Re: Anatomy vs. Architecture

[email removed] (Scott S. Kellogg) writes:
>
> George sez:
> > Scott Kellog writes:
>             ^^^
> GRR!  Didn't I just have a fit about this last time!  Scott 2G Kellogg!
> ;-)

As I mentioned in a rather facetious message before, one possible reason
for the above mistake is that the following line is what appears in the
header of the bundle:
>  496  6008 08-Sep-1993 Scott S. Kellog  Anatomy vs. Architecture << George sez:

If you threaten James Perkins with a tactical nuke, or bribe him with enough
money or alcohol, he might fix this problem.
;-)

> My point was that, one should not look to the anatomy of the race
> building the ship to see how it will be laid out.  A Droyne ship will
> not necessarily look like it was cribbed from an anatomy chart for
> a Droyne any more than Human anatomy appears in the Space Shuttle,
> Saturn V etc.

I believe a lot of aircraft and ships are built with a sort of rib-like
framework, with a "skin" covering it.  Nowadays, the "skin" is metal, but
the ribs are often still there.

My guess is that Droyne vehicles will be likely to have a geodesic framework.
Humans have tried this, and it works rather well - one example was the
Vickers Wellington bomber of WW2.  For some reason, though, the rib-like
framework is still used.

And I have no idea what a Hiver spaceship will look like. :-)

- --
 "Keyboard?  How quaint!" - M. Scott

 Adrian Hurt			     |	JANET:  [email removed]
 UUCP: ..!uknet!cee.hw.ac.uk!adrian  |  ARPA:  [email removed]