Hello all,

I am probably missing some important aspect of the

discussion, which means I am out to lunch, but here

is my two credits.

Taking away meson guns/particle accelerator spinal

and bay mounted weapons leaves you with fusion

guns, plasma guns, beam lasers, pulse lasers, missile

launchers, and sandcasters for weapons. If I've got this

right they are either fixed mounted or turret mounted.

I'm not sure if the 50 and 100-ton bays are out for the

remaining weapons.

Keeping the fusion guns, plasma guns, beam lasers,

pulse lasers, missile launchers, and sandcasters as

written fixed mounts could provide fire support to

the front, back, top, bottom, left, and right sides of the

hull. Of course the hull configuration would determine

the directions that the fixed mounted weapons could

fire at targets. Since the mounts are inside the hull

they would keep the hull smoother. Sticking the weapons

in turrets allows for more flexibility but also makes for

better detection.

I'm not sure that I agree that equipment has to be built

bulky to work efficiently. Unfortunately, I have not been

able to figure out why I feel the way I do. Hopefully,

something will percolate up from the depths of my

brain and then I'll be able to reply better. Of course by

that time I'll have forgotten where to reply.

Tom R

From: "Richard Aiken" <xxxxxx@gmail.com>
To: "TML" <xxxxxx@simplelists.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2016 3:20:58 PM
Subject: Re: [TML] What If No Meson/PA Spinal Or Bay Weapons?

On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 2:20 AM, Knapp <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Mar 5, 2016 1:03 AM, "Richard Aiken" <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Kurt Feltenberger <xxxxxx@thepaw.org> wrote:
>>
>> So what happens to design when you remove them?
>
>
> I would say that - a globe being the most efficient hull shape for the amount of volume enclosed assuminb all other factors are equal - you'd likely get warships which are all variously-scaled versions of the Happy Fun Ball.
>
> E.g.
But not the best for dumping heat so a flying pankake would be better. Or, not the best for reducing front profile ca nd maxamizing weapons to bear, so a wedge might be best.

Well, since it's a warship that might want to hide when it's not under thrust, it probably doesn't want to efficiently radiant heat ALL the time; that's what retractible heat exchanger wings are for.

As to the wedge shape, unless you make it a very skinny wedge - which would lessen total hull strength and also lose you some functionality (since a lot of equipment - if built efficiently - would be too bulky to fit into such a shape) - I doubt you would end up with significantly more weapons able to bear on targets you are trying to close with . . . and since you're choosing this shape to maximize *those* weapon sites, that leaves you with few (if any) facing toward the rear, for those times when you're outnumbered and being chased.

Richard Aiken

"Never insult anyone by accident." Robert A. Heinlein

"I studied the Koran a great deal. I came away from that study with the conviction there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as Muhammed." Alexis de Tocqueville (1843)

"We know a little about a lot of things; just enough to make us dangerous." Dean Winchester

"It has been my experience that a gun doesn't care who pulls its trigger." Newton Knight (as portrayed by Matthew McConaughey), to a scoffing Confederate tax collector facing the weapons held by Knight's young children and wife.

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