Its a size thing, waw: Re: Fighter Missiles and such

5 posts ยท Jan 25 1999 to Jan 27 1999

From: DracSpy@a...

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:15:36 EST

Subject: Its a size thing, waw: Re: Fighter Missiles and such

In a message dated 99-01-25 14:57:30 EST, you write:

<< I agree that over-complicating the fighter rules too much will cause
problems. FWIW, my fighter construction rules are mostly about combining
existing fighter
 capabilities in any way you want - and then paying for them.  I did add
in Large fighters (1.5 spaces, or 4 per group) that allow you to more easily
carry additional abilities, but offset by the fact that your squadron size is
reduced. >>
If I under stand this corectaly 1 CS is 1/50 of a mass, as each fighter
takes up one mass it would take up 50 CS. 50 CS could hold 4 people (for
flight ops) and a size 8 aero space craft, is this corect? Thanks Bye Stephen

From: Phillip E. Pournelle <pepourne@n...>

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:43:41 -0800

Subject: Re: Its a size thing, waw: Re: Fighter Missiles and such

> At 05:15 PM 1/25/1999 EST, Stephen wrote:

I think for the new construction rules of the Fleet Book we've determined that
1 Mass = 25 CS.

Gort, Klaatu barada nikto!

From: DracSpy@a...

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 21:01:01 EST

Subject: Re: Its a size thing, waw: Re: Fighter Missiles and such

In a message dated 99-01-25 20:51:31 EST, you write:

<< I think for the new construction rules of the Fleet Book we've determined
that 1 Mass = 25 CS.

Gort, Klaatu barada nikto! >> If that was the case then the fighter would be a
size two fighter. Were does it say that 1 mass = 25 CS?
-Stephen

From: Jared E Noble <JNOBLE2@m...>

Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 17:36:46 -1000

Subject: Re: Its a size thing, waw: Re: Fighter Missiles and such

In the books? It doesn't, as the FB doesn't re-hash the interface ideas
in MT -
However go to the Mailing list archives (note that this was the old list, but
Jerry's got 'em all, I believe.)

Look at posts starting Nov 10/98.  A post my Mike Elliott entitled
'[FT][DS][SG] Interface' This is continued in a thread started by Philip
Pournelle titled 'Cargo capacity, etc.' The thread 'Marine Contingents' also
touches on this.

It appears as if all the writings died down by Nov 14/98.

BTW, there is an earlier thread that started this. Check out the Nov
5/98 post
by Brendan Robertson titled 'RE: FT: EW & Boarding Parties'. It is a response
to my question (which he included in his quote) about BP's in the FB. Follow
this one through for some more ideas.

Hope that helps,
     Jared

DracSpy@aol.com on 01/25/99 04:01:01 PM

Please respond to gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU

To:   gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU

From: Phillip E. Pournelle <pepourne@n...>

Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 16:20:29 -0800

Subject: Re: Its a size thing, waw: Re: Fighter Missiles and such

> At 09:01 PM 1/25/1999 EST, Stephen wrote:
Were does
> it say that 1 mass = 25 CS?

Comparing the mass of a single fighter versus the DS sample Areospace fighter
it was size three for 15 CS. To fit one vehicle inside another
takes 8/5 * CS (size).  Therefore to fit a standard Aerospace fighter
into
a vehicle takes 15 * 8/5 =24. round up to 25 and you have a Bay that can
hold a fighter. In order to arm, refuel and service a fighter, you need a
fighter Bay, hence the 50% increase in mass requirements...

Gort, Klaatu barada nikto!