From jamesp@metolius.wr.tek.com Tue Feb 12 17:44:29 1991
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by engrg.uwo.ca;
	(id AA04515) Tue, 12 Feb 91 22:43:55 GMT
Received: from tektronix.tek.com by RELAY.CS.NET id aa24359; 12 Feb 91 17:01 EST
Received: by tektronix.TEK.COM (5.51/7.1)
	id AA11079; Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:55:55 PST
Received: by wrgate.wr.tek.com (5.51/7.1)
	id AA28628; Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:54:00 PST
Received: by metolius.WR.TEK.COM (4.0/7.1)
	id AA14489; Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:53:53 PST
Message-Id: <9102122153.AA14489@metolius.WR.TEK.COM>
To: Dan Corrin <dan%engrg.uwo.ca@RELAY.CS.NET>, jamesp@metolius.WR
Subject: TML Bundle #168: Msgs 2077-2097
Reply-To: TML Administrator <traveller-request%metolius.wr.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET>
Precedence: bulk
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 91 13:53:52 PST
From: James T Perkins <jamesp%metolius.wr.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET>
Status: RO


TML Bundles come from the archives of the Traveller Mailing List,
maintained by James Perkins, traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com.

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

Date: Tue Feb 12 13:53:48 PST 1991
From: traveller-request@metolius.wr.tek.com (TML Administrator)
Subject: TML Bundle #168: Table of Contents

-AMN- --Date--- --Sender--------- --Subject-----------------------------------
2077  15-Jan-91 Mark F. Cook      I should look before I leap... << Based on my
2078  15-Jan-91 George William He Black Globes << hrm. The material in Knightfa
2079  16-Jan-91 grue@batserver.cs Black Globe ideas << >Date: Tue, 15 Jan 91 10
2080  16-Jan-91 Adrian Hurt       Re: Black globes and gravity << Mark F. Cook 
2081  16-Jan-91 wrgate.wr.tek.com Re: 2075-2077 Black Globes << Mark quoted fro
2082  16-Jan-91 matth@mars.njit.e Navy Question << I've been reading in the MT 
2083  16-Jan-91 "Robert S. Dean"  Grav Vehicle Tactics and Armor << In your let
2084  16-Jan-91 wilber%nunki.usc. Black Globes again << Many of you mentioned t
2085  16-Jan-91 George William He Grav Vehicles and Overhead Attacks << This de
2086  17-Jan-91 bonnevil@acc.stol Re: (2081) Black Globes << I hate to duck int
2087  17-Jan-91 plb@violin.att.CO GEnie and MT << Operating System: HP-UX A.B7.
2088  18-Jan-91 wilson m liaw     MT on GEnie << Once you get on GEnie, type "s
2089  18-Jan-91 Adrian Hurt       Re: Black globes being hit by missiles << gru
2090  18-Jan-91 "Robert S. Dean"  RoboSpeed << With regard to some of your comm
2091  18-Jan-91 wrgate.wr.tek.com Nuclear_Dampers << Mark Cook and I had been t
2092  19-Jan-91 Rob Miracle       Re: GEnie << From: In Message (2087) plb@viol
2093  21-Jan-91 chk@alias         Re: Nuclear_Dampers << > This is a little wea
2094  22-Jan-91 mcknight@tusun2.m Other nets << If anyone is interested, there 
2095  23-Jan-91 "Robert S. Dean"  How to Handle this? << Since we have been hav
2096  23-Jan-91 tom               sector data (and stuff) << this is my first p
2097  23-Jan-91 Mark F. Cook      PGMP/FGMP Fuel & Starship Fuel << I've got tw

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2077
From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
Subject: I should look before I leap...
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 91 11:08:57 PST

Based on my subject line, maybe I'd better start running Vargr
characters. :-)

Regarding my post about black globed ships slamming into planets and
overloading, I guess I should have read a bit further into the MT BBS
on GEnie before proposing MY brilliant inspiration, to wit:

- - ------------------
Category 11,  Topic 10
Message 194       Sun May 13, 1990
M.MIKESH                     at 16:53 EDT

 Subject: Black Globes

 Joe -
      <Of course, one thing everyone has been assuming is that the
 ship/energy sinks onboard the space vessel with the black globe could
 absorb all this energy that the vessel gathered when it entered an
 atmosphere.>
      True.  We've just been talking in theory so we can develope a
 better understanding of what's going on.
      <In actuality, I see the energy sinks of the owning vessel going
 into an overload condition if it enters a world's atmosphere.>
      You're right.  I just ran through the equations, and what I found
 was that the energy in de-orbiting and that which a J-1 ship could
 absorb was well over 10 million times in difference.
      The scarry thing about this was that the lion's share of the
 energy was in the form of potential energy ( E=mgh ).  This means that
 a globed ship had best stay away from a planet.  A slight change in
 depth to a gravity well could spell doom.
- - ------------------

Well, at least it's nice to know I think along the same lines as the MT
designers, huh?

                "Here's the next plant for your collection, Turin.  It's
                 a Pharosian Bitching Cactus.  Where do you want it?"
                        "...MY NEEDLES ARE TOO DRY...MY POTTING SOIL
                         ISN'T SANDY ENOUGH...THIS POT IS TOO SMALL,
                         I'M GETTING ROOT-BOUND...IT'S TOO DARK IN HERE..."
                "...put it in the airlock."
                                [paraphrased from my MT campaign]
Later,

        Mark F. Cook

USMail: User Interface Technical Support
        Hewlett-Packard - Interface Technology Operation
        1000 NE Circle Blvd.  Corvallis, OR 97330

INTERNET: markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.com
          markc%hpcvss.cv.hp.com@relay.hp.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2078
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 91 23:12:13 -0900
From: George William Herbert <gwh@soda.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Black Globes


hrm.  The material in Knightfall (information about a sneak-attack planetary
assault from black-globed ships) tends to indicate that Gravity does indeed 
affect ships in Black Globes.

- - -george

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2079
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 91 21:55:29 GMT
From: grue@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au
Subject: Black Globe ideas

>Date: Tue, 15 Jan 91 10:28:51 PST
>From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
>Subject: (2075) Black Globes redux

>B)  Any solid striking a black globe will demonstrate all the properties
>    of a perfect inelastic collision, with all the kenetic energy tranferred
>    to the globe.  The only thing the occupants of the globe would notice
>    is an energy raise in their capacitors.

This would make black globes next to useless against incoming missiles.
Think of the KE that a missile that has been accelerating for 20 minutes
at 6Gs.  I would assume that 6Gs would have to be a minimum for a missile
and 20 minutes is a combat round!  A standard HE missile has a weight of
0.05 Tonnes which is 50 kgs.  g = 9.8 m/s/s so 6G = 58.8
for a time of 20*60=1200 seconds.

v = v0 + a.t = 0 + 9.8 * 1200 = 70600m/s

            2                                                    11
ke = 0.5 m v  = 0.5 * 50 * 4984360000 = 124609000000 = 1.246 * 10   J

Is that a big number or what!  Splat goes one space ship!

Just think what a small suicide fighter would be capable of (the perfect
place to use a robot pilot --- while attacking black globe shielded
ships).


Worse, since mass is energy (E=mc^2), wouldn't the globe have to absorbe
the energy of a mass placed in contact with it?

I hope I got the above figures correct, I never was much good at physics.
I'm sure somebody on the list will correct me when I'm wrong.





							Pauli
seeya

Paul Dale               | Internet/CSnet:            grue@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au
Dept of Computer Science| Bitnet:       grue%batserver.cs.uq.oz.au@uunet.uu.net
Uni of Qld              | JANET:           grue%batserver.cs.uq.oz.au@uk.ac.ukc
Australia, 4072         | EAN:                          grue@batserver.cs.uq.oz
                        | UUCP:           uunet!munnari!batserver.cs.uq.oz!grue
f4e6g4Qh4++             | JUNET:                     grue@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2080
From: Adrian Hurt <adrian@cs.heriot-watt.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Black globes and gravity
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 91 13:08:26 GMT

Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM> writes:
> 
> A)  Black globes cut off gravity.  If you turn one on while in orbit
>     around a large body (i.e. planet), you suddenly take off in a straight
>     line, tangetial to that body.

Does the theory about gravitons apply in Traveller?  If so, how's this for
a perpetual motion machine?

1. Vehicle with black globe sits at a certain height.  Globe is off.  Vehicle
falls.
2. Vehicle switches on its globe.  Vehicle now takes off as described above,
and also absorbs the gravitons.
3. Vehicle shuts off globe, uses some of the energy absorbed to move along
back to its previous position, and beams the rest at the planet.
4. Go to 1.

In another article, Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM> writes:
>       You're right.  I just ran through the equations, and what I found
>  was that the energy in de-orbiting and that which a J-1 ship could
>  absorb was well over 10 million times in difference.
>       The scarry thing about this was that the lion's share of the
>  energy was in the form of potential energy ( E=mgh ).  This means that
>  a globed ship had best stay away from a planet.  A slight change in
>  depth to a gravity well could spell doom.

How far away must it stay from the planet?  The further it gets away,
the more potential energy it gains, as h in the above equation gets
bigger.  Meanwhile, it's losing potential energy as it gets closer to
something else, e.g. a star 2 parsecs away.

- - -- 
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cs
 UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian     |  ARPA:   adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2081
Subject: Re: 2075-2077 Black Globes
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 91 9:20:15 PST
From: wrgate.wr.tek.com!agora.rain.com!carlf@tessi.UUCP (Carl Fago)

Mark quoted from Genie:

> Then there's the famed "Black Globe World" in the Vargr Extents. On that world
> (Tuglikki 0904), a Vargr researcher activated a black globe and it promptly
> expanded to engulf a radius of 50 km from its location within 24 hours. That
> was in 973 (Imperial). That black globe engulfed the entire world within a
> year and kept growing, although at a slower rate. The black globe has reached
> 20,000 km in size and continues to grow at a rate of about 20 km per standard
> year.  In about 2 trillion years, assuming the globe's rate remains constant,
> it will have engulfed all of charted space. Recently, however -- for some
> unknown reason -- the globe's expansion rate has been increasing dramatically.
> Many researchers theorize this increased expansion rate means the globe is
> about to "go into overload." A globe of this size, if it releases all of its
> aborbed energy in one sudden blast, would devastate the entire parsec (both
> star systems).

Now the question comes up about what happens to gravity with black globes
and what are the effects?

I propose that a black globe reduces any factor of "g" (the gravitational
constant) from external bodies, to zero.  This makes any black globe
maintain its proper motion with respect to the universe at large.  Thus this
Vargr black globe would not be staying in Tuglikki 0904 but would be
travelling at some velocity (probably large) depending on the proper motion
of the star system it is in, depending on the proper motion of the galaxy,
and depending on the proper motion of the galactic cluster!

So the question you have to ask yourselves is, "Is it heading my way and
can I sell my property before it gets here or someone else finds out!!!"

> M.MIKESH                     at 16:53 EDT
> 
>  Subject: Black Globes
> 
>  Joe -
>       <Of course, one thing everyone has been assuming is that the
>...
>       <In actuality, I see the energy sinks of the owning vessel going
>  into an overload condition if it enters a world's atmosphere.>
>       You're right.  I just ran through the equations, and what I found
>  was that the energy in de-orbiting and that which a J-1 ship could
>  absorb was well over 10 million times in difference.
>       The scarry thing about this was that the lion's share of the
>  energy was in the form of potential energy ( E=mgh ).  This means that
>  a globed ship had best stay away from a planet.  A slight change in
>  depth to a gravity well could spell doom.

And I would have to disagree with the designers on this point.  Potential
energy would have no effect (or at least it would if one assumed my
previous point of reducing external gravitational constants to zero.)
Hence g=0 thus E (potential) = 0.  Now the kinetic energy traveling
through the atmosphere is another matter all together and I am in 
agreement...don't travel to a planet's surface with your black globe
on!

                     *-=Carl=-*
		     
		     carlf@agora.rain.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2082
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 91 09:48:58 EST
From: matth@mars.njit.edu (Matthew Harelick)
Subject: Navy Question


I've been reading in the MT Ref's manual about  fleets, Batrons and CruRons. 
There is one piece of information I can't quite find however. How large is 
a typical Imperial Fleet? How many of what types of ships could be found there?

- - - Matt

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2083
Date:     Wed, 16 Jan 91 14:49:53 EST
From: "Robert S. Dean" <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  Grav Vehicle Tactics and Armor

In your letter dated Tue, 15 Jan 91 14:27:22 MET, you wrote:
>
>From: <d9bertil@dtek.chalmers.se>
>Subject: Re: Striker and Agility
>
>>The one good thing about simplifying Striker into the MT design system, in my
>>opinion, was to get rid of the "what are the dimensions of your box" section.
>>It really shouldn't make that much difference, but it was, for me, the 
>>difference between designing 200 MT vehicles in a year, and designing 8 
>>Striker vehicles in 10 years.  It might be that Striker would look much easier
>>now that I am used to MT.  Putting in armor slope without using actual vehicle
>>dimensions could be difficult.  The other thing I should point out is that 
>>the new combat rules make armor less critical than it was in Striker.  In MT, 
>>you need 2x the armor value to get a "high penetration" result, which causes 
>>double damage.  In Striker, I seem to recall that a +12 difference between 
>>armor and peentration was enough to cause a certain kill of the target.  So 
>>to some extent, armor slope "comes oput in the wash" as we say here.  The 
>>pinpoint damage rule also sort of simulates aiming for the non-sloped surfaces.
>
>  One thing that I definitly dislike about the MegaT vehicle design is that all
>vehicle armour is spread in an layer of equal thickness all over them.
>
>  I can understand the need for this when it comes to staships, but I dislike
>the impact of this on tactical situations. Suddenly, it's no advantage to 
>fire down on a tank, or suprising it from behind.
>
>  A favourite of mine that I used before I even knew that Striker existed, the
>light speeder with several VRFGaussGuns that plays A10 from high elevations
>down through the more or less lightly armoured roofs:)
>
>  A simple solution would be to reduce the armour thickness by some factor for
>the secondary surfaces (0.75) and increase it for the front surfaces (1.25).
>
>  Thanks for the v1.1. I'm looking at it to integrate it into RebelGuard.
>
>>Rob Dean
>
>-bertil-



Bertil,

     I  have been considering your comments on the armoring of grav  vehicles 
since  yesterday, since I wanted to make some sort of coherent  response.   I 
think  one of the drawbacks of electronic communications is that we  tend  to 
type things without really thinking about them.

     The  answer to the armoring question depends very much on what style  of 
fighting  you  would anticipate.  Are grav vehicles going to hug  the  ground 
most  of  the time, or get up and tangle in dogfights  like  current  fighter 
aircraft?   Are they going to have friends on either flank, with an enemy  to 
the front, or is their higher speed and ability to bypass obstacles going  to 
lead to a confused brawl spreading over many square miles (square  kilometers 
for you metric types)?  Are they going to hide in hull down positions  making 
it  reasonable to put extra armor on the turret?  How much threat  of  attack 
from above is there going to be?

     Obviously  all of these things are dynamic--your VRF gauss gun  overhead 
attack craft would probably lead to my designing a series of tanks with armor 
thick  enough to resist penetration from that threat (and maybe a  backup  PD 
laser turret), which would prompt you to field an attack craft with a  bigger 
gun, etc...

     I would expect that grav tanks would mostly hug the ground, reducing the 
number of angles that a threat could come from, and also reducing the need to 
carry  heavy  belly armor.  I expect that "Pop-up" tactics  as  described  in 
various  Traveller  materials would make top deck armor a priority.   I  also 
expect  that the battle would be more of a confused brawl than a nice  linear 
action, making it more reasonable to spread out my armor protection.  Below a 
certain  level, of course, I have no aspect which is protected from an  enemy 
tank  main gun, but also no aspect which is vulnerable to a  lighter  weapon.  
The  best  defense then is to concentrate on targeting and  SHOOT  FIRST.   I 
forget  now where I read an interesting commentary on the design of  the  M-1 
tank,  and how its armor layout no longer matched the non-linear battle  doc-
trine  that the U.S. Army was planning on using, that is, that the number  of 
shots  expected against the frontal armor did not justify carrying  all  that 
weight to protect only one side.

     It would not be unreasonable, though, to implement some sort of  differ-
ential armor scheme on the grounds that you could then make you own  doctrine 
to  match  your weapons systems.  In the absence of that, I think  you  could 
certainly try the 1.5x, .75x rule you suggest, and see how it works out.

     I'm going to post this and your note to the net for wider discussion.

Rob Dean




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

Archive-Message-Number: 2084
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 91 14:04:08 PST
From: wilber%nunki.usc.edu@usc.edu (John Wilber)
Subject: Black Globes again


Many of you mentioned the possibility of overload with a black globe
contacting several solid objects, bumping into large planets, and so
on.  The ancients solved this problem by finding a way to create a
large, nearly infinite "energy sink."  This is mentioned in Adventure
13 from the old Traveller books.  I forgot what the title of the book
was, but I do remember how they made the "sink."  I'm not giving any
more detail here so I don't spoil the adventure for somebody else, but
if you want to know, mail me at wilber@nunki.usc.edu.

John
wilber@nunki.usc.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2085
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 91 20:40:42 -0900
From: George William Herbert <gwh@soda.Berkeley.EDU>
Subject: Grav Vehicles and Overhead Attacks


This debate has actually occured in real life recently, over the problems of
armoured vehicles vulnerability to overhead attack.  The conclusion was that
the next generation of vehicles was going to have a reduction in armour level
of more like 1/2 from side to top, with the side being nearly 2/3 of frontal
armour thickness.  This contrasts with current vehicles where the sides are
less than 1/2 of frontal thickness, and the top only about 1/10 of the frontal.

I would believe that with the transition/simplification from Striker to MT,
they (GDW) assumed that armour becomes nearly uniform (my relative thicknesses
above).  This will make things like overhead attack moot... 8-)

- - -george

ps- We have some reports that a TL8-9 superpower on Terra just launched a 
massive air assault on a TL7ish minor power that had recently invaded one of
its neighbors.  In typical gaming style, it appears that of several thousand
sorties there were no losses to the attackers.  Reality continues to be stranger
than fiction... 8-)

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2086
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 91 01:30:14 -0600
From: bonnevil@acc.stolaf.edu
Subject: Re: (2081) Black Globes


I hate to duck into these techno debates, but I have a few questions and/or
comments about this one involving the force field generator.

>I propose that  a black globe reduces any factor of "g" (the gravitational
>constant) from external bodies, to zero.  This makes any black globe
>maintain its proper motion with respect to the universe at large.  Thus this
>Vargr black globe would not be staying in Tuglikki 0904 but would be
>travelling at some velocity (probably large) depending on the proper motion
>of the star system it is in, depending on the proper motion of the galaxy,
>and depending on the proper motion of the galactic cluster!

Ummm, proper motion relative to what frame of reference?  I vaguely
recall something from freshman physics that there is no universal frame
of reference...proper motion is always relative to _something_, and
I vaguely recall that this something can be picked arbitrarily.  There
shouldn't be a universe at large frame of reference then, right?
Maybe I'm wrong -- one of you physics majors might want to jump in here.

[Right on, in Einsteinian General Relativity, all frames of reference
are valid - there is no "master" frame of reference.  The Universe's
rules apparently hold true for all observers, and there is no underlying
"grid" or "mesh" to the Universe that is special or fixed.  All events
in the Universe happen relative to each other.  Nonetheless, there are
several holes in EGR in Traveller.  Perhaps there is a non-relativistic
universal frame of reference available through a small oversight in
Einsteinian theory.  How else can you suspend your disbelief that matter
can travel faster than light? That reactionless thrusters can function?
How many holes and hand-waving you permit in your campaign is a function
of the Player's and Ref's ability to suspend their disbelief.  -- James]

Another question for physics majors...can the PE problem be gotten rid of
if the potential energy of a system involving a large body and a bg'ed
ship is set at zero for the ship arbitrarily, and the PE is assigned to
the planet whose gravity the ship is falling into?  Then the ship would
just have to worry about the KE when the planet hit it, right?  (Sort
of thinking about the problem backwards.)  It's been a while, so I may
be missing something important here....but if that works, maybe it solves
the problems about approaching planets.

Personally, if I was using a globe, I'd be worried about KE weapons --
but then, it might be a bad idea to have it on a high rate of flicker
if I thought they knew where I was.  Then again, if it can nail the
capacitors, it can probably get me anyway!

- - --Steve

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2087
From: plb@violin.att.COM
Subject: GEnie and MT
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 91 10:05:21 EST

Operating System: HP-UX A.B7.00 U
Organization: AT&T-BL, Red Hill System Administration Group (HRSAG)
Location: HR 2C119
Phone: (201) 615-4419
Return-receipt:
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL5]

I keep hearing about a MT Bulletin Board on GEnie... How the heck
do you get there??   I have (now) a GEnie account and have been
pulling what little hair I have out trying to find it.


- - -- 
Peter L. Berghold | TELEPHONE: +1 (908) 615-4419
- - ------------------+---------------------------------------------------
EMAIL ADDRESSES:   BIX - PETEB  COMPU$ERVE - 70152,3017 
FAX (908) 706-2004 DELPHI - BERGHOLD GENIE - PBERGHOLD

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2088
From: wilson m liaw <macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu>
Subject: MT on GEnie
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 91 2:27:02 EST

Once you get on GEnie, type "scropia" to get to the gamers roundtable.
Once there, go to the bulletins area, and select cat 11. Cat 11 is
devoted to MegaTraveller discussion.

				Mac

Wilson MacGyver                      | "I know what he said, it isn't evil, it
Internet:macgyver@cis.ohio-state.edu | isn't good, it's not anything, it's
=====================================| everything. That's so like Fizban!"
Disclaimer:All opinions are mine only|              - Laurana, in DragonLance

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2089
From: Adrian Hurt <adrian@cs.heriot-watt.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Black globes being hit by missiles
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 91 10:14:16 GMT

grue@batserver.cs.uq.oz.au writes:
> >From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
> >Subject: (2075) Black Globes redux
> 
> >B)  Any solid striking a black globe will demonstrate all the properties
> >    of a perfect inelastic collision, with all the kenetic energy tranferred
> >    to the globe.  The only thing the occupants of the globe would notice
> >    is an energy raise in their capacitors.
> 
> This would make black globes next to useless against incoming missiles.
> <Assume a 50 kg missile has been accelerating for 20 minutes at 6G.>
>
> for a time of 20*60=1200 seconds.
> 
> v = v0 + a.t = 0 + 9.8 * 1200 = 70600m/s
		 0 + 9.8*6*1200 = 70560 m/s

>             2                                                    11
> ke = 0.5 m v  = 0.5 * 50 * 4984360000 = 124609000000 = 1.246 * 10   J
> 
> Is that a big number or what!  Splat goes one space ship!

Two points.

First, that assumes that the target ship isn't moving.  If the target takes
any evasive action, some of that acceleration is going to be used up following
the target.  Second, if the target is moving towards the missile at the time of
impact, the target's velocity gets added to the missile's velocity; if the
target is moving away from the missile, the target's velocity gets subtracted.

However, these figures will probably do for an order of magnitude analysis.

The MT Referee's Manual says that 1 kilolitre of capacitors can absorb 650 MW
of energy.  Which just shows what a heap of junk the MT Referee's manual is -
MW is power, not energy.  If 1 kilolitre of capacitors can absorb energy equal
to 650 MW coming in for one full turn, i.e.
        6                 11
650 * 10 * 1200 = 7.8 * 10   J

then that kinetic energy will hardly be noticed.  It all depends on how long
that 1 kilolitre of capacitors can absorb 650 MW.

- - -- 
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  adrian@uk.ac.hw.cs
 UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!adrian     |  ARPA:   adrian@cs.hw.ac.uk

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2090
Date:     Fri, 18 Jan 91 15:16:41 EST
From: "Robert S. Dean" <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  RoboSpeed

With regard to some of your comments regarding speed calculation for robots
that you included with the design package you uploaded:

I would expect that many robots would be operating in a mixed human/robot
environment, such as an office, a hotel, or a starship.  In that case, I
think that the amount of clutter in most people's offices/hallways/homes
would tend to keep robot speed low regardless of the theoretical maximum.

I know that if I had a wheeled Naasirka Office Mate here and I sent it to
the coffee maker for a cup of coffee it would have to dodge around a lot
of junk in the halls (not to mention the rest of the people).  There 
wouldn't be a chance of zipping down there at 100kph.  Similarly, a grav robot
should probably be considered to be using NOE speed for most building interiors
which would limit them to 40kph unless they had avionics.  Even then, I hate
to get bumped by a 100kph robot in the hall.

Anyway, if you sent these robots out on the roads or other trafficways by
themselves, they could then use their speed effectively.  I know using the
P/W calculations on wheeled/tracked/legged robots will tend to make them
fast because they need a lot (comparatively) of power to run peripherals,
but there is really no reason to design an indoor grav robot with more than
a nominal amount of excess thrust (.1G or so?).  So some of this could be
covered in the design section without having to do a separate table for them.

Rob Dean


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

Archive-Message-Number: 2091
Subject: Nuclear_Dampers
Date: Fri, 18 Jan 91 14:02:23 PST
From: wrgate.wr.tek.com!agora.rain.com!carlf@tessi.UUCP (Carl Fago)

Mark Cook and I had been talking about how certain items work (similar to the
recent Black Globe discussion).  Mark sent me this info off GEnie:

> TOPIC:  NUCLEAR DAMPERS
>
>     Going way to back to Mercenary [p. 42]:
>
>      'A common term, dampers units actually may be used to increase or
>decrease the stability of atomic nuclei.  Projecting from two seperate
>stations, the intersection of the two transmitted broadcasts produces a
>series of nodes and anti-nodes.  In the area of the nodes, the strong nuclear
>force is enhanced, making the nucleus more stable.  In the area of the
>anti-nodes, the strong nuclear force is depressed, making the nucleus much
>less stable.  Anti-nodes are focused on incoming nuclear warheads, causing
>them to shed neutrons at low energy levels, rendering the warheads
>inoperable....  This damper is later developed into a disintegrator weapon,
>beginning at tech level 16.'

My reply:

This is a little weak in the "explanation" area.  It requires "two transmitted
broadcasts" but of what?  Also, the logic of "shedding neutrons" is faulted
from the standpoint that neutrons is what is _required_ to initiate a fission
reaction.  If the anti-node is strong enough to shed lots of neutrons faster
than it takes the fission reaction to occer, then I say you already have your
disintegrator weapon.

If the nodes were focused on the weapon, then any neutron emitted to try and
generate the fission reaction would more likely be absorbed (creating U-236
with a 2.3E7 year half-life (long)) or bounce off (billiard ball
interaction...or rather ping pong ball/bowling ball interaction).  The
increase in the nuclear force would tend to make fission less likely.  This
may be similar technology to what is used to make bonded-superdense material.

Also, if you had to aim the nodes (as it seems), wouldn't it be easier to have
a laser point defense system???

With all my nuclear damper bashing, I suppose I should come up with a
"reasonable" explanation for it...

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

So I thought I'd throw this into the TML for any other input...

*-=Carl=-*

carlf@agora.rain.com

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2092
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 91 12:20 EST
From: Rob Miracle <RWMIRA01%ULKYVX.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU>
Subject: Re: GEnie

From:
In Message (2087) plb@violin.att.COM (Peter L. Berghold) writes:

>I keep hearing about a MT Bulletin Board on GEnie... How the heck
>do you get there??   I have (now) a GEnie account and have been
>pulling what little hair I have out trying to find it.

Once you are on line, you can type the keyword: SCORPIA  and it will take you
to the Games Forum By Scorpia.  At that point, you can select the library files
and Traveller is Group 11 I belive.  Or you can go to the Games menu and look
for the Games Roundtable.

Rob

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2093
From: chk@alias (C. Harald Koch)
Subject: Re: Nuclear_Dampers
Date: Mon, 21 Jan 91 10:16:54 EST

> This is a little weak in the "explanation" area.  It requires "two transmitted
> broadcasts" but of what?

The answer to that can be as simple as 'we don't know yet; Terra @ 1991 is
only TL8 (or is it 7?)'. It isn't necessary to explain every little detail
of how something like this works; if we knew we'd have invented it here on
this planet...

> Also, the logic of "shedding neutrons" is faulted
> from the standpoint that neutrons is what is _required_ to initiate a fission
> reaction.  If the anti-node is strong enough to shed lots of neutrons faster
> than it takes the fission reaction to occer, then I say you already have your
> disintegrator weapon.

Yes, but the key words were 'low engery'. The decrease in nuclear force
means that the neutrons don't need alot of energy to escape; presumably
their energy is low enough that they don't cause fission reactions.

> Also, if you had to aim the nodes (as it seems), wouldn't it be easier to have
> a laser point defense system???

Who said that the nodes were small? Maybe the 'transmissions' are at a very
low frequency, and so have a large wavelength? It is quite possible to have
an anti-node kilometers or even hundreds of kilometers across; this makes
them easy to aim.


Sure wish we have nuclear dampers in 2300AD; those detonation lasers sure
are deadly!

- - -- 
C. Harald Koch  VE3TLA                Alias Research, Inc., Toronto ON Canada
chk%alias@csri.utoronto.ca      chk@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu      chk@chk.mef.org
"I think you curdled my Pepsi!"-Gerry Smit, in response to sickening cuteness


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

Archive-Message-Number: 2094
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 91 10:07:02 CST
From: mcknight@tusun2.mcs.utulsa.edu (Chuck McKnight - Law)
Subject: Other nets


If anyone is interested, there is an amateur network that does nothing but
RPGs.  It currently has a PBEM game in Traveller in progress, as well as
various other RPG systems (such as GURPS, Hero Systems, etc.).  If anyone
has any interest in finding out more about Vervan Net, please send email and
I'll forward the location of the various access points across the county.
VervanNet has recently connected to a similar network in Europe and is
working (if they haven't already succeeded) on connecting to Australia.

Chuck McKnight
mcknight@tusun2.mcs.utulsa.edu
    - or -
mcknight@vax1.utulsa.edu

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2095
Date:     Wed, 23 Jan 91 15:19:47 EST
From: "Robert S. Dean" <rsdean@crdec8.apgea.army.mil>
Subject:  How to Handle this?

Since we have been having discussions about how to handle various situations
as a gamemaster, let me throw out a question to the crowd.  This is inspired
by a never run 2300AD character, but the same would apply to a similar 
Traveller situation.  Suppose we have a character who is a journalist.
In 2300AD he/she would have a high writing and perhaps imaging skill.  In
Traveller, you might have to wing it, but let's assume that we are talking
about a character with a high education and intelligence, and that we will
use those to modify any task die rolls.  Clearly, such a character could,
with the proper selection of other skills, be an asset to a group without
regard to the journalism.  But suppose the player wishes to keep his character
in pocket money (or more) by selling their stories.  I see no reason in
particular why this should be role played out, especially if it was a routine
occurence.  (Ship lands, journalist sends files to his/her favorite publisher).
What would you do?  Set it as a task with a set payoff, with extra for
extraordinary success, less for failure?  Add modifiers if you deem the 
adventure to be "exciting" or newsworthy"?  How would you decide how big to
make the average payout?

What about other characters with skills that could be marketed freelance?
Or craftsmen who could build things while they whiled away the endless hours
in jumpspace?

Rob


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

Archive-Message-Number: 2096
Subject: sector data (and stuff)
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 91 22:18:13 -0500
From: tom <tom@cis.udel.edu>

this is my first posting, so hello everyone.  [welcome aboard, tom, glad
to see you're getting right into the swing of things -- James] i've
looked at *lots* of stuff from the archive in the last two days... i was
wondering if there is any more official sector data out there besides
the 26 files in the archive.

i'm also looking for the subsector names for the sectors in machine
readable form, i have some of it in books & magazines but not all in one
place, let alone on computer. and a list of all possible values for the
allegiance field.

btw, if anyone is interested i have a c program that takes files of data
and outputs a color view of the stars in them. it uses a generic
graphic format that can be trivially converted to gif, X, and many
others.
- - --
Internet: tom@sol.cis.udel.edu         Uucp: ...{unidot,uunet}!udel!sol!tom

"Themes were useless; Destiny was here, and the foot pedals were bleeding."

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

Archive-Message-Number: 2097
From: Mark F. Cook <markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.COM>
Subject: PGMP/FGMP Fuel & Starship Fuel
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 91 21:17:04 PST

I've got two question which recent events in my MT campaign have prompted
me to solicit answers for.  Here they are.

1.  PGMP/FGMP ammo/powerpack costs.

  The Imperial Encyclopedia (pg. 72) says the PGMP, "consists of a power
  pack carried on the firer's back, the weapon itself, a flexible power
  link.  The power pack powers a laser ignition system in the weapon
  itself which heats hydrogen fuel to a plasma state.  The plasma is
  contained in the ignition chamber briefly and is then released through
  a magnetically focused field along the weapons' barrel.  The high
  initial velocity plasma jet is 2 centimeters in diameter, but it
  begins to dissipate immediately.  EACH POWER PACK HAS SUFFICIENT
  ENERGY TO DISCHARGE 40 PLASMA BOLTS BEFORE RECHARGING IS NECCESSARY.
  Each pull of the trigger discharges one plasma bolt."  [The emphasis
  is mine.]

  In the next paragraph, it goes on to specifically address the PGMP-13
  (which leads one to believe that the earlier discussion was directed
  towards the PGMP-12).  It says, "THE POWER PACK IS A SMALL FUSION
  REACTOR WITH EFFECTIVELY UNLIMITED FUEL FOR COMBAT PURPOSES (BUT IT
  REQUIRES PERIODIC REFUELING AND ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EVERY 24-36 HOURS,
  DEPENDING ON THE AMOUNT OF USE).  [Again, the emphasis is mine.]

  Then, on pg. 75, the following data is given:

        Weapon      TL             Price     Ammo Wt.  Ammo Price
        PGMP-12     12    ...     10,000 Cr.   3.0        2,500 Cr.
        PGMP-13     13    ...     65,000 Cr.   7.0       50,000 Cr.
        PGMP-14     14    ...    100,000 Cr.   1.6      250,000 Cr.
        FGMP-14     14    ...    100,000 Cr.   9.0       65,000 Cr.
        FGMP-15     15    ...    400,000 Cr.   2.0      300,000 Cr.
        FGMP-16     16    ...    500,000 Cr.   1.0      375,000 Cr.

  Well, that's it.  I'm totally confused.  The ammo wt. jumps all over
  the place.  And the price; does it refer to the hydrogen 'pellets'
  in the gun that actually get zapped by the laser, or does it refer
  to the hydrogen fuel in the power pack?  Based on articles in both
  the TDR Physics SIG and the HIWG (History of the Imperium Working
  Group), the 'hydrogen' in this case is some combination of deuterium
  and tritium (as opposed to the ol' vanilla protium which fuels star-
  ship power plants).

  Sooooo, in the words of Ricky Ricardo, "Somebody 'splain dis to me,
  please?"

2.  Fuel duration & multiple jumps by a starship.

  I have a design for a modified Beowulf-class Free Trader that has
  jump-2 and maneuver-2.  It burns up 405 Kl. of fuel per jump and
  has a total fuel capacity of 859 Kl.  It also has a duration of
  30/90 days (whateverthehell that means) according to the design
  rules in the Refs. Manual.  If I understand the rules correctly,
  that means that it can make one jump (jump-1 or jump-2, it doesn't
  matter 'cause the both burn 405 kl. of fuel, thanks to those
  mysteriously vanishing 'jump governors').  On the remaining 454
  Kl. of fuel, the ship can stay powered for 90 days in some sort
  of 'low-power mode (or '8-hour work days' as the Refs. Manual calls
  them).  This implies that the ship burns 5.0444 Kl. of fuel per day
  in that mode, right?

  Given those values, one can assume that for 2 weeks in jumpspace a
  ship would need 5.0444 x 14 days = 70.6222 Kl. of fuel, plus 405 x
  2 = 810 Kl. for the 2 jumps.  810 + 70.6222 = 880.622, which is only
  21.6222 Kl. more than my ship holds already.  By installing a small
  (say, 50 Kl.) auxillary tank in the cargo hold, this ship could
  ram-scoop a gas giant, jump-2 parsecs, and still have enough fuel
  to safely make a second emergency jump-2, right?

  I realize this completely ignores the other factors such as in-system
  transit time, etc.  It also doesn't address whether or not this low
  power consumption figure assumes the M-drives are going or not.
  However, I don't think the rules explicitly forbid this sort of
  action, do they?  All of this hinges on my understanding of the 30/90 
  duration figure, which is zip.  So somebody enlightening me, okay?

One possible interpretation of the 30/90 duration (mine :-)).

  The 90 day duration is max. duration if the M-drives are NEVER run.
  This gives use a life-support (et.al.) fuel usage of 5.0444 Kl./day.
  The 30 duration is max. duration if the M-drives are run CONSTANTLY.
  Since we know life support burns 5.0444 Kl./day, we know that life-
  support burns 151.3333 Kl. of fuel in 30 days.  This means that the
  remainder of the 454 Kl. (which is 302.6667 Kl.) is 30 days of con-
  sumption by the M-drives, which works out to 10.0889 Kl./day.  Now
  that we've got these 2 figures:
        M-drives ------- 10.0889 Kl./day
        life support ---  5.0444 Kl./day
  We can derive per hour consumptions and determine right to the
  credit how much it will cost to refuel at that next starport! :-)

        [The scene is L'sis (0409 Pretoria/Deneb), in Lorraine's Adult
         Entertainment & Electronics Repair.  Hassan and Nonny are
         browsing through the Holo-porn:]

         "Check this out.  Over here in the Zhodani section, there's
          one called _Debbie_does_Herself_!"

         "Uh-huh.  Oh wait, now *this* looks interesting.  In the
          Vargr section, there's an X-rated remake of some old
          2-D flick called _One_Hundred_and_One_Dalmatians_."

                        - Paraphrased from last weekend's MT session
Later,

        Mark F. Cook

USMail: User Interface Technical Support
        Hewlett-Packard - Interface Technology Operation
        1000 NE Circle Blvd.  Corvallis, OR 97330

INTERNET: markc@hpcvss.cv.hp.com
          markc%hpcvss.cv.hp.com@relay.hp.com

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

End of TML Bundle
*****************

