Thanks to all for their responses to my earlier comments. I was inspired
while reading them by the remark someone made about their idea for fuel
consumption for spacecraft. Ah yes, fighters do require more power for
their weapons. I learned this the hard way. Although GDW has kindly
provided us with ship design systems and a supplement or three of "common
spacecraft," and although I inherited an additional system from a friend
(now ex-friend, but that's another story), I foolishly decided to tinker
together a "realistic" spacecraft design system.
Does the word "mistake" mean anything to you?
Actually, it has turned out pretty well. My system probably has errors in
it that would send engineers into hysterics, but most people find it (a)
plausible and (b) roughly playable (with a little practice, you can design
just about anything you could ever want, and you get a lot of detail about
what is actually on your spacecraft). (The reason it is plausible is that
I annnoyed all my engineer questions with stupid questions about how much
things mass, and what kind of thrust-weight ratios do you get with certain
kinds of engine, etc. There are still errors, but a lot less than in a lot
of other systems; I guess I'll have to be satisfied with that.)
Incidently, for those of you who are curious, power requirements for normal
spacecraft (including life support, power for computers, sensors, etc.) is
about ten kilowatts per ton of spacecraft--actually, I use something called
Power Units, which are about ten kilowatts each; it makes it easier to handle
the bookkeeping--but the moment you go to armed spacecraft (except for
things like missiles which only require a little power to magnetically
accelerate them out of a launching catapult), your power requirements go
through the roof. An armed spacecraft will probably end up using something
like forty or fifty times the power of an unarmed spacecraft of the same
general size. This is one of the reasons why they are so expensive.
By the way, some good books on the subject of spacecraft design include
FUTURE MAGIC, by Robert Forward, and especially THE FUTURE OF FLIGHT by
Dean Ing (Ing is not only a good writer, but he provides a bibliography
of his technical sources, something which many so-called science writers
leave out). One of his chapters even has a couple of "story ideas" that
might make good Traveller adventures.
Well, take care all.
Mark
All opinions and material above is the responsibility of the originator.
Submissions: [email removed], or [email removed]
Administrator: [email removed] (James Perkins)
The TML is made possible by facilities provided by Tektronix, Inc.