Thank you for indicating that I'm probably not out in a field somewhere with my conclusions for the maneuver drive and power plant.

I created a Microsoft Word document that combined the CT LBB 2 1977/1981 material and the CT LBB 5 HG 2e material back in 2014. In that document I spread the power plant out a bit, but with the recent review I decided I might have been out in a field somewhere.

Personally, I think the system began to breakdown with CT LBB 5 HG 1979 and HG 2e 1980. In CT LBB 2 1977 and the revised book in 1981 building a CT LBB 2 hull the hardpoint took up no tonnage with a MCr cost allowing the installation of the fire control system (FCS) of 1 ton at no MCr cost with or without one of the turret options for only a cost in MCr.

CT LBB 5 HG omitted the hardpoint and turret costs and subsumed the fire control system tonnage into the turret. CT LBB 2 hulls redesigned using CT LBB 5 HG weapons in turrets cost less. In CT LBB 2 a single turret has a cost of MCr 0.2 + hardpoint cost MCr 0.1 + one pulse laser MCr 0.5 = MCr 0.8 and requires 1 ton of space for the FCS. IN CT LBB HG the same turret is MCr 0.5.

I'd say you're right on target.

Considering all the anomalies that you've detected in the CT LBB's, it's no wonder that the whole system broke down horribly when the hyper-complexity of MT & it's successors was cooked up.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Thursday, October 24, 2019, 03:41:55 PM MST, Thomas RUX <xxxxxx@comcast.net> wrote:

Late Afternoon from the Pacific Northwest,

The CT LBB 3 TL Chart pages 14-15 not really clear on the TL for the maneuver drive and power plant. According to the TL chart on page 15 under the column header of "Space" non-starships are common at TL 7.

In CT LBB 5 HG2e MD 1 and 2 are available TL 7, MD 3 through 5 at TL 8 and MD 6 at TL 9 and should be inserted at those TLs under the "Space" column of the CT LBB 3 TL Chart.

I'm not sure about the TL s for the CT LBB 5 HG 2e Power Plants from looking at the table on page 23. My impression is that a CT LBB 5 HG 2e power plant is capable of any rating up to 50 but rarely over 35 at TL 7. In CT LBB 2 the maximum rating is 6 and based CT LBB 5 HG 2e I think that the Power Plant rating should be 1 through 6 in the TL 7 row under either the "Space" or more likely the "Energy" column header.

How far out in the field am I on my integration?

Tom Rux

-----
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