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 14:17:54 +1200<BR>
From: "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
On 7 Aug 2000, at 20:24, Dan Lane wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Sounds awesome Tod, could you discuss it?  (Better yet, could I get a copy<BR>
> of your system when it's done?<BR>
> <BR>
>  I tried to do this research years and years (about a decade) ago but<BR>
> couldn't get a satisfactory equation to model ballistic penetration.  Same<BR>
> problem with damage.   Just don't have time to fiddle with this anymore.<BR>
> <BR>
> How do you model penetration and damage (living organism and inanimate<BR>
> objects)?<BR>
> Any thoughts of how to model laser and HE weapons?<BR>
<BR>
I've been fooling with this off and on, too. So far my best results have been <BR>
from totally arbitary systems - decide how much damage you want a 9mmP round, a <BR>
5.56NATO round, etc to do, find some measure of power that fits these points OK <BR>
(momentum, KE, whatever) and viola! A new damage system.<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
"Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
<BR>
A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 21:38:00 -0500<BR>
From: Bill Hopper <whopper@pobox.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
 "If a ship absorbs enough energy to make a jump, and is supplied with sufficient<BR>
fuel, it may jump at the end of the turn." HG 2'nd ed, p43.  This is sometimes<BR>
used to justify jump fuel as 'injection mass' rather than fuel.<BR>
<BR>
WKH<BR>
<BR>
Robert Conley wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > In other words - 0 is needed.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > However - according to HG you _can_ use other sources to power the JDrive if<BR>
> > you want (such as a black globe). The JDrive has .5% of the ships<BR>
> > displacment per JN (ie, 100 ton jump 2 ship = 1% or 1 dton of capacitors).<BR>
> > Each ton of capacitors holds 36 EP's and each EP is 250 MW. So a scout<BR>
> > courier needs to have 9000 MWs in its capacitators to initate a jump<BR>
> > (weither generated by the jump drive or by black globes)<BR>
><BR>
> Doesn't this mean that you could built a High Guard Ship without hydrogen<BR>
> fuel and have extra power plants to generate the EPs to charge the<BR>
> capacitators.<BR>
><BR>
> Rob Conley<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 20:32:50 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
on 8/7/00 7:17 PM, Rupert Boleyn at rboleyn@paradise.net.nz wrote:<BR>
>> Do you have excel? I'd love to have someone else who's gun knowledgeable<BR>
>> check my work.<BR>
> <BR>
> Yes, I have excel, and I'd be happy to have a look at anything you've done.<BR>
> Just don't expect any proofing of maths, as it's been 10 years since I've done<BR>
> anything involving such.<BR>
<BR>
Actually, I'm just looking for someone to generate some guns, and see if the<BR>
comparative damage values, penetration, weight, etc look right and fit the<BR>
traveller system, particularly not CT versions (I'm a CT type of guy).<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 20:34:13 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
on 8/7/00 7:17 PM, Rupert Boleyn at rboleyn@paradise.net.nz wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> <BR>
> <BR>
> On 7 Aug 2000, at 20:24, Dan Lane wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
>> Sounds awesome Tod, could you discuss it?  (Better yet, could I get a copy<BR>
>> of your system when it's done?<BR>
>> <BR>
>> I tried to do this research years and years (about a decade) ago but<BR>
>> couldn't get a satisfactory equation to model ballistic penetration.  Same<BR>
>> problem with damage.   Just don't have time to fiddle with this anymore.<BR>
>> <BR>
>> How do you model penetration and damage (living organism and inanimate<BR>
>> objects)?<BR>
>> Any thoughts of how to model laser and HE weapons?<BR>
> <BR>
> I've been fooling with this off and on, too. So far my best results have been<BR>
> from totally arbitary systems - decide how much damage you want a 9mmP round,<BR>
> a <BR>
> 5.56NATO round, etc to do, find some measure of power that fits these points<BR>
> OK <BR>
> (momentum, KE, whatever) and viola! A new damage system.<BR>
> <BR>
> --<BR>
> "Rupert Boleyn" <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz><BR>
> <BR>
> A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history.<BR>
> <BR>
<BR>
Yes, there's a lot to be said for comparative systems like this.  The<BR>
problem becomes how to determine damage for high tech weapons.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:39:44 -0300<BR>
From: Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca><BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
At 07:48 PM 8/6/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>         If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, you <BR>
>> simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion. Lasers <BR>
>> are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too mind <BR>
>> bogglingly big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
><BR>
>Are rof's that fast reasonable?  I don't know....<BR>
<BR>
         I've seen designs go by on this list with ROF 800.  Even if that <BR>
is per 15 minute turn, that is still more than one pulse per second.  You <BR>
commented on 60m for 3g as a maximum distance, so if you evaluate against a <BR>
circle with r=60 and ROF=800...<BR>
<BR>
         ~3.14 * 60^2 = ~11305<BR>
         ~11305/800 = 1 shot per 14m2 = 1/~3m linear box pattern<BR>
<BR>
         If your ship is a 20m long hull, you took about 7 hits.<BR>
<BR>
	<BR>
	-- Michel R. Vaillancourt	<BR>
	   (ICQ # 31172292)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2898<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yg04.mx.aol.com (rly-yg04.mail.aol.com [172.18.147.4]) by air-yg02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 23:47:36 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yg04.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Mon, 07 Aug 2000 23:47:20 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id XAA57019;<BR>
	Mon, 7 Aug 2000 23:47:07 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 7 Aug 2000 23:46:57 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id XAA56973<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Mon, 7 Aug 2000 23:46:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 23:46:56 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008080346.XAA56973@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2898<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
<HTML><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10>Subj:	<B> Traveller-digest V1999 #2899</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10></B><BR>
Date:	8/8/00 1:41:21 AM Pacific Daylight Time<BR>
From:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
Sender:	owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Reply-to:	traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
To:	traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
</FONT><FONT  SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
Traveller-digest      Tuesday, August 8 2000      Volume 1999 : Number 2899<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.<BR>
All rights reserved.<BR>
<BR>
The following topics are covered in this digest:<BR>
<BR>
Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
ROF 800 (was RE: About Agility)<BR>
FFS3/GT: Starships Compatibility Issues<BR>
Re: Max Acceleration<BR>
Re: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2897<BR>
RE: FFS3: Power Systems<BR>
RE: Jump initiation<BR>
Re: values<BR>
RE: FFS3: Power Systems<BR>
Re: FFS3/GT: Starships Compatibility Issues<BR>
Re: Max Acceleration<BR>
Re: values<BR>
Re: values<BR>
Imperial Legions<BR>
Back engineered GURPS Modules Part 1 <BR>
Re: Imperial Legions<BR>
<BR>
----------------------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 20:49:28 -0700<BR>
From: Tod Glenn <webmaster@travellercentral.com><BR>
Subject: Re: Gunbunnies of the TML, lend me your ears!<BR>
<BR>
on 8/7/00 5:24 PM, Dan Lane at danielrlane@home.com wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> Sounds awesome Tod, could you discuss it?  (Better yet, could I get a copy<BR>
> of your system when it's done?<BR>
> <BR>
> I tried to do this research years and years (about a decade) ago but<BR>
> couldn't get a satisfactory equation to model ballistic penetration.  Same<BR>
> problem with damage.   Just don't have time to fiddle with this anymore.<BR>
> <BR>
> How do you model penetration and damage (living organism and inanimate<BR>
> objects)?<BR>
> Any thoughts of how to model laser and HE weapons?<BR>
> <BR>
> -Dan Lane<BR>
<BR>
I've been looking at both FFS2 and 3G3 as starting points (no sense in<BR>
reinventing the wheel).  I'm working with sectional density/velocity for<BR>
penetration and projectile energy/retardation for damage.<BR>
<BR>
I'll put together a more detailed rationale and post it to the tml.<BR>
<BR>
Tod<BR>
- --<BR>
"SolSec: Keeping the Confederation safe for Humaniti"<BR>
- -- <BR>
Tod Glenn<BR>
webmaster@travellercentral.com<BR>
webmaster@solsec.org<BR>
- --<BR>
http://www.travellercentral.com<BR>
http://www.solsec.org<BR>
http://www.grandsurvey.com<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2000 23:39:57 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: About Agility (was Re: FFS3: POLL)<BR>
<BR>
On 08/08/00 at 12:39 AM,  Michel Vaillancourt <misha@empire.atlantic-online.ns.ca> said:<BR>
<BR>
>         I've seen designs go by on this list with ROF 800.  Even if that<BR>
> is per 15 minute turn, that is still more than one pulse per second. <BR>
<BR>
Thirty minute turns, I believe, is where you get the ROF 800<BR>
designs.  That's 800 shots per 1,800 seconds, 1 per 2.25 seconds.<BR>
Still quite rapid at the Mj's each is putting out.<BR>
<BR>
>You  commented on 60m for 3g as a maximum distance, so if you evaluate<BR>
>against a  circle with r=60 and ROF=800...<BR>
<BR>
>         ~3.14 * 60^2 = ~11305<BR>
>         ~11305/800 = 1 shot per 14m2 = 1/~3m linear box pattern<BR>
<BR>
>         If your ship is a 20m long hull, you took about 7 hits.<BR>
<BR>
Yeah, that's correct. <BR>
<BR>
The laser's potentially high ROF, long sighting and firing ranges,<BR>
and the slow accelerations of ships and missiles is why lasers are<BR>
so deadly.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 00:50:50 EDT<BR>
From: GypsyComet@aol.com<BR>
Subject: ROF 800 (was RE: About Agility)<BR>
<BR>
>At 07:48 PM 8/6/00, you wrote:<BR>
>>>         If you  presume ROF's in the dozens of pulses per second, you <BR>
>>> simply pepper the probability sphere until you get an explosion. Lasers <BR>
>>> are just to mind-bogglingly fast to miss, and space is too mind <BR>
>>> bogglingly big for missiles to hit.  End of analysis <g>.<BR>
>><BR>
>>Are rof's that fast reasonable?  I don't know....<BR>
><BR>
>         I've seen designs go by on this list with ROF 800.  Even if that <BR>
>is per 15 minute turn, that is still more than one pulse per second.<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
 Like the Point Defense Turret Can I did for my TNE game: TWO ROF 800 1.6m <BR>
lasers, powerplant, fuel and crew station, all in 3 dtons...<BR>
<BR>
GC<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 01:01:41 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
From: Dalton Spence <dalton.spence@hwcn.org><BR>
Subject: FFS3/GT: Starships Compatibility Issues<BR>
<BR>
This reply has also been sent to the newsgroups.<BR>
At the moment two major books for designing Traveller starships are<BR>
under development: "Fusion, Fire & Steel version 3" and "GURPS<BR>
Traveller: Starships." It would really be nice if ships designed for<BR>
one game system could be ported to the other. Is anyone making sure<BR>
that these two books aren't going to be wildly incompatible?<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
              @==================================================@<BR>
              | Dalton S. Spence, B.Sc. <dalton.spence@hwcn.org> |<BR>
              | Home Page: http://www.hwcn.org/~ag775/home.html  |<BR>
              |      Family Motto: Virtute Acquiritur Honos      |<BR>
              |    "Trade is the lifeblood of the Imperium."     |<BR>
              |   Cleon I, First Emperor of the Third Imperium   |<BR>
              |  King Tut must take the shifty cactus from the   |<BR>
              |          Empire State Building. FNORD!           |<BR>
              @==================================================@<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:51:19 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Max Acceleration<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> In CT, 6G was the max possible acceleration and it came from thruster<BR>
> plates.<BR>
<BR>
Not true. The rules say "manuever drive" and don't further describe it.<BR>
I always figured it was some sort of fusion rocket.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:25:06 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: FFSv3 and Navigation<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> SPACECRAFT NAVIGATION:<BR>
><BR>
> <Snyder><BR>
>> The only alternative will be some sort of inertial navigation system <BR>
> (INS).  <BR>
><BR>
> I was premature in my earlier post .  Most of my experience has been<BR>
> with INS and I did not really consider stellar navigation.<BR>
><BR>
> <Erickson><BR>
>> Not true. You can naviagate quite well with what amounts to an<BR>
>> automated "star sight" system. You determine your orientation by the<BR>
>> positions of bright stars.  You combine that with the direction and<BR>
>> size of the star(s) in the system to give you a rough position (good<BR>
>> to within 100,000 km or so I'd guess). You then check the empheris<BR>
>> for the system, and check the positions of the planets, comets,<BR>
>> and/or major asteroids. That'll fine down the position a lot.  And<BR>
>> you can bounce radar off the nearer bodies to get accurate distances<BR>
>> to go with the angles.  Sure, you can't fine down your position much<BR>
>> more than +/- 10,000 km until you are within 100,000 km or so of the<BR>
>> planet you are interested in. So what?  Between the huge amounts of<BR>
>> delta-V available at higher TLs and the sheer *scale* of a star<BR>
>> system, you don't *need* to know your position all that closely.<BR>
>> 100,000 km is *very* accurate when dealing with distances measured<BR>
>> in AU (1 AU = 150,000,000 km).  Note that there's no way an INS can<BR>
>> tell you anything useful when you jump into the system because it's<BR>
>> been isolated from the universe for a week. So it'd have to be set<BR>
>> via nav beacons, or by the sort of observations listed above. Not<BR>
>> worth it.<BR>
><BR>
> On the Navy's Trident missile submarine the SLBMs used a combination<BR>
> INS and stellar navigation (the D-5 if I recall).  This combination<BR>
> was sufficient for SLBMs to achieve strategic scale accuracy--not as<BR>
> good as land-based systems, but good.  Stellar navigation has the<BR>
> potential to be very accurate, much more accurate then you are<BR>
> stating above.<BR>
<BR>
Well, I didn't want to overstate the accuracy. Besides, I'm not sure if<BR>
it is or isn't more accurate in *free space*. On earth, your position<BR>
has to be on (or near) the surface. That eliminates a fair amount of<BR>
uncertainty. <BR>
<BR>
Still, you may well be right.<BR>
<BR>
> How accurate does it have to be ?<BR>
> I think accuracy has to be high for the following reasons:<BR>
> (1)  ortillery (planetary bombardment):  modern day artillery needs<BR>
> accurate information on their position so that they can place their<BR>
> rounds in the right place.  I don't think ortillery with deadfall<BR>
> ordnance will be anything different.  PADS (position azimuth<BR>
> determination system) is or was used by the US Army.<BR>
<BR>
Ortillery has a set of special problems. One of the big ones is that<BR>
they *must* have a reference mark on the surface to "synch" their<BR>
co-ordinate system with that of the planet. <BR>
<BR>
> (2) jump:  there is little written about jump procedures other than<BR>
> how finicky, tricky, and dangerous it all is.  I think accurately<BR>
> knowing the jump entry position/velocity/acceleration will be very<BR>
> important in achieving the predicted jump exit<BR>
> position/velocity/acceleration.  We could even assume that jump is<BR>
> heavily dependent on sensitive initial starting conditions, so that<BR>
> small jump entry errors can generate huge jump exit errors (Misjump!?).<BR>
<BR>
This also gets into the details regarding how you target jump exit, as<BR>
well as how the time and positional errors are figured as well as how<BR>
momentum is conserved in jump.<BR>
<BR>
I prefer to have you aim for a specific point relative to the target<BR>
star's position at your expected arrival time, and have you arrive at<BR>
that point (+/- position error) at the arrival time (+/- jump duration<BR>
fluctuations). <BR>
<BR>
> (3) jump (some more):  there are dangerous jump locations (the 10 and<BR>
> 100 planetary diameters limits) which need to be navigated safely.<BR>
> Jumping within the 100 planetary diameter limit when one thinks they<BR>
> are safely at 110 diameters can create a disaster.  This is the<BR>
> Traveller equivalent of the historical record of wet nautical ships<BR>
> running aground.  In the US Navy it is (or was) a court-martial<BR>
> offense to run a ship aground.  I think the Imperial Navy and<BR>
> Merchant Marine will have similar ideas.  Jumping within 10 diameters<BR>
> should be a major Imperial crime.<BR>
<BR>
I'd say it's not necessarily a crime. It certainly doesn't endanger<BR>
bystanders. Just the ship and the people on it. So it'd likely be more<BR>
civil than criminal. <BR>
<BR>
In the Navy thewy can court-martial you for endangering the ship. In<BR>
the Merchant service, they can fire you or someone on board could try<BR>
to have you prosecuted for "reckless endangerment".<BR>
<BR>
Note: the fine print on passenger tickets states that you *can't* sue<BR>
for early jumps, if the ship's master "had a good reason" (ie He was<BR>
running from pirates, or some such).<BR>
<BR>
> (4) Merchant Traffic Management:  To prevent collisions and<BR>
> efficiently handle dense traffic there will probably be flight paths<BR>
> and other administrativia.  Space is big, but you absolutely want to<BR>
> avoid any possibility of collisions.  These ships are hugely<BR>
> expensive.  Excellent position/velocity/acceleration information<BR>
> needed especially near the up-port, down-port, world, etc.<BR>
<BR>
Most importantly, even a little 100 dton ship can make a *big* crater<BR>
if something goes wrong. <BR>
<BR>
I figure that entering a trajectory that intersects the planet, or any<BR>
important objects in permanent orbits around it, except during an<BR>
authorized "final approach" is a capital crime. And both the trajectory<BR>
you'll have if you continue at current acceleration, and the one you'll<BR>
have if you cut power at any given time. The sole exception is while<BR>
you are getting things sorted out after exiting jump. <BR>
<BR>
> (5) Naval Fleet Manuevers:  Complex manuevers of multiple ships require <BR>
> excellent position/velocity/acceleration information. <BR>
<BR>
Yeah, but "formations" will likely be spread out over thousands of km,<BR>
simply to avoid things like more than one ship getting caught by a nuke<BR>
(while the hulls will shield the crews from all but *close* nukes, any<BR>
exposed personnel can get lethal radiation doses at multiple thousand<BR>
km ranges in space. So can some sensors)<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 21:52:41 PST<BR>
From: shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)<BR>
Subject: Re: Traveller-digest V1999 #2897<BR>
<BR>
In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
> In a message dated 07-Aug-00 5:54:18 PM Central Daylight Time, <BR>
> owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com writes:<BR>
><BR>
>> >Which brings to mind an apparently-uncommented-upon feature <BR>
>>  >of Northern Californian linguistics that I've noticed -- <BR>
>>  >the tendency for these types to abbreviate words down to <BR>
>>  >their first syllable (i.e. "CalTrain," "SamTrans," et numerous <BR>
>>  >al).  Here in the southern part of the state we don't do <BR>
>>  <BR>
>>  NoCal was for a long time the site of a major naval base (Alameda) and had<BR>
>>  several ships based here.  No doubt the tendency to use first syllables<BR>
>>  came from naval personnel who settled here.  <BR>
><BR>
> Or German. Kripo . . . Stalag . . . Kapo . . . Stuka there are non-military <BR>
> ones, but I can't think of any off the top of my head.<BR>
<BR>
Gestapo: Gehiem Statz-polizei (forgive the atrocious mangling of the<BR>
spelling). <BR>
<BR>
They weren't military. More of an FBI/CIA cross.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)<BR>
 shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred<BR>
leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 22:14:48 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: Power Systems<BR>
<BR>
Accually, I think that bolth MT and Striker had scale effecincy breaks -<BR>
when you got above a certian KL/M3-age you got more power out. (and that's<BR>
not IIRC) ;)<BR>
<BR>
IIRC that with striker it was a MW output multiplyer when the plant was<BR>
above 14m3.<BR>
<BR>
IMHO I do not like the formula presented - it smacks too much of space<BR>
master.<BR>
<BR>
(shivers run down spine)<BR>
<BR>
;)<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 2:51 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: FFS3: Power Systems<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Just a quick suggestion...<BR>
<BR>
We normally figure power plant volume by multiplying MWs by some<BR>
factor for MW/m^3 for the type and TL of the plant.  FFS2 introduced<BR>
an economy of scale factor to give large installations a volume<BR>
break.<BR>
<BR>
I'd like to propose a simplified way of handling the "economy of<BR>
scale" factor.  The "extra" volume could be thought of as the<BR>
required overhead for controls, access and so on, and would be an<BR>
additional volume equal to the square root of the plant itself, ie.<BR>
<BR>
  Power Plant Volume = MW * factor + sqrt(MW * factor)<BR>
<BR>
Thus if we are building a 900 MW power plant at 1 MW/m^3, and we<BR>
build it as...<BR>
<BR>
 1 engine = 900 * 1 + sqrt(900*1) = 930 m^3<BR>
<BR>
 2 engines = 450 * 1 + sqrt(450*1) = 472 + 472 = 944 m^3<BR>
<BR>
 3 engines = 300 * 1 + sqrt(300*1) = 318 * 3 = 954 m^3<BR>
<BR>
 10 engines = 90 * 1 + sqrt(90*1) = 100 * 10 = 1,000 m^3<BR>
<BR>
So, building several smaller engines requires proportionally more<BR>
overhead than building one large one, and we get our economy of<BR>
scale.  The downside of doing this is that smaller engines take up<BR>
more volumn that before and cost more, so everyone would want to<BR>
build one big engine...right?. Maybe not...<BR>
<BR>
With one big power plant, if it gets knocked out your ship is done,<BR>
but with 2 or more power plants losing one power plant only reduces<BR>
your possible output.  Tradeoff time!<BR>
<BR>
Commercial ships might want to have one big power plant and save a<BR>
couple of tons for another cabin or more cargo.  Warships would want<BR>
to have several power plants so they could keep fighting if one or<BR>
more is knocked out.  Non-warships that "go in harm's way" might<BR>
want to have more than one engine as well, just in case, they lose<BR>
one from natural...or...um...unnatural causes.  <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- --<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2000 22:25:20 -0700<BR>
From: "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com><BR>
Subject: RE: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
Correct -<BR>
<BR>
;)<BR>
<BR>
I had always thought that most of the fuel was used to stream into Jump<BR>
Space and create a 'bubble' of more normal space time around the ship. The<BR>
atoms of realstuff cascading out into the heathen jspace would carry/cause<BR>
some (ahem) quantum effects of normal spacetime (including cascading more<BR>
virtual particles), thereby degrading the effects of jspace.<BR>
<BR>
IMHO jspace is a complete and total energy and mass vacume - which has some<BR>
strange effects on delicate structures and energy feilds (ie, brains and<BR>
computers), the H2 that is ejected by the ship counters the effect. Thus -<BR>
ships should only stay in jspace for one week.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- -----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
[mailto:owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com]On Behalf Of Bill Hopper<BR>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 7:38 PM<BR>
To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Re: Jump initiation<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
 "If a ship absorbs enough energy to make a jump, and is supplied with<BR>
sufficient<BR>
fuel, it may jump at the end of the turn." HG 2'nd ed, p43.  This is<BR>
sometimes<BR>
used to justify jump fuel as 'injection mass' rather than fuel.<BR>
<BR>
WKH<BR>
<BR>
Robert Conley wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > In other words - 0 is needed.<BR>
> ><BR>
> > However - according to HG you _can_ use other sources to power the<BR>
JDrive if<BR>
> > you want (such as a black globe). The JDrive has .5% of the ships<BR>
> > displacment per JN (ie, 100 ton jump 2 ship = 1% or 1 dton of<BR>
capacitors).<BR>
> > Each ton of capacitors holds 36 EP's and each EP is 250 MW. So a scout<BR>
> > courier needs to have 9000 MWs in its capacitators to initate a jump<BR>
> > (weither generated by the jump drive or by black globes)<BR>
><BR>
> Doesn't this mean that you could built a High Guard Ship without hydrogen<BR>
> fuel and have extra power plants to generate the EPs to charge the<BR>
> capacitators.<BR>
><BR>
> Rob Conley<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 00:32:07 -0700<BR>
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
Subject: Re: values<BR>
<BR>
>From: Kiri Aradia Morgan <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
><BR>
>>Hey.  Just because a girl likes to sleep with pilots and soldiers when<BR>
they are on leave does not mean you should call her a bimbo.<BR>
>><BR>
> Kira, you brought this up, so you cannot blame me for saying this, but as<BR>
a Marine, the only women I know of who would sleep with a member of the<BR>
Airforce or Army is not called a bimbo, but hooker.  *weg*<BR>
><BR>
LOL!!!  It's Kiri, not Kira.  "Fog", not "glittering".<BR>
<BR>
None of my boyfriends is in the *American* armed forces.<BR>
<BR>
Kiri-chan  ^_^<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 02:34:21 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: RE: FFS3: Power Systems<BR>
<BR>
On 08/07/00 at 10:14 PM,  "Tsykoduk" <Tsykoduk@bigfoot.com> said:<BR>
<BR>
>Accually, I think that bolth MT and Striker had scale effecincy breaks -<BR>
>when you got above a certian KL/M3-age you got more power out. (and<BR>
>that's not IIRC) ;)<BR>
<BR>
>IIRC that with striker it was a MW output multiplyer when the plant was<BR>
>above 14m3.<BR>
<BR>
So, using Striker, if I need 6000 MW, I can put 1 - 2000 MW plant<BR>
*or* 2000 - 1 dton power plants in my hull with both getting the x3<BR>
scale efficiency.  <scarcasm> Yeah, that's economies of scale!<BR>
</scarcasm><BR>
<BR>
>IMHO I do not like the formula presented - it smacks too much of space<BR>
>master.<BR>
<BR>
>(shivers run down spine)<BR>
<BR>
>;)<BR>
<BR>
We disagree, because I do.  <BR>
<BR>
Can you give a more detailed reason for your objection?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 02:35:34 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: FFS3/GT: Starships Compatibility Issues<BR>
<BR>
On 08/08/00 at 01:01 AM,  Dalton Spence <dalton.spence@hwcn.org> said:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>This reply has also been sent to the newsgroups.<BR>
>At the moment two major books for designing Traveller starships are under<BR>
>development: "Fusion, Fire & Steel version 3" and "GURPS Traveller:<BR>
>Starships." It would really be nice if ships designed for one game system<BR>
>could be ported to the other. Is anyone making sure that these two books<BR>
>aren't going to be wildly incompatible?<BR>
<BR>
Certainly not! That would make too much sense. <g><BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 02:37:52 -0500<BR>
From: eris@pcola.gulf.net<BR>
Subject: Re: Max Acceleration<BR>
<BR>
On 08/07/00 at 09:51 PM,  shadow@krypton.rain.com (Leonard Erickson) said:<BR>
<BR>
>In mail you write:<BR>
<BR>
>> In CT, 6G was the max possible acceleration and it came from thruster<BR>
>> plates.<BR>
<BR>
>Not true. The rules say "manuever drive" and don't further describe it. I<BR>
>always figured it was some sort of fusion rocket.<BR>
<BR>
I believe it was mentioned that the drive could be used as a weapon at very short range.  Yes, my original understanding was some sort of fusion rocket, but that was never spelled out for very good gaming reasons.<BR>
<BR>
Eris<BR>
- -- <BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
eris@pcola.gulf.net    using MR/2 ICE #245<BR>
http://www.crosswinds.net/~erisr<BR>
- -----------------------------------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 00:51:20 -0700<BR>
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net><BR>
Subject: Re: values<BR>
<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan wrote:<BR>
<BR>
> > Getting really drunk and sleeping with Bimbos?.... At least that is<BR>
> > the culture most of my characters live in...<BR>
> ><BR>
> Hey.  Just because a girl likes to sleep with pilots and soldiers when<BR>
> they are on leave does not mean you should call her a bimbo.<BR>
<BR>
Kiri, it's not if they are or aren't, it's the perception of the character.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- --<BR>
Evyn...<BR>
<BR>
C-Space home http://home.att.net/~wmacdude/<BR>
<BR>
When Spring comes back with rustling shade,<BR>
And apple blossoms fills the air,<BR>
I have a rendezvous with Death,<BR>
When spring brings back blue days and fair.<BR>
 Legionnaire Alan Seeger, KIA the Somme.<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 01:01:56 -0700<BR>
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com><BR>
Subject: Re: values<BR>
<BR>
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net><BR>
<BR>
<BR>
>Kiri Aradia Morgan wrote:<BR>
><BR>
>>> Getting really drunk and sleeping with Bimbos?.... At least that is the<BR>
culture most of my characters live in...<BR>
>>><BR>
>> Hey.  Just because a girl likes to sleep with pilots and soldiers when<BR>
they are on leave does not mean you should call her a bimbo.<BR>
>><BR>
>Kiri, it's not if they are or aren't, it's the perception of the character.<BR>
><BR>
LOL, Evyn, I was not being totally serious.<BR>
<BR>
Am I still capable of totally serious?<BR>
<BR>
I wonder...<BR>
<BR>
Kiri  ^_^<BR>
<BR>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~<BR>
Kiri Aradia Morgan      93!      Thou Art God...<BR>
tiamat@tsoft.com<BR>
<BR>
"That wickedness weltering around inside of you, inside of everyone, is<BR>
sacred somewhere.  There's a deity out there who digs it.  You can respect<BR>
and love your darkest side, disposing of only what is obsolete or<BR>
impractical.  It's all about giving yourself permission."<BR>
                                -- Jack Darkhand<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 16:04:08 +0800<BR>
From: "Antony Farrell" <Skaran@bigpond.com><BR>
Subject: Imperial Legions<BR>
<BR>
Just a thought, based on adjusting the mustering out tables. In the Roman<BR>
empire legionnaires upon retirement often received their "retirement pay" as<BR>
a mixture of money and land grant.<BR>
<BR>
Could the 3I have such a scheme, ie less retirement funds (mustering out<BR>
funds) but a land grant somewhere (probably a distant frontier world)? A<BR>
good adventure hook for newbies and not so newbies.<BR>
<BR>
Antony<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 09:35:02 +0100 <BR>
From: "Jones, Dean" <Dean.Jones@fox-europe.com><BR>
Subject: Back engineered GURPS Modules Part 1 <BR>
<BR>
OK boys and girls, here are those powerslices. Anyone who wants to see my<BR>
working, mail me. <BR>
<BR>
Jump Modules:<BR>
<BR>
Jump Modules use 10,000 KW at GTL10 and 12. Of the module, approx. 1<BR>
metric(non-displacement) ton is fusion reactor componants and power<BR>
conduits. The major  TL differance is in jump capacity, 3 at GTL 10, 6 at<BR>
GTL12<BR>
<BR>
Engineering:<BR>
The Eningineering module has the following componants:<BR>
Fusion core: 1 metric ton<BR>
6 person airlock: 4500 lbs, 300 cf<BR>
GTL10 Full fire supression system<BR>
Aside from the fusion core, none of these are in contant use. Power use is<BR>
neg. and these is no gain to shutting them down. The fusion core doesn't use<BR>
power.<BR>
<BR>
Bridge/Cockpit:<BR>
This was a tricky one.<BR>
Sensors included are AESA, PESA, Radar/Laser detector and Radscanners<BR>
PESA is a passive EMS reciever, and uses neglegible amouts of power:- the<BR>
power gains from turning it off are vastly out weighed by the problems of<BR>
flying blind.<BR>
Radar/Laser detectors use most of the same componants as the PESA andabout<BR>
as much power...as near to nothing as makes no odds. The same is true of the<BR>
Radscanners<BR>
<BR>
AESA, on the other hand, uses the following power slices:<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
			GTL10		GTL12<BR>
Cockpit/systems	7.25 kw		 10 kw<BR>
Basic Bridge		10.25 kw	10.5 kw<BR>
Command Bridge	10.5 kw		10.75 kw<BR>
<BR>
Next we have the computers. Bridge/cockpits have 3 computers for redundancy.<BR>
<BR>
			<BR>
Cockpit/systems	 0.3 kw		 <BR>
Basic Bridge		 3 kw<BR>
Command Bridge	30 kw<BR>
<BR>
Computers use the same power slices at both TLs, but the TL12 computers are<BR>
WAY more powerful.<BR>
Power slice given is for all 3 computers. <BR>
<BR>
Cockpits include an airlock. As this is only used when exiting the ship,<BR>
power should be assumed to be neg.<BR>
<BR>
Communications:<BR>
<BR>
GTL10			Radio		Laser		Meson<BR>
Cockpit/systems	0.1 kw		1 kw		not available<BR>
Basic Bridge		0.4 kw		4 kw		not available<BR>
Command Bridge	0.4 kw		4 kw		40 kw	(nb Meson<BR>
communicators are not listed in Ve2, so I used the description for Neutrino<BR>
communicators. Your flames are invited :) )<BR>
<BR>
GTL12			Radio		Laser		Meson<BR>
Cockpit/systems	0.1 kw		1 kw		not available<BR>
Basic Bridge		0.4 kw		4 kw		1kw<BR>
Command Bridge	0.4 kw		4 kw		40 kw  (equipment gets<BR>
smaller at higher TLs, but power requirements are the same)<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2000 03:40:51 -0500<BR>
From: John Groth <wombat@premier.net><BR>
Subject: Re: Imperial Legions<BR>
<BR>
Antony Farrell wrote:<BR>
> <BR>
> Just a thought, based on adjusting the mustering out tables. In the Roman<BR>
> empire legionnaires upon retirement often received their "retirement pay" as<BR>
> a mixture of money and land grant.<BR>
> <BR>
> Could the 3I have such a scheme, ie less retirement funds (mustering out<BR>
> funds) but a land grant somewhere (probably a distant frontier world)? A<BR>
> good adventure hook for newbies and not so newbies.<BR>
<BR>
Interesting idea.  My take would be that any character who went from<BR>
common to noble status during service (i.e., gained Social Standing of B<BR>
or higher as a result of service skill or mustering out rolls) could<BR>
have land grants appropriate to the character's new status, _in addition<BR>
to_ mustering-out cash (after all, even the maximum Cr150,000 for<BR>
mustering-out cash is far less valuable than even the meanest of<BR>
baronial fiefs).  These land grants would, as you noted, probably be in<BR>
frontier regions.  Characters who entered service as nobles (Social<BR>
Standing of B or higher) may also have fiefs, but these may well be in<BR>
more-or-less developed regions, as the character inherits family lands.<BR>
<BR>
Given the feudal nature of the 3I, I would not expect commoners to<BR>
receive land grants as a mustering-out benefit.<BR>
<BR>
- -- <BR>
AuricTech Shipyards Journeyman Gearhead<BR>
"Gold-Plated [tm] solutions for copper-plated problems!" (r)<BR>
Keeper of the TML Keyboard Casualty List<BR>
<BR>
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9776<BR>
<BR>
------------------------------<BR>
<BR>
End of Traveller-digest V1999 #2899<BR>
***********************************<BR>
<BR>
To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:<BR>
<BR>
unsubscribe traveller-digest<BR>
<BR>
in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".<BR>
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is<BR>
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that<BR>
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe<BR>
"local-traveller":<BR>
<BR>
subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net<BR>
<BR>
A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to<BR>
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"<BR>
in the commands above with "traveller".<BR>
<BR>
Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com<BR>
</XMP></FONT><FONT  COLOR="#0f0f0f" BACK="#fffffe" SIZE=3 PTSIZE=10><BR>
<BR>
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------<BR>
Return-Path: <.owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
Received: from  rly-yb02.mx.aol.com (rly-yb02.mail.aol.com [172.18.146.2]) by air-yb02.mail.aol.com (v75_b3.11) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 Aug 2000 04:41:20 -0400<BR>
Received: from  lists.imagiconline.com (lists.imagiconline.com [204.85.32.11]) by rly-yb02.mx.aol.com (v75_b3.9) with ESMTP; Tue, 08 Aug 2000 04:40:55 -0400<BR>
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) with SMTP id EAA67846;<BR>
	Tue, 8 Aug 2000 04:40:43 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Received: by lists.imagiconline.com (bulk_mailer v1.12); Tue, 8 Aug 2000 04:39:48 -0400<BR>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)<BR>
	by lists.imagiconline.com (8.9.3/8.9.2) id EAA67807<BR>
	for traveller-digest-outgoing; Tue, 8 Aug 2000 04:39:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
	(envelope-from owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com)<BR>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2000 04:39:48 -0400 (EDT)<BR>
Message-Id: <200008080839.EAA67807@lists.imagiconline.com><BR>
From: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com (Traveller-digest)<BR>
To: traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Subject: Traveller-digest V1999 #2899<BR>
Reply-To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
Sender: owner-traveller-digest@lists.imagiconline.com<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>
