More on this nifty "center of mass" idea

> Seth the Lesser [email removed] writes:
>
> Jeff Zeitlin ([email removed]) talked about center of mass as an
> important, neglected consideration in Traveller & MT ship designs, to which
> I reply from my sickbed with fevered brow and palsied typing finger:
>
> ...
> However, as soon as we change over to "thrusters" as a means of propulsion,
> we wave hands and make F=ma go away.  Instead, we calculate the
> acceleration of a ship based on its thrust-to-*volume* ratio.
> ...


   I've never liked using thrusters that accelerate a volume instead of mass.
One problem is with relativity: if mass does not affect the acceleration, you
can approach and exceed c without penalty to the acceleration. Also, how does
the maneuver drive define the volume to be accelerated? Can you extend it out
beyond the hull? Why are inertial compensators needed if every part of the
ship is being accellerated equally?

   Using mass-based thrusters does add to the book keeping however; you'll
need accelerations defined for empty, average, and full loads. But, in the
interests of keeping things from becoming too complex, I would not worry
about center-of-gravity problems.

- --

               Edjs                    _
              ------                _ //  CI$  : 76427,662
   [email removed]                  \X/   GEnie: [email removed]