Hello Ethan,

May I ask why using general and admittedly imprecise terms is such an issue?

The issue appear to be that I did not include that the F-16 is doing evasive maneuvering using control surfaces, which create drag slowing the airspeed, decreasing or increasing thrust slowing or increasing airspeed, and using countermeasures to avoid being blown out of the sky. The best and least likely outcome is the F-16 avoids any damage at all. The next best outcome is the aircraft takes minimal damage that doesn't affect the combat capability and the pilot lands back at base. The next outcome is the pilot gets out safely while the F-16 becomes scattered bits and pieces scattered all over the place.

Ethan, I admit to being inadequate to debate over the speed versus acceleration versus velocity and concede the floor and stick to the subject of Starship Berthing Philosophies?

I apologize to the originator for being party to sidetracking, or is that ship jacking ;-), from the subject of Starship Berthing Philosophies and I will try to stay on track from here on out.

Another thing to consider is that the Droyne, Vargr, Aslan, K'kree, Hivers and other like beings will have different philosophies for berthing. For that matter today there are differing opinions on berthing philosophies between the countries for military and civilian personnel. The USN's habitability manual, the link is somewhere in the thread, is the minimum requirements, in theory anyway, to keeping the crew combat ready during long underway periods. There are a number of other sources out there by maritime agencies that have different requirements. I have, or at least had, a link to the United States Coast Guard to see what they had for their habitability and if there were any guidelines for civilian craft. To be honest I have never took the time to look.

Tom Rux

From: "Knapp" <magick.crow@gmail.com>
To: "TML" <tml@simplelists.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2015 1:12:20 PM
Subject: Re: [TML] Starship Berthing Philosophies?

On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 8:57 PM, <tmr0195@comcast.net> wrote:

Hello Ethan,

Thank you for the link to the AtomicRockets site, which I had forgotten about.

My apologies for using "speed" instead of velocity. My thinking when I was typing the reply was that maneuvering by changing course (Is vector a more accurate term?), accelerating (speeding up) and/or decelerating (slowing down) or a combination of them the ship under attach can either avoid the hit or minimize the damage.

Tom Rux

I will believe this when I see that a current f16 can change speed to avoid a hit. I could see a course change with decoys though or other ECM. As has been pointed out here before speed of light is the key both in tracking and in hitting.

Douglas E Knapp

-----
The Traveller Mailing List
Archives at http://archives.simplelists.com/tml
Report problems to listmom@travellercentral.com
To unsubscribe from this list please goto 
http://www.simplelists.com/confirm.php?u=zZOCJCw2BI9jPrGTB4OJoibiHbbTEiok