>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen [email removed] writes:
> Scott Kellogg writes:
>> It is a question of the fitting of battle dress and combat armor. Does
>> armor have to be fitted to the individual? It seems to me that someone
>> would have a lot of trouble fitting into someone elses battle dress.
> Yes. Given that the battle dress has a rigid shell it may be
> possible to do somthing with internal padding, but male and
> female versions would at least be necessary, as well as
> different sizes.
I don't believe that a suit *has* to be fitted for each individual.
I will ammend this statement shortly, but I would like to justify it
with something I learned on a recent trip to the Marshall Space
Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama -- they have a pretty neat space
history museum there. The space suits that were manufactured for the
Mercury program had each suit custom manufactured for each astronaut.
They made casts of each astronaut in toto. However, with current
technology, this is no longer necessary for the Shuttle astronauts.
They manufacture each part of a space suit in a variety od sizes.
Each astronaut is measured -- "size 7 glove, see bin 17; size 38
chest, see bin 22; size 34 waist with 31 inseam, see bin 49," etc.
Once they have all the pieces together, they take some final
measurements and do some tailoring. Also, I'm assuming that it is
impossible for a person with noticable differences in build to wear
to suit of someone else (height, weight, extra arms, whatever).
Now for my ammendment. As long as the person had at least the proper
components gathered, they would be able to wear the suit in at least
(and at most) a little comfort. For battledress, assembling the inner
suit will be this easy. However, they are also intended for extended
wear in unusual and harsh environments. This would mean more than simple
tailoring, but not much more. Also, I believe that a majority of the
time needed to build one of these monstrosities is adapting the
electronics, built-in power and weapons systems, and hardening the
suit (wouldn't do well to have a stray 22 round cause the power
plant to go up). This is also where the cost is.
>From: Hans Rancke-Madsen [email removed] writes:
> Btw. I've decided to include a new skill in marine character
> generation (and perhaps army too?) called 'armourer', and then
> require armourer skill to care for high tech weapons...
> What do you think?
I like it. Perhaps 2 skills: one for weapons and one for armour, or
one for personal weapons and armor and another for crew/vehicle
weapons and armor?
- --Bill Morrison
[email removed]