Scott Martin
SOC-13
Hello
I had a thought yesterday, and it still looks valid today, in the cold light of dawn.
Why not have thruster plates work on volume, not mass?
CG is based on volume, and is the definitive gravitic system in Traveller.
Jump drives work on volume, and the concensus on this board is that they are gravitic in origin.
Why are thruster plates the "odd man out?" Volume based thruster plates would certainly explain why all of the Traveller versions before TNE did ship design *SOLELY* based on volume, and warships had *immense* masses of armour without requiring more volume for drives, or power to run them.
Think of that TL-12 buffered planetoid monitor that you proudly built: 35% planetoid (at a specific gravity of ~6 and 26% "armour" (superdense) at a density of 14. If this was 10,000 dT the *Armour* alone on this thing pushes the average density for the entire hull to 5.75, so if this was just a shell of armour with nothing else in it, it would mass over 800 Kilotons (only a factor of 8 over the "target" for FF&S designs) there is no way that there is enough room in the hull to cram weapons and engines sufficient to get this behemoth crawling faster than about 2 G's at TL-12, and ~5 G's at TL-15. That's without any weapons loadout.
Yet this type of platform was routinely seen in the 3I running around at 6 G's.
A thought for T5: make "thruster plates" work on volume, not mass: this takes mass completely out of the equation, and simplifies design (for thruster plated ships) back towards LBB-2 and HG-like design sequences.
There are some wrinkles that I will throw in if folks are interested in this discussion, but I figured I'd put this out and see if anyone else had a "head slapping" moment like me when they looked at the numbers.
The actual numbers are a *bit* better for the planetoid monitor in Supp9, since bonded SD is more space efficient than SD, but it still gives a base desnity (for just the hill) of 4.34, 6x the "trget" for FF&S, and remember that this is without the drives and weapons, which *all* have a density of ~2, and fill most of the remaining space.
Scott Martin
I had a thought yesterday, and it still looks valid today, in the cold light of dawn.
Why not have thruster plates work on volume, not mass?
CG is based on volume, and is the definitive gravitic system in Traveller.
Jump drives work on volume, and the concensus on this board is that they are gravitic in origin.
Why are thruster plates the "odd man out?" Volume based thruster plates would certainly explain why all of the Traveller versions before TNE did ship design *SOLELY* based on volume, and warships had *immense* masses of armour without requiring more volume for drives, or power to run them.
Think of that TL-12 buffered planetoid monitor that you proudly built: 35% planetoid (at a specific gravity of ~6 and 26% "armour" (superdense) at a density of 14. If this was 10,000 dT the *Armour* alone on this thing pushes the average density for the entire hull to 5.75, so if this was just a shell of armour with nothing else in it, it would mass over 800 Kilotons (only a factor of 8 over the "target" for FF&S designs) there is no way that there is enough room in the hull to cram weapons and engines sufficient to get this behemoth crawling faster than about 2 G's at TL-12, and ~5 G's at TL-15. That's without any weapons loadout.
Yet this type of platform was routinely seen in the 3I running around at 6 G's.
A thought for T5: make "thruster plates" work on volume, not mass: this takes mass completely out of the equation, and simplifies design (for thruster plated ships) back towards LBB-2 and HG-like design sequences.
There are some wrinkles that I will throw in if folks are interested in this discussion, but I figured I'd put this out and see if anyone else had a "head slapping" moment like me when they looked at the numbers.
The actual numbers are a *bit* better for the planetoid monitor in Supp9, since bonded SD is more space efficient than SD, but it still gives a base desnity (for just the hill) of 4.34, 6x the "trget" for FF&S, and remember that this is without the drives and weapons, which *all* have a density of ~2, and fill most of the remaining space.
Scott Martin