IAVRs/SG2/DS2 grav

2 posts ยท Nov 16 2001 to Nov 19 2001

From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>

Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 13:26:56 -0500

Subject: IAVRs/SG2/DS2 grav

1) John A: Please cite the reference where grav vehicles can fly in SG or DS.
I was under the impression Grav mobility in GZG was "a few feet
off the ground" rather than VTOL/Aerospace style flying.

2) Brian: A figure can only fire an IAVR if he does not fire his rifle or SAW
in the same activation. If the rules don't explicitly say this, to quote my
friend OO, then "they're wrong!".;)

3) MDC: small MDCs (GACs) especially I always envisioned as having much higher
ROF than equivalent RFACs. I assumed this continued into the larger weapons to
give the better effective stats for an MDC.

4) There is some minimum amount of space a human needs to go to space to be
comfortable over the longer term (as the term increases, so probably does the
space requirement). This includes both the gear to support him or her and the
extra "living space" required to prevent them going "postal". Similarly, if
you needed to make a 45 min trip to orbit, a 4 hour skip to another continent,
and a 45 min descent, then the APC has to have enough space to make this
feasible. But note that we contemplate
military actions in sealed suits and using PA - staying inside a shell
like that for more than 11 or 12 hours must be hell. What is the duration
limit for an astronaut on a spacewalk nowadays? I can't see that much more
than doubling in the GZGverse times. So on any planet where you operate that
has unbreathable atmosphere, you'll need places for people to get in and get
their kit off regularly. But what people can endure when they must certainly
tends to exceed what they can endure
_with_comfort_.

5) I'm not so sure I agree with 40 grav generators. You are protecting
yourself against a single point of failure by introducing the likelihood of
multiple smaller failures. Quite simply, in any system of high
reliability (I'm thinking 98%+), reliability engineering studies over
the years have shown that triple redundancy is the best - beyond that,
you run the risk of your system suffering failures due to being "too
redundant" and then you end up with a lower overall reliability. By
introducing 40 individual grav modules, I'm making 40 rolls of the d100 and
conceivably one or two will come up 99 or 100 regularly. I'd think two or
three large redundant systems (hey, backup systems, what a concept) would be
key (unless you are the ESU).

Is there any reason a null-grav, contra-grav, a-grav (whatever)
generator can't be as simple as a large electromagnet? (ie perhaps solid state
with no moving parts). I assume that electromagnets fail.... very very very
rarely. Only a major materials failure would cause it. I'm not saying we can
do this now, but who knows? Maybe we'll discover a way to negate mass effects
or to provide counter force to gravitational force with a very robust and
simple mechanism with few or no failure prone parts.

Mind you, in this case, everyone WILL buy grav tanks.

From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>

Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 09:57:26 -0800 (PST)

Subject: Re: IAVRs/SG2/DS2 grav

> --- Tomb <kaladorn@fox.nstn.ca> wrote:

> 3) MDC: small MDCs (GACs) especially I always

Why? If you can smack around a tank with one round,
why use 3-5?  And you don't need a higher ROF to get
better stats--just higher muzzle velocity and flatter
trajectory.

> 5) I'm not so sure I agree with 40 grav generators.

It was just a suggestion.