CPV

11 posts ยท Sep 10 2003 to Sep 11 2003

From: JRebori682@a...

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 10:18:05 -0400

Subject: Re: CPV

In a message dated 9/10/2003 10:41:37 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> mptope@omnihybrid.com writes:

> I'm fine with the "TMF" and "/100", I just have no idea

Its simply keyboard shorthand to show an exponent. Read it as "TMF squared".

John Rebori ETN2 (Discharged)
USN 1976 - 1982
ex-USS Pegasus PHM-1

From: Steve Pugh <steve@p...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:18:58 +0100

Subject: Re: CPV

> On 10 Sep 2003 at 15:41, Matt Tope wrote:

> Roger Burton wrote on Monday the 18th August, 2003:

^x is a plain text representation for 'raised to the power x'. So ^2 means
raised to the power 2, or in other words squared.

Basic Hull Cost = ( TMF * TMF ) / 100.

From: Jerry Acord <acord@i...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:21:46 -0500 (CDT)

Subject: Re: CPV

> On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Matt Tope wrote:

> Basic Hull Cost = (TMF^2)/100

^2 means to the second power, i.e. squared. So TMF^2 = TMF*TMF.

From: Doug Evans <devans@n...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:22:49 -0500

Subject: Re: CPV

> I'm fine with the "TMF" and "/100", I just have no idea what the " ^ "

You probably are as good or better than I am at math, but I believe this is
a case of e-mail text not dealing well with super- and subscripts.

I'm assuming this means 'to the power of 2' or squared.

The_Beast

From: Doug Evans <devans@n...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:28:01 -0500

Subject: Re: CPV

I've just been informed that this is proper notation for input to some
software, such as spreadsheets and other 'math' programs. Shows how often I
use M$ Excel. ;->=

The_Beast

From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@a...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:33:46 -0500

Subject: Re: CPV

> On 10 Sep 2003 at 15:41, Matt Tope wrote:

> I've been racking my brain over this for ages but I'm afraid my grasp

Take the TMF and square it (that is, multiply it by itself). Then take that
and divide it by 100. You get the Basic Hull Cost.

Example 1: NAC Ticonderoga class Destroyer, TMF 30.

Basic Hull Cost = (30 x 30) / 100 = 900 / 100 = 9

Example 2: NAC Vandenburg class Heavy Cruiser, TMF 80.

Basic Hull Cost = (80 x 80) / 100 = 6400 / 100 = 64

Example 3: NAC Ark Royal class Fleet Supercarrier, TMF 200.

Basic Hull Cost = (200 x 200) / 100 = 40000 / 100 = 400

The "^" symbol is often a programming symbol for squaring something (though
I've also seen squaring shown as "**"). The notation is
because in normal e-mail text you can't show a superscript to
indicate "squared". However, the "^" isn't widely known outside of programming
circles, and sometimes people forget that not everyone knows this notation.

From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@a...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 09:37:15 -0500

Subject: Re: CPV

> The "^" symbol is often a programming symbol for squaring something

I caught this "just" as it was being sent. The "^", of course, means "raise to
the power of", not "square". So, "^2" means to square, "^3" means to cube,
etc. Likewise, "**2" means to square and "**5" means raise to the power of 5,
etc.

Sorry if I caused any confusion; it was entirely within my own
head...

From: Matt Tope <mptope@o...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:41:37 +0100

Subject: CPV

Roger Burton wrote on Monday the 18th August, 2003:

> ...you might find http://lists.firedrake.org/gzg/200302/msg00334.html

I've been racking my brain over this for ages but I'm afraid my grasp of
mathematics has never been my strong point so can some one help explain this
equation:

                Basic Hull Cost = (TMF^2)/100

I'm fine with the "TMF" and "/100", I just have no idea what the " ^ "
represents and thus what it does with the TMF and the 2.

No doubt it is something extremely obvious but I have never been afraid to
look stupid in the search of knowledge...as many of you probably realise from
some (if not all) of my previous posts.

Regards,

From: Matt Tope <mptope@o...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 15:56:57 +0100

Subject: RE: CPV

> John Rebori wrote:

> Jerry Acord wrote:

Thanks for that guys...now what does squared mean?

Only kidding, thanks again!

Regrads,

From: Matt Tope <mptope@o...>

Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 16:00:32 +0100

Subject: RE: CPV

Thanks also to Doug and Steve, and to anyone else who answers the question.
Most apppreciated.

Regards,

From: Matt Tope <mptope@o...>

Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:57:21 +0100

Subject: RE: CPV

I have been going over my existing designs and working out their CPV's.

I know the CPV is a work in progress but my initial reaction is positive.

I like the balancing effect it produces, cruiser's remaining much the same (in
relative terms) in cost effectiveness but escorts becoming really cheap, and
(obviously) capitals more expensive.

It certainly encourages balanced formations in terms of hull types.

Anyway, thats my humble opinion on the CPV concept.

Regards,