On October 7, 2019 at 4:01 PM "Phil Pugliese (via tml list)" <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
In the end I think it comes down what the TL of the J-drive actually is.
If a J-drive's TL is 13 then it will never ever do better than J4 no matter how much displacement is reduced.
However, if the TL is 15 then it can & will make J6, even if the original design only did J4, *if* the displacement could be reduced accordingly
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Monday, October 7, 2019, 11:50:34 AM MST, Thomas RUX <xxxxxx@comcast.net> wrote:
Howdy Phil,
I think you are saying that a J5 drive is capable of making a 5 parsec jump using either CT LBB 2 or cross referencing hull tonnage to jump 5 rating/performance to Drive Type or CT LBB HG 2e using the equation of Hull tonnage x a percentage of the hull required.
I, if I'm understanding correctly, agree that a J5 drive is the same drive in either CT LBB 2 or CT LBB 5 HG 2e.
Tom Rux
On October 6, 2019 at 8:04 PM "Phil Pugliese (via tml list)" <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
It would seem then that a lot of folks decided that J-range could go down but not up.
The group I was in, which was formed *after* CT HG v2 came out, figured it worked both ways.
To us it didn't matter whether, for example, the Gazelle's J-drive was originally designed to a max-DT config or a max-J config.Either way it was the same J-drive.
-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://archives.simplelists.com-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to xxxxxx@simplelists.com
To unsubscribe from this list please go to
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=zZOCJCw2BI9jPrGTB4OJoibiHbbTEiok