> At 02:29 AM 7/9/97 -0400, valen wrote:
> and while were thinking on the costs of an external fighter racks, has
From FT3 notes we now know that a fighter is Mass 1 (Bays are Mass 9 for 6
fighters). Therefore, just do the FTL costs for a Mass 1 vessel. However, a
fighter must have a bay somewhere (1 jump away), therefore, for a scenario
they must either have an empty bay on the board or pay for one off the board.
This cost should include the 12 Mass (MT) or 18 Mass (FT3) of infrastructure
the base station needs to support the bay.
> At 03:28 PM 7/9/97 -0500, you wrote:
What I meant was that in More Thrust we know a fighter is Mass
1.
Therefore just do the cost for a Mass 1 vessel.
FT3 notes? What are these? How do I get them?
> At 03:28 PM 7/9/97 -0500, you wrote:
Not exactly. A six fighter group is mass 6, but that includes launch, recover,
and repair facilities. The fighters probably mass only about half of 1 mass
each.
On the other hand useing mass 1 for a guide point would represent the idea
that small FTL drives cost more to produce so actually cost 2 or more times
what their tonnage would indicate.
It depends on background I guess. The launch/recover facilities on the
Galactica were 10-20 times the actual size of the fighters carried.
Compare that with B5 where the launch racks are not much more then required to
store the fighters.
What a wasted post.(IMHO)
*********************************************************************
"A place where life has no value but death sometimes has a price"
> On Thu, 10 Jul 1997, Tracy Hale wrote:
> It depends on background I guess. The launch/recover facilities on the
I thought the B5 bays were just for launching and the rec facilities were
somewhere else along the same area.
> On Thu, 10 Jul 1997, Tracy Hale wrote:
I wondered the same thing for a while until I saw in one episode how they
reload the bays. The fighters fly into the same docking area that the other
ships docking with B5 do and there they are docked with the launching rails.
These rails are then transported, fighter and all, back to the launch bay.
Cumbersome, but I suppose there's no other way.
> On Thu, 10 Jul 1997, She stands on things I can't understand wrote:
> That, along with the
I don't think the B5 fighters are considered as "short-range" in the
show, especially not when they are quite often referred to as "warships"
rather than "fighters". OK, so the bigger warships carry them and the term
"fighter" is used often as well, but even so...
How long a time (in the B5 universe, not on the screen) did the longest
battles involving Starfuries last? (Battle of the Line, or possibly
Ivanova's little brawl with the Raiders - or something in Season 3 or
later, which I wouldn't know about)?
Later,
> It depends on background I guess. The launch/recover facilities on
Which makes for a really *long* reload time, gamewise. That, along with the
fact that these 'short-range' fighters seem to be able to traverse most
of known space, and fight for extended periods of time makes me want to just
not use the endurance rules any.
(now that I've opened *that* can of worms... ;-)
Mk
> That, along with the
rather
> than "fighters". OK, so the bigger warships carry them and the term
Actually, they have been referred to as 'short range' fighters, in the show
and in the little merchandising that's out there. And Joe's called them 'short
range' fighters, too (though he *is* more a writer, not a military-type
person, as has been demonstrated with his Omega 'destroyer'
battleship/carriers). I've
never heard 'em referred to as 'warships', though (least I can't remember any
ep where they were).
> How long a time (in the B5 universe, not on the screen) did the longest
> battles involving Starfuries last? (Battle of the Line, or possibly
(note: being somewhat vague with things below to protect spoilers for those
who have not yet seen season 3/4 episodes)
There were a couple of protracted battles (at least one; I'll have to go back
and rewatch the other one I'm thinking of to make sure) in season 3, and one
fairly long one in season 4 where 'Furies were running around on their own a
lot. Okay, granted, they could have had a supply carrier in the area, but we
never saw it (such as the season 4 ep I'm thinking of, the 'Furies, along with
other ships, all entered hyperspace together, and all were floating out in
space together at their destination system). And, okay, granted, the scales
being used *might* of a high enough ratio to argue for endurance usage, but it
just doesn't *feel* right to me.
There was another season 4 ep where a squadron of 'Furies were sent out to
deal with a....situation at another transfer station. They went out, dealt
with the thing they had to deal with, and returned. Now unless the transfer
station they went to was *very* close by...
Mk
Fury's are "short range" in the Normal space sense of the word, as far as I
can figure. They could make a trip to the moon with ease, Mars would probably
be right out. Though the coarses would be mostly ballistic so little or no
pilot input would be needed. They could
probably keep on a patrol for 12-14 hours. (We do similar stuff today
with some of our fighters, for ferry missions and such) but would probably get
fairly uncomfortabel after about 8 or so. Usual air
patrols, (such as over Iraq now) last about 4-6 hours to keep the
pilots fresh. Combat patrols are usually short duration, out and
back, and last about 2-4 hours including getting to the combat area.
Randy
> At 01:48 PM 7/11/97 +0000, you wrote:
rather
> than "fighters". OK, so the bigger warships carry them and the term
Then again, they've had 250 years for the usage of the terms to
evolve- it's
not that long since a common American description for a fighter aircraft was a
"pursuit ship". As to the Omega "destroyers"- well, the term destroyer
has already referred to 3 radically different forms of warship this century,
beginning with enlarged torpedo boats, moving on to light fleet escorts, and
finally expanding to include great muckle vessels like Burkes and Spruances,
which are "obviously" cruisers by older definitions. Personally, I like the
all too brief USN classification of
DLG/CLG as
"Frigate"- a much more appropriate use of the term than the current
usage IMHO.
cheers
> On this point I agree with you. We dont play with the return in 3
I like this idea. It would behoove the returning fighters to have at least one
turn of fight left in them, otherwise their sitting ducks for any enemy
fighters that might pounce on them on their way back to returning to their
carrier.