LOL-john, i had similiar thoughts about jon and traveller 2300 myself.
as for civilian weaponry on the colonial worlds, i agree with your reasoning,
ie, weapons using cased ammo on frontier worlds. robust, reliable weaponry in
the form of hunting rifles, shotguns, and handguns using cased ammo would
certainly be more sensible than caseles, binary propellant or gauss weaponry.
the LETHAL ai rifle concept is also immenantly reasonable for frontier world
use. lol, and it has been around since the 17th and 19th centuries as both a
limited issue military and hunting weapon.
and the anti-material / very big game rifle, in either turnbolt or
autoloading actions is also believable in the hands of colonists than need
them or can afford them. again using reloadable cased ammo.
these are indeed the weapons and ammo types that most frontiersmen (generic
term!) would have available on a daily basis for self defense, and hunting.
hence these would be the weapons readily available to ad hoc colonial militias
and rebels.
any explosives available to the average frontiers man would be of the
industrial types, or home made.
again i agree with you that the weaponry of the goverment controlled organized
militias would most likely be military surplus, but i think richer colonial
governments could afford first rate weaponry.
militia weapons, with basic ammo loads will certainy be kept in armories as
they are now. additional ammo for these weapons will be kept in ammo dumps.
these armories and dumps would be closely controlled by the colonial or
corporate government world.
also, any military vehicles belonging to the militia would be kept at
armories.
militia aircraft would be kept at installations under the control of the
colonial government.
ad hoc militia or rebel vehicles and aircraft would be rag tag civilian models
pressed into service.
also animals might be used for transport or draft teams.
a third colonial source of weaponry, vehicles, and aircaft would be the local
law enforcement authorities, which depending on the actual location of the
lawmen, would be of an urban, suburban, or rural type. all of these law forces
would have available special weaponry that belonged to the agency or the
policemen themselves.
in the games i have run (in the old reliable well developed TRAVELLER
UNIVERSE background-regardless of actual rules used to play with
miniatures) the world tech level and law level tend to provided a ready idea
as to the possible weaponry in use by civilians, police, and militias.
very useful, those world profiles!
many is the game that the rebels conducted operations to gain modern
military weaponry, or the heroic colonists have fought with off world human or
alien invaders, or space pirate raiders.
smuggling and anti smuggling actions in space and on world too as the colonial
goverment tries to thwart the import of military weapons,
medical supplies and etc, destined for rebel forces or the export
of wotever to buy same for the rebels.
we have always used merc organizations to bolster or train colonial militias
or regular armed forces.
rebels too.
What about a plain'ol future tech LASER rifles?
Assuming that energy storage technology or LASER technology makes a few
'jumps' (just as we assume for gauss technology) why not arm these colonials
with with LASER weapons?
LASER weapons would NEVER require ammo. Just a recharge from the local
power grid/solar cells and perhaps a replacement of a few components
(only needed after significant use) and they are ready to go again. LASER
rifles might pack a lesser punch, but they should be pretty reliable, do
decent
damage, have good range and zero recoil. Also packing a lesser punch is not
always a bad thing when arming colonist (ie they will think twice about facing
the local armored regulars or PA). And IMO LASER rifles should not
be out of the tech ability of an average colony to produce/maintain.
Just my 2 cents, but IMHO a light/medium LASER rifle beats them .
Scott
> From: DAWGFACE47@webtv.net
> Scott Clinton Wrote:
> What about a plain'ol future tech LASER rifles?
Depends on how gritty you're playing your future. The problem I've always had
with lasers as personal weapons is the issue of what happens if the optic get
jarred. maintenance and service issues tend to lessen it's effectiveness as a
frontier weapon. As a military weapon, the problem is mitigated by the
presence of support units to service weapons. But even
then... I'd rather have my soldiers/colonists carry somethinmg around
that
won't break from the get-go.
2B^2
> Depends on how gritty you're playing your future.
> 2B^2
:-) Okay...Let me see...
In SG2 we have:
50-100 ton tanks that can hover...
rail/gauss weapons in sizes from < 10kg to multi ton sized...
power armor... fusion power......and lets not forget faster than light
travel...
But, you can't buy into a more reliable, robust and slightly more portable
version of a weapon that basically can be produced today???
:-) Hey, to each his own.
> But, you can't buy into a more reliable, robust and slightly more
Now that was a short (elegantly so) argument...) In the words of Wesley Snipes
in Demolition Man, "If this is the future where are all the phaser guns?"
> Scott Clinton Wrote:
> :-) Okay...Let me see...
I was referring to gaming in general, not just SG. For instance, when I
play Star Wars RPG, it's not an issue - that's Space Opera. As said, it
depends on how gritty you play your games.
> 50-100 ton tanks that can hover...
Which isn't that far removed from today's LCAC's....
> rail/gauss weapons in sizes from < 10kg to multi ton sized...
Depends on your definition of the word "Robust." The precision of a laser beam
is always going to be much finer than the tolerances even on a gauss weapon,
and thus much more prone to even a slight jarring knocking it out of
alignment. Plus, given the nature of a laser beam, out of alignment for it
won't mean inaccurate (As for a more conventional weapon), it will mean
that it's no longer a weapon, just a really, really bright spotlight.
> :-) Hey, to each his own.
Sure. If you want, just give your settlers Cyborg Psionic Implants. Those
should be just as plausible, right? ;-)
2B^2
> Plus, given the nature of a laser beam, out of alignment for it won't
> it's no longer a weapon, just a really, really bright spotlight.
The point remains that you are accepting a weapon system that is at very
best a decade or so away from protype use to one that can be produced today
(albit with several limitations).
> Sure. If you want, just give your settlers Cyborg Psionic Implants.
No, last I heard "psionics" are not CURRENTLY in use in reality. Again, all it
takes is a few "leaps" in LASER tech to make your issues mute. Whereas for
things such as gauss weapons, they are not even developed enough for
anyone to say what their TRUE battlefield limitations might be (for the first
generation) of weapons.
And lets not even get into FTL travel vs robust LASER rifles and which is
more plausable... :-)
> Scott Clinton Wrote:
> The point remains that you are accepting a weapon system that is at
Following that logic, it should stand to reason that a longbow is a better
combat weapon than an assault rifle (after all, the AR toook SO much longer to
develop). Limitations on a weapon due to it's particular nature are different
than limitations based on the technological level of it's makers.
> Sure. If you want, just give your settlers Cyborg Psionic Implants.
True, but To Each His Own would imply that anything someone wants to play
should be made plausible for the game. My point was merely that for any
given gaming background, it is possible to insert certain limitations to any
technology. The issue of optics sensitivity is definitely as plausible for a
given background as the idea of a laser robust enough not to be sensitive.
> Again, all
Perhaps more robust laser will make the issue less pressing, but as long as
the weapon relies on optics, there will always be a chance that they become
jarred, they will probably require precision to retune if jarred, and they
will probably still be more affected by jarring than any other contemporary
weapon system (Any other system of the same time period will be able to
benefit from the same tech advances, and be based on a less temperamental
system).
> Whereas
Although by that time, we should be well beyond first generation (unless
only lasers will be receiving further research?).
> And lets not even get into FTL travel vs robust LASER rifles and which
Ummm..... I don't recall ever stating FTL was more plausible. No Straw Men,
please.
2B^2
> Scott Clinton wrote:
> What about a plain'ol future tech LASER rifles?
The real advantage of conventional firearms with cased ammo is that the
equipment needed to manufacture/maintain them are generally useful for a
lot of other things and the chemical facilities required for nitrate based
fertilizers can easily produce nitrate based propellants (but not both at the
same time). With shipping to and from the core worlds at rather infrequent
intervals, anything that can be produced locally is greatly superior to
anything coming from another star system and a colony's power grid will likely
be very limited; unless, they will require megawatts from the word go.
Hi-tech equipment assumes cheap interstellar travel. If interstellar
travel is not cheap, exploitation of planets will be in waves. The first wave
consists of
a planetary mapping expedition with geo- and biological surveys. The
survey is done from enough allterrain vehicles to give the planet a complete
once over
before running out of supplies/spares.
The next wave consists of a quick and dirty mining operation that collects
thousands of tonnes of a variety of minerals and deposits them at a
conveniently located prime agricultural zone (preferably not to far from
whatever passes for a dense forest. The miners also do not stay long before
leaving.
The final wave is the arrival of the colonists. They arrive with just enough
appropriate technology to begin agriculture and build enough industry to push
railroads to the mineral deposits. With the colony's ability to endure
assured, they can get around to producing whatever made the colony worth
setting up in the first place. Unless the product is extremely valuable, the
colony receives
> Richard Bell wrote:
> > What about a plain'ol future tech LASER rifles?
> (only
> rifles
> over
> assured,
The other objection I have to laser rifles specifically for colonists has to
do with the types of targets that they might be facing. If I'm staring down a
ravenous blugbatter beast, I want some stopping power. Burning a hole in it
might not stop something big and dumb. transferring a significant amount of
kinetic energy has it's perks.
2B^2
> At 2:44 PM -0800 1/28/02, Brian Bilderback wrote:
Nahh, then you run into the training issue.
> At 3:08 PM -0800 1/28/02, Brian Bilderback wrote:
Think wounding power. Its trauma that makes a beast fall down and die. Not
kinetic energy per say. Tranferring lots of energy into the head of a cape
buffalo that is willing to thump that head after a full run into solid objects
like cars doesn't do you much good. Putting something that will tear his heart
and lungs to shreads and make him stop moving will make him drop.
When dropping a man or beast, you are looking to cause traumatic blood loss.
Not a massive kick in the chest or thigh.
> At 3:11 PM -0600 1/28/02, Scott Clinton wrote:
It would depend on the level of technology on the colony would it not? I could
take a Macintosh and a digital camera to Borneo and live there for 5 years.
But, I would question whether it would be running after 5 years in the jungle.
One has to realize that depending on the size of the colony, you have a great
limit on what industry is available on that site. Look at the number of
businesses involved in making a car. Just a simple car. Those major parts
source from more than 500 factories all over this continent. Smaller
components probably source from further afield.
Granted some things would be easy to fix if there are available parts. There's
the other issue. Parts. If it takes half a year to get a shipment of parts in
from the major systems, you are going to want to limit what is purchased from
off world in deference to what is made on world.
Think about the large amount of commerce that goes on in the US or UK every
day. Parts, raw materials, sub components, whole finished products. The web is
really really complex. If your lag time between shipments of components is
very long then you are going to have huge issues with assembly time.
I'm not disagreeing, just posing problems...
> The point remains that you are accepting a weapon system that
No, that has nothing to do with the point I made. The point I made is that
LASERs actually exist in more or less the same form needed to fulfill
sci-fi
colonial weapon needs. All that needs to be done (in reality) is for
(admittedly) significant advances to be made in a few areas (reliability for
one). Whereas weapons/technology that many (and I assume you) on this
list
accept as no argument feasible/acceptable are way, way, WAY off in the
stratosphere of sci-fi (hover tanks, gauss weapons and FTL travel as
examples).
The only possible point I can think you are trying to make is to suggest
that LASERs are as good as they will EVER get, right now (i.e. the long bow
was the highest evolution of the bow, which btw is not true). If this is
the case you are making a large (very large IMO) assumption. :-)
> True, but To Each His Own would imply that anything someone wants to
Possible/acceptable to a gamer does not equate to plausible in reality
or
even a sci-fi inspired reality (IMHO).
> My point was merely that for any given gaming background, it is
Sure, but it just seems odd to me that you have no problem with technology
that is PURE fiction as "plausible" but balk at what would simply be
generational improvements of technology that already exists.
> Perhaps more robust laser will make the issue less pressing, but as
You make some sweeping assumptions here IMO. You assume that the improvements
made to LASERs will involve simply a 'strengthening' of the
existing system/tech instead of a actual "leap" in tech. You also make
the assumption that whatever form this improvement is for LASERs, this tech
will be also transferable to other weapon systems. These are fairly large
assumptions IMO.
> Whereas for things such as gauss weapons, they are not
Sure, but my point was that we KNOW what a few of the long term limitations
are or may be for battlefield, man-portable LASERs. We really have no
clue what they will be for gauss weapons. That being the case one should
assume
that they will be at LEAST as large as other, similar high-tech systems.
> And lets not even get into FTL travel
PLEASE don't start calling everything a "straw man". This is the first sign a
debate has reached it limit and it is time to end it. As a point of fact this
argument is anything but a "straw man". FTL travel is a GIVEN in any
sci-fi game <period> If you debate it's existence (in one form or
another) then you have a LOT of ground to make up in explaining HOW humans
(and others) reach the stars and interact to begin with.
So, FTL travel is a given in SG, DS2, 40k, etc. etc. because FTL travel HAS to
exist for the game to exist. Thus, if you accept FTL travel (and you
must) and balk at an improved version of 20th century technology you are
contradicting yourself (IMHO).
> --- Brian Bilderback <bbilderback@hotmail.com> wrote:
...
> power. Burning a hole in
Well, As much as I am enjoying the tech debate, one needs to consider the
political background to see IF ANY weapon is available to the colonist. The
ESU would allow NO weapons outside of the partys control, the number of
colonists that die is of no importance as long as control is maintained. FSE,
NAC, and NSL would be only slightly more willing to allow colonists to have
weapons. An FCT or Dutch colony would be armed to the teeth. (Comparitively
speaking)
Bye for now,
> Scott Clinton Wrote:
> The point remains that you are accepting a weapon system that
And my point was that in any given background, it is possible that lasers will
still have a problem with optics jarring that makes them a less desireable
option for rough use.
Whereas weapons/technology that many (and I assume you) on
> this list
This is granted, although assuming anything about me is an iffy proposition.
> The only possible point I can think you are trying to make is to
That was not my point at all. My point was that just because a technology has
been around longer does not necessarily make it the BEST technology.
If
> this is
As you can see, that was NOT the case.
> True, but To Each His Own would imply that anything someone wants to
This is true. I was merely reacting to what I perceived as a flippant
dismissal of my concerns.
> My point was merely that for any given gaming background, it is
To which technology are you referring? I never once defended another
technology, I merely presented a concern about laser technology. Again, I take
issue with you basing arguements on what you ASSUME is my position without
ever confirming it IS my position.
> Perhaps more robust laser will make the issue less pressing, but as
> will
Sweeping and large assumptions seem to be the order of the day. In actuality,
what I meant was not that the SAME technological advances can be applied to
all techs, but that an equal or comparable amount of effort to make advances
in general will be applied to many technologies.
> And lets not even get into FTL travel
> sign
Which is where this seems to be going. This was never intended to be a debate
about the relative plausibilities of different technologies, my original goal
was to present some reasons to consider other technologies
(Including good old fashioned powder rounds) as more reliable in a rough
country setting).
Again, my observation about laser reliablility definitely falls under the
YMMV caveat - it can vary from one setting to another, as well as from
one era within a setting to another (we are talking about a generic game, so
the tech level setting CAN be varied). If you want lasers to be rough and
ready, then, as you said, To Each His Own.
2B^2
--- Scott Clinton <grumbling_grognard@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> What about a plain'ol future tech LASER rifles?
Low rate of fire (SG, p 27) and low impact (best
mil-grade sniper rifles have only d8). Plus you have
optics to worry about here--how much dirt/grit/abuse
can they tolerate? And if it breaks, it's not easily
repairable--a cased ammunition rifle can have spare
parts machines in a garage. Laser rifles require an electronics industry.
While there may be a light electronic industry on a colony planet, if you have
to
ship the spare parts half-way around a planet with
poorly developed transportation networks the costs get pretty high and the
availablity is questionable.
> --- DAWGFACE47@webtv.net wrote:
> again i agree with you that the weaponry of the
Assuming they were up for sale/permitted to do so.
IMU, NRE's first and second line troops use gauss weapons. These are no
available to their militia forces and there would be serious penalties (exile
to some lousy asteroid) for some colonial administrator trying to procure them
from foreign armories instead of going through proper channels.
> ad hoc militia or rebel vehicles and aircraft would
Which sometimes can be relatively effective, at least for light vehicles. I
mean, is there really a lot to choose between a civillian Land Rover and a
military Land Rover?
> very useful, those world profiles!
To the point that I'm working on developing them for NRE planets as well.
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2002 at 05:16:09PM -0800, John Atkinson wrote:
The mounting post in the back for the Milan launcher, mostly. Generally more
intensive maintenance, but that's a separate discussion.
> Ryan Gill wrote:
> At 3:11 PM -0600 1/28/02, Scott Clinton wrote:
The industry required to build a car can fit in a modest garage. The 500
factories are needed to produce cars at a rate of one per minute. The garage
with sheet metal, bar stock, plates, forge, and machine tools will allow you
to produce a car fast enough if you only have twenty, and they each last
twenty years.
> Granted some things would be easy to fix if there are available
The colony will probably start with steam powered machinery, as the first
(admittedly really inefficient) steam engines managed to produce useful work
despite fact that threaded fasteners were still cut by hand. Steam engines
have the advantage that they are easy to build and maintain. While
reciprocating steam engines require some artistry to run, being able to
operate one gives wonderful insight into what is wrong when it breaks done.
They can also use locally grown fuel, like charcoal.
[Bizarre aside: to build precision machines, you need a very accurate
lead screw. You only need one, because after the first one is made, it is
trivially easy to copy it by the millions. Fortunately, in the mid eighteenth
century, someone discovered that if you press a hard metal knife edge into
soft metal round stock, at the desired thread pitch, turning the round stock
would advance it past the cutting tool at the correct rate. The man who did
this is unknown, but his invention made Jesse Ramsden a fortune.]
> Think about the large amount of commerce that goes on in the US or UK
The web is complex due to the economies of scale. Colonial economies
[quoted original message omitted]
MORNING!
i tend to think that laser small arms might be a tad to expensive for the
average colonist to afford, or maybe even restricted access (like plasma
guns).
lasers, like small caliber rocket firing weapons make a great deal of
since in a 0-gee or near 0-gee environment (as they say now days when
discussing orbital operations).
hmmmm. using explosive tipped rockets, rocket firing small arms might
also re-appear and even become popular with civilians and militias.
as i remember from the 60s the main reason the gyrojet system was
poo-pooed was lack of power at short range before the rocket built up
speed (using a solid slug).
i also just recently read about a sporting rifle that uses conventional
brass, reload - able cartridges and an electonic firing mechanism using
a 9-volt battery to provide the 150 volt "surge" required to fire the
cartridges. something like 1500 shots per 9-volt battery, improved
accuracy, and safety. but very expensive -like a top line mechanical
firing mechanism rifle.
dawgie
> At 3:34 AM +0000 1/29/02, Roger Burton West wrote:
Pretty Much. Sometime Land Rover made a different model for the Army, but
then, they'd turn around and sell them on the civilian market too. ie the 101
FC iirc.
Then there are the MV collectors....they won't be as effective as the real
military guys, but they have their own Military Vehicles. Some have their own
APCs and such. I personally have a British Armored Car (a 1:1 scale Daimler
Ferret so to speak...).
> At 11:41 PM -0500 1/28/02, Richard and Emily Bell wrote:
> The industry required to build a car can fit in a modest garage. The
Yeah, a Lotus or something. But are you machining those parts from raw
materials or using pre assembled sub components?
What about armored vehicles? Where exactly are you getting your armor plate?
Track links? Tires?
There were locally produced armored cars that were made by smaller
commonwealth nations during WWII. They used lots of locally available
components and still had issues with their vehicles. Austrailia and or South
Africa had what sort of Industrial base at that point?
> The colony will probably start with steam powered machinery, as the
Steam
> engines have the advantage that they are easy to build and maintain.
I'd expect that Fuel Cells and Solar/Wind power would be the quickest
way of getting power that is portable. Electrolize water with solar or wind
power, and you have a way of running a fuel cell easily.
> [Bizarre aside: to build precision machines, you need a very accurate
Granted, But, do they spend 36 hours per rifle on that
machined/stamped/welded/riveted assault rifle that uses gas operation
and a 200 year old reciprocating bolt design or do they spend 150 hours making
that gauss rifle using electronic components they can barely make on site?
You can get an Enfield or a L1A1 brand new made in Pakistan in a village on
the border with Afganistan. You can't get a Brand new Sony beta deck made
there. Too many precise and small electronic parts that have to be sourced
from elsewhere.
> The web is complex due to the economies of scale. Colonial economies
Thus at that small point the amount, quantity and variety of items they can
make will be very limited.
> I will stand by my speculation that unless supply ships are inexpensive
Thats the whole point.
I have only read the 2nd Ed Full Thrust rules so far, but it mentions that the
battery weapons are most likely particle accelerators. So what kind of
traumatic "stopping power" would a personal particle accelerator have?
We don't know. We haven't built any yet. Are they able to be made
effective weapons for an infantryman/colonist? Dunno. Would they be
too fragile for colonist use? Dunno.
So, for the record: When I'm done building my fleet and have started building
up my DS2 army, all of my colonists will have slightly less
than military-grade Particle Beam weapons. They will have respectable
kick, and when the particle beam hits the target the beam will tranfer enough
energy into the target to cause trauma and damage from burns, and the
explosive vaporization of the target's matter, which will provide the
"stopping power"(unless it's structure isn't given to explosive
vaporization due to particle-beam hits).
And you can't stop me... Muwahahahahaha!
(Here's where people line up to say that I'm wrong and start citing
hard sci-fi about particle beams and the physics behind them, trying
to stop, you see.)
DAWGFACE47@webtv.net schrieb:
> MORNING!
Depends on the market and technological progress. 40 years ago, a
Laser, any Laser, was a Nobel-price-worthy invention. Nowadays
everybody has and uses Lasers - your CD player has one, there are Laser
pointers, Laser Lightshows etc.
A mass-produced Laser rifle plus charger might well be cheaper than a
rifle and ammunition once the technology is mature.
Greetings
> At 7:45 AM -0600 1/29/02, DAWGFACE47@webtv.net wrote:
Remington's Etronic R-700 type rifle. It needs its own primers and
has a ceramic insulated firing pin that is really just a contact. The nice
thing about the rifle is that the electronics are all simplified down to a
microswitch in terms of movement of the system. Thus less movement at firing
and less variation of firing movement effecting aim as well as very precise
and repeatable primer ignition.
> At 4:31 PM +0100 1/29/02, KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de wrote:
I have a new iBook. I could take that iBook with me to Afganistan. I could not
find parts or a full replacement unit in Afganistan. I could not make those
parts there either. I could take my 1941 Lithgow Enfield Rifle there and get a
local with some simple machine tools to make a new trigger spring or turn out
a new firing pin. Thats the difference.
[quoted original message omitted]
[quoted original message omitted]
> Flak Magnet wrote:
> I have only read the 2nd Ed Full Thrust rules so far, but it mentions
In vacuum? Probably quite a bit.
In a breathable atmosphere, at ranges over 20 meters? Not very much at
all :-)
Regards,
> I have a new iBook. I could take that iBook with me to Afganistan. I
You could NOT have taken your Enfield Rifle to such a location in 1941 and had
decent replacement parts made, just as you can not take any cutting edge tech
into the middle of nowhere and expect to have replacements made for it.
The point IS a LASER rifle will NOT be cutting edge tech in the 2150 universe.
Quite the opposite I would expect it LASERs to be quite well established tech
as they will have had well over 150 years (!) of development behind them. How
many years of development does your Enfield have behind it now? About the same
number of years that the LASER will have 150 years from now (first rifles
using cartridges).
[quoted original message omitted]
[quoted original message omitted]
[quoted original message omitted]
> At 12:50 PM -0600 1/29/02, Scott Clinton wrote:
I couldn't get a 50 year old Cathode Ray tube fixed there now. The thing to
think about is the amount of technology behind the construction and repair of
the weapon is the issue, not whether it is cutting edge or not. You need
basically one type of complex tool to work on a weapon that is all steel and
wood. A milling machine. For a laser, you would likely need far more compelx
tools to manufacture new components. What do you think goes into a Laser of
2183? Electronics? Some kind of complex tube that requires multiple chemical
and microsopic industrial processes to make? Would such an industrial process
be able to be shoved into a container to be shipped 50 Light years away and
not need anything else other than bulk refined material?
I can see a colonial laser rifle with a wood stock. I"m partial to wood on
small arms where feasible, and any colony with an agricultural component could
produce the wood easily enough. This cuts down on
metal/plastic consumption .
I think a laser rifle with a nice woodgrain on the stock and grips would
have a lovely neo/retro design dynamic. I want one.
> K.H.Ranitzsch wrote:
> What would a Laser rifle need ?
> At 6:58 PM +0100 1/29/02, K.H.Ranitzsch wrote:
> I am not easily convinced that an industrial SF infrastructure able to
Of what quantity? Clearly given the weapons available to troops in the SG
rules, such weapons are available. However, usually snipers get the newer
lasers (says so in the rules) based on their accuracy, however some troops
still prefer the gauss sniper rifles. The majority of troops use gauss rifles,
colonist and back water militia forces use older technology. If everyone can
make a laser rifle why did St.John even bother with the older weapons types?
Sure your back water world could get 15 people making a really nice laser
sniper rifle and they'd probably spend a month working on the process to get
one rifle. Or they could spend that same amount of time making older style
powder type weapons with the same tools they use to fabricate parts for their
tractors and make propellant with the same tools they use to make their
fertillizer.
One has to realize, this colony isn't there as a place to put data processing
experts that have hobbies in things like precision manufacturing and lens
grinding. They are there for raw materials. They have people that mine. They
have people that grow food. They didn't send people out there to those
colonies to make high end computer and laser components. I question whether
the knowledge, materials and hardware will even be in system.
But then hey, maybe you are right and every farmer has a self adjusting self
repairing laser cutting wheat thresher that they can
build in their garage with their Gerber phase multiplying multi-tool.
> At 7:55 PM +0100 1/29/02, K.H.Ranitzsch wrote:
[snip]
> You will need some steel or other metal for the engine. You have to get
Available
> from the 18th/19th century on, perhaps.
This is the crux of what I've been trying to get to. You need industries to
support industries to support other industries. A great big web of materials,
transport and factories. Even if they are small and in someone's garage. Thats
a lot of garages.
> At 8:18 PM +0100 1/29/02, K.H.Ranitzsch wrote:
Ah but the original question arose that you'd be able to make them in situ on
a back water colony. Some are arguing that it'd be tough and more economically
feasible to just make repeating powder powered assault rifles.
> At 7:10 PM +0100 1/29/02, K.H.Ranitzsch wrote:
The last big Dutch colony was. The Boers nearly kicked the British off of
South Africa. Made the Britsh army change all sorts of tactics, weapons skills
and even uniforms.
Karl,
I didn't post this message. You must have accidentally cut part of the header,
because this quote isn't mine.
2B^2
> ----- Original Message -----
> made
[quoted original message omitted]
> On 29 Jan 2002 Ryan Gill wrote:
> At 12:50 PM -0600 1/29/02, Scott Clinton wrote:
> to make? Would such an industrial process be able to
> refined material?
I think that would be the key question - can one shove
the entire industrial process into a container. Obviously if you send your
colonists out with only a
metal lathe, they won't be able to build/support
high-tech electronics.
But if you have the ability to import some level of
self-sustaining industry and technology than why are
you settling for 20th century technology instead of bringing factory equipment
that can produce high
tech/electronics from the raw materials you feed them?
If that was possible than the factories/machines
would be able to devote a certain amout of time to producing parts for self
repair. Or at least keep them running for a a few years until another shipment
arrives from the homeworld.
My suggestion does depend on the idea that colonists still have a link
(however thin) back to the infrastructure of the homeworld. But I think that
if that link was completely lost then the colonists would
find themselves armed with bows/spears before too
long, regardless of the technology they started with (at least for a while).
> On 29-Jan-02 at 16:21, Jakim Friant (jmodule@yahoo.com) wrote:
> My suggestion does depend on the idea that colonists
Too extreme. _I_ could, if I had to, start with raw materials
> At 10:02 PM +0100 1/29/02, K.H.Ranitzsch wrote:
Aye but they were still "dutch" and armed quite well too.
> From: KH.Ranitzsch Wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
I tend to lean towards the idea that colonists, especially very remote ones,
are going to tend to be (RELATIVELY) well-armed, whether it's "legal" or
not
- it will be a matter of survival if they're to face whatever fauna etc.
their new world may throw at them (I suspect that the reason Boers were more
well armed than Dutch in the Netherlands had less to do with the removal of
Dutch influence and more to do with Leopards, Lions, Mambas, Cobras, Cape
Buffalo, Zulus, etc. - in whichever particular order is fitting). And
the further out the colony, the further removed from home and authority, and
the
less pervasive the presence of police/army/any sort of Earth-based
presence, the more true this will hold. I may disagree with Scott on which
weapon
will be carried, but I am willing to bet we both agree they will be around.
2B^2
> --- "K.H.Ranitzsch" <KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de> wrote:
> I think that would be the key question - can one shove
Which IMHO would be very, very stupid (not to mention less than economically
viable considering the cost of getting them there in the first place).
> My suggestion does depend on the idea that colonists
Absolutely, I agree. Also, f you are going to basically abandon your
colonies...then YOUR colonies they will no longer be.
I find it hard to accept that in 2150 "empires" will go to the trouble of FTL
traveling to other solar systems, mapping, preparing, recruiting, outfitting,
training and transporting colonists...just to abandon them with
steam engines and 200+ year old technology. Sorry, I just don't see the
economics in it myself. Now, if you want to say they are penal colonies, thats
another matter (actually there are cheaper ways of doing that
too).
From: Scott Clinton <grumbling_grognard@hotmail.com> replied to:
> >I think that would be the key question - can one shove
You're assuming that shipping is expensive. The facts mentioned in canon would
seem to indicate otherwise. a) colonies exist on lots of planets; b) they're
worth fighting over; and c) nations ship brigades and divisions around to do
their fighting.
To take an example close to home--I *could* make miniatures myself, if
I wanted to, but it is cheaper and easier for me to buy them from England and
pay the shipping. That lets me concentrate on producing whatever it is I
produce, instead of trying to sculpt minis this week, grow my own tea next
week, and vulcanize the rubber for my tires on
Gunpowder:
75% potassium nitrate 15% carbon 10% sulfur
Of course mixing it wet is a big step in quality, and safety, but there are
other things you can do to improve performance.
A smoothbore muzzle loader could be produced by a length of rod bored out. You
might have to "test" a few to make them safe though. It would be innacurate as
hell, but would work as a shotgun.
Bill
Roger Books
<books@jumpspace.net> To:
gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Sent by: cc:
owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Be Subject: Re:
COLONIAL WEAPONS rkeley.EDU
01/29/02 03:29 PM
Please respond to gzg-l
> On 29-Jan-02 at 16:21, Jakim Friant (jmodule@yahoo.com) wrote:
> My suggestion does depend on the idea that colonists
Too extreme. _I_ could, if I had to, start with raw materials
and end up with a muzzle loader. Give me a few books and
it would be a no-brainer. Black powder is not a biggy, although
I would need to look up proportions. All you really need to know are what goes
in and you mix it wet.
> At 3:55 PM -0600 1/29/02, Scott Clinton wrote:
Well it does depend on the distance the colony is. Anything shipped out is
going to be far more expensive than anything you can produce locally.
If they are there to mine raw materials as the basic reason for the colony
(they build up other industries along the way to self sufficiency) then you're
early shipments to the colony are going to be bringing in the most needed
supplies. Things that they absolutely need there. Medical stuff seems to come
first in my mind. Then food supplements and more equipment to expand the local
industries. Eventually They'll be able to make everything they need, but I
foresee a period of at least 50 years where many things aren't locally
available and must be shipped in.
> I may disagree with Scott on which weapon
Yep, IMO it is a lot cheaper to screen your colonists and trust them a bit
(even if you have to 'put them down' on occasion) then set up garrisons on
every colony.
Scott
_________________________________________________________________
> From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
Am I missing something here? Or are you contridicting yourself? If
shipping is NOT expensive (i.e. cheap) then LASERs (or whatever hi-tech
weapon is best) would not even have to be locally manufactured (which seems to
be them main issue). I mean if its cheap then WHATEVER weapon they are issued
can be shipped from the homeworld and the tech issue is moot (better?
<g>)
> --- "K.H.Ranitzsch" <KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de> wrote:
> I was thinking more of present-day Dutch from the
Sure. But they had their nasty imperialist phase as well. However, he is
correct in that the colonial defense was in the hands of tiny garissions and
plenty
of quite well-armed militia.
> Am I missing something here?
Yes
> Or are you contradicting yourself?
No
> If shipping is NOT expensive (i.e. cheap) then LASERs
You mean "lasers"
> (or whatever hi-tech
Right. What you were missing is that *I* didn't say anything about
> --- "K.H.Ranitzsch" <KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de> wrote:
> What would a Laser rifle need ?
Nah, just the stock. The Lock would have to be electronic, and the barrel... a
lens.
> If shipping is NOT expensive (i.e. cheap) then LASERs
> You mean "lasers"
errr, no I mean LASERs. It is an acronym, thus it should be capitalized.
Are we still picking nits? :-)
> --- Roger Burton West <roger@firedrake.org> wrote:
> The mounting post in the back for the Milan
Which could be improvised by a good welder in what, 30 minutes to an hour?
> errr, no I mean LASERs. It is an acronym, thus it should be
And originally it was, IIRC, but current usage is to regard it as a word
rather than an acronym. Trust me on this...
> Ryan Gill wrote:
> At 11:41 PM -0500 1/28/02, Richard and Emily Bell wrote:
The
> >garage with sheet metal, bar stock, plates, forge, and machine tools
The parts are machined from bar stock, sheet metal, and plates. An
intermediate step between raw materials and unmachined blanks. I should
include piping, as it is easier to assemble the chassis from pipe sections.
> What about armored vehicles? Where exactly are you getting your armor
If they need armored vehicles to face the native fauna, the initial size of
the colony will be much more than twenty families of homesteaders (or the
minimum needed to prevent inbreeding), it will be an instant settlement of
several thousand, to allow for genetic diversity after many have been eaten
and to have a large enough economy to support more than cottage industry.
> >
Steam
> >engines have the advantage that they are easy to build and maintain.
Depending on whether small heavy things are cheaper to move than very large,
bulky, but light things, and where they costs cross over (eventually volume is
always more expensive than mass), the electrolysis will probably be done with
nuclear power. Solar-hydrogen is great from a pollution perspective
(assuming
that PV production is non-polluting, which is doubtful), it is truly
horrid
from resource utilization. Anything-hydrogen is very resource intensive
> Flak Magnet wrote:
> I have only read the 2nd Ed Full Thrust rules so far, but it mentions
It turns out that the IEEE report on the therac-25 medical accelerator
is the first
link provided google. Although the therac-25 is not an infantry weapon
and was most certainly NOT designed to kill more than tumors, six accidents
due to poorly designed software resulted in deaths. Further research would be
needed to determine if anyone else has been killed by particle beams. The
individuals received
localised doses of between ten and twenty-five thousand rads (LD50 for a
whole body dose is 500rads). The patients did experience sensations similar to
mild electrocution, but the report does not go into whether the patients
suffered any immediate, short term incapacitation. The particle beam consisted
of electrons
accelerated through a potential difference of twenty-five million volts,
but I would have to find the correspondance between rads and joules, and worse
(given that I am sure that a rad is damage per unit volume) coroners' reports
describing the extent of the damage, before any calculations could be
performed to determine the energy delivered to the target.
The cause of death in each case was complications of tissue necrosis and the
patients endured for several weeks before succumbing and the full extent of
the damage took several days to appear. Based on this, it is not proven that
particle
beam weapons would have any stopping power at all. As anti-tank
weapons, they kick ass, as that fine beam is turned into a claymore as it
passes through the armor, and resulting cascade particles will have an even
stronger intraction with the occuppants than the original beam. Vehicles will
need VERY thick armor
> "K.H.Ranitzsch" wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
The energy supply is VERY special purpose as it converts a small amount
applied over a large amount of time ( from energy storage) to a large amount
of power applied for a very short time with very small losses in between. If
there were a lot of uses for these things they would show up in power
electronics textbooks, and be described in graduate level courses on power
conditioning. Due to my interest in high powered microwave weaponry, I would
have remembered them. The 90% (est.) efficiency of the power supply in your
microwave will not cut it, despite its similarities.
The energy storage device has lots of uses, but the power supply does not.
> Electronics - again, production can be easily converted from other
This assumes that every electronic device is based on the one FPGA design, so
they only need one set of masks and only one chip tester. Chip manufacture is
sufficiently specialised (what do they do if chip making machine breaks?) that
the colony may be designed to employ only a few electronic devices that are
grossly over engineered. Electronics are very difficult to produce in a
cottage industry, as there are no economies of scale to exploit.
> Optics - slightly more critical, but again , optical lenses are a
Lenses, binoculars, telescopes, cameras-- Yes
Special optical coatings and lenses of peculiar materials that do not explode
when you hit them with high energy densities-- No
> The Laser itself - depending on what type it is, it probably will
A conventional firearm requires a machine shop and a foundry. The
Haber-Bosch
process was an economic failure of a way to produce chemical fertilizer.
It
took off when combatants were running out of high explosives to fill shells
with, in WWI.
Please remember that my assumptions are based on less than one visit a year
from outside, possibly none for the first decade. So long as not everything
fails at
From: <bbrush@unlnotes.unl.edu>
> Gunpowder:
carbon (in the form of charcoal) can reasonably easily be produced (assming
you have wood and oxygen). Potassium nitrate and sulfur exist as mineral
deposits. Lucky if you find them nearby. Otherwise oyu would have to trade
with other parts of the planet.
> A smoothbore muzzle loader could be produced by a length of rod bored
A worthwhile barrel length would need a fair degree of skill and special
tools. Not impossible though, it was done in the late middle ages. But a far
cry from the automatic rifle some postulated as a colonial weapon.
> Roger Books
gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> On 29-Jan-02 at 16:21, Jakim Friant (jmodule@yahoo.com) wrote:
What do you call raw materials? Iron ore? Or lengths of steel bar? What kinds
of tool do you postulate? Reasonably modern power tools or a medieval
blacksmith's shop? I don't doubt you can do it. But how much work would it be?
Even with instructions, you have to develop the neccessary skills, probably
with several trial and error steps along the way.
Greetings
I've read with interest some of the opinions expressed about colonial weapons.
Here's my 2c worth ( some based on professional studies, most not).
a) A high-tech design may, *if designed with this is mind* be
manufactured
using non-high-tech resources.
Example: That bloody awful weapon, the Sten. It safety and performance were
exceeded by nearly all other SMGs in the world. However... it could be (and
was) made by the hundred using drainpipe and welding bars. Any garage capable
of simple auto repairs, and any plumber, could make em in batch loads. The
perfect Resistance weapon. The US M3 "grease Gun" was, in some ways, superior,
both in ease of manufacture and reliability.
Example: I have personally aided a Mad American in making a simple CPU
(PDP-8) in his kitchen. Our yield was lousy, and the chip needed a
mounting the size of a matchbox. But about 5% of them worked, after very much
experimentation and keeping the room scrupulously clean. So simple 8- or
12- bit CPUs can be made, quite adequate for many military purposes
(ballistics calculations, power management of lasers, laser ranging
etc).
A Metal Storm-type weapon would be easier to make than a .303, IF there
was a reasonable chemical industry around - say one equal to Germany in
1880.
b) Lasers. The problem here is entirely with the power supply. And their
susceptibility to atmospheric pollution, which ranges from water droplets
for some frequencies, to smoke in others. Even hard X-rays don't
penetrate
atmosphere too well (that's why you get a fireball from an A-bomb, where
most of the energy is carried off in X-rays and immediately absorbed by
the atmosphere within 10s, 100s or 1000s of metres, depending on the size).
The good thing about chemically-powered weapons is that chemicals are
power-dense (at least, for a pulse), storable, relatively insensitive to
<snotty>So! You still can't stop me from arming my colonists with them
and killing big-nasties.</snotty>
Hmm... maybe I'll have to revise it and make them plasma weapons or
something. Maybe I'll just make up some psychic race that mind-bolts
every creature to death...
What's the stopping power of having your body turn against itself?
On Tue, 29 Jan 2002 23:10:56 -0500
> Richard and Emily Bell <rlbell@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> Flak Magnet wrote:
> Karl Heinz wrote:
> >Gunpowder:
Potassium is fairly easy to get - the "latin" name comes from "Pot
Ash"...
you can make it from the ash of certain kinds of wood - IIRC ash wood
:-/
Nitrate - well, everyone needs to pee.
Sulfur might be harder though, I don't know :-/
Regards,
Potassium Nitrate is easy if you're on farm. As Oerjan points out -
everyone has to pee. In medieval times, before pure deposits were found, the
most common way of collecting KNO3 was to lift manure piles. After aging for a
while, the potassium nitrate concentrates as a white ring on the bottom of
manure piles. Probably not pleasant work, but unless you happen to be one of
those lucky Pacific islands with tons of nitrates just sitting around, you'll
have to collect it the hard way.
Assuming geological forces and a crust compositon similar to earth, sulfur is
only going to be found in high concentrations as a mineral deposit. Geothermal
areas might provide a continuous source, or barring that you might genetically
engineer bacteria to extract sulphur from coal or other bio matter. I've heard
there are current projects to do just that to provide a "cleaner" coal for
burning.
Carbon - if there's earth type life, there's carbon.
One might hypothesize that a new colony would have easy access to such
components for the following reasons:
a) A good portion of the early economy is going to be agriculturally driven
1) Feeding people with "homegrown" food is cheaper than importing it, even if
it comes out of a vat.
b) Most industry is going to be geared to supporting the
agricultural sector - heavy industry is churning out tractors, not
SUV's, chemical companies are making fertilizer instead of solvents for
circuit board manufacture etc.
1) Most early explosives are just derivatives of fertilizer because of the
nitrates in them. Modern explosives have tweaked the structures to get you
more bang for the molecule, but if you can churn out tons of fertilizer you
can demolish almost anything (see Oklahoma City Bombing).
2) Supporting the agriculture industry, there will probably be some type of
extraction plant at mineral rich sites. Even if a fertilizer only needs 0.1%
of some element, when you use hundreds or thousands of tons of it, it adds up
pretty quickly. So there is likely to be a site that has the capability of
producing tons of sulfur per year or hundreds of pounds per day.
c) Assuming a planet with an earth type atmosphere, there is going to be a
good percentage of carbon dioxide in it. Using bacteria, plants, trees, algae
etc, you can fix this gaseous carbon into a solid state. Barring that, several
types of carbonate rock can be burned or heated to release carbon dioxide
which can then be fed into greenhouses or vats. The carbon can then be
extracted from these organisms by heating their corpses without oxygen.
Remember to dry out the corpses first, otherwise you spend a lot of energy
getting the water out.
The conclusion is that a basic agricultural colony would have plenty of
access to explosives/gunpowder. The manufacture and use of firearms
would be a different matter.
--Binhan
> -----Original Message-----
> Scott Clinton wrote:
> I find it hard to accept that in 2150 "empires" will go to the trouble
Remember the assumption that it it costs a lot to send to send an empty
starship somewhere. The other assumption is that even full starships are
expensive, if they are not large. If travel times are low (crossing explored
space takes less
than a month), and first class mail between far-flung worlds costs
twenty minutes at minimum wage, the colonies will have ships pssing several
times a year, so spares can always be ordered. If travel times are long, and
cargo costs do not get affordable below a million tonnes, the colony will not
be visited until they can be expected to fill the holds. There are further
difficulties if the only way to send FTL messages is to hand carry them on FTL
ships.
Larry Niven's "Known Space" milieu has several stories that examine some of
the problems of long voyage times. Constrained by lightspeed, the only thing
worth sending is information. Colonies were dropped off with everything that
could be
From: Richard and Emily Bell <rlbell@sympatico.ca>
> Remember the assumption that it it costs a lot to send to send an
Er, where do these assumptions come from? If travel was all that expensive, we
wouldn't have colonized all these planets, we'd've stuck
to just a couple --"NAC gets this continent, ESU gets that one, Pan
Europe gets the other one, and all the little guys can have those
> At 6:31 PM -0500 1/30/02, Laserlight wrote:
Which is why European Explorers pronounced..."from this river to the east I
claim in the name of King XXXXX." It was a land grab pure and simple. You
established some sort of presence and claimed it first. If you claimed it and
didn't establish a presence you likely lost it.
I suspect that St.Jon has similar ideas behind the expansion of the major
powers.
[quoted original message omitted]
[quoted original message omitted]
> On 31-Jan-02 at 02:40, K.H.Ranitzsch (KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de) wrote:
> How much Nitrate can you get that way ? Could a farm provide enough
They mined it from bat guano.
> Laserlight wrote:
> From: Richard and Emily Bell <rlbell@sympatico.ca>
There is a whole spectrum of possibilities, but you can lump them into two
thresholds and the area in between. The lower threshold is that it is no more
expensive to travel between the stars than it now cost to ship things by sea.
The higher threshold is that travelling between the stars will be at least as
expensive as sending things by air is now. At the lower threshold, the people
will buy most of their finished goods from off planet as the only point to
manufacture locally what can be imported from anywhere else is cost. Shipping
costs add little to the price of any commodity. At the higher threshold, only
things so valuable that the high transport costs are still only a small
fraction of the overall price will be imported. I confess a certain amount of
disbelief that interstellar travel will be as inexpensive as shipping by sea
is today.
Given the inevitability of planet wide disasters, interstellar colonies