[FT] Wacky question - non-FTL Carrier

3 posts ยท Jan 28 2002 to Jan 29 2002

From: Jon Davis <davisje@n...>

Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 06:17:14 -0500

Subject: Re: [FT] Wacky question - non-FTL Carrier

> Alexander Williams wrote:

> From an infrastructure sense, they are a new colony. From a political

> Further, if you have a purely solar power, one limited to one solar

Do you mean a system without FTL technology? Or a preexisting ship prior to
FTL acquisition? It could be both.

BTW, my name is spelled 'Jon'. Thanks.

From: Ryan Gill <rmgill@m...>

Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 10:30:54 -0500

Subject: Re: [FT] Wacky question - non-FTL Carrier

> At 6:17 AM -0500 1/28/02, Jon Davis wrote:

Though, given the whole human counterpart, a small carrier would make more
sense. Crews don't just start out knowing how to handle carrier ops. You have
to work your CPOs up to snuff in the experience levels before you can handle
complex naval evolutions. Same goes for an experienced officer corps.

This is one thing that I wish FT accounted for. Crew training and morale.

The Indian Navy has carriers, the Chinese navy has them too. The Indian Navy
would likely beat the stuffing out of china in a Carrier on Carrier engagement
based on experience of handling ships, weapons, logistics and other stuff
alone. India has a good solid history of experienced NCOs and has had carriers
for years. More than enough time to develop several generations of experienced
Chief Petty Officers, Command Officers and doctrine.

The US and British Navies are extremely experienced. Having a long time of
dealing with such equipment builds an institutional knowledge of how they work
and what processes (that are hard to see unless you really know what to look
for) should be put in place. Even major mistakes several generations ago are a
catalyst for good process and SOP. The big fire on the Forrestal is still used
as a model of problems of damgage control on a ship.

Likely for a colony getting a third rate CVL with out FTL drive, they'd also
have a load of advisors on how not to get yourself (or 50 of your ship mates)
killed when handling a fighter recovery.

From: Robertson, Brendan <Brendan.Robertson@d...>

Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 11:41:30 +1100

Subject: RE: [FT] Wacky question - non-FTL Carrier

On Tuesday, January 29, 2002 2:31 AM, Ryan Gill
[SMTP:rmgill@mindspring.com]
wrote:
> Though, given the whole human counterpart, a small carrier would make

I've got some preliminary training rules for my campaign rules.
http://home.pacific.net.au/~southernskies/ft/ftcamp1.htm#Crew

I haven't addressed morale, but at a pinch, use the DS/SG quality die
which must exceed the current threshold level or "Strike the colours".

Hmmm, must add that into the page...