On 9 Jul 2016 at 17:15, Jim Vassilakos wrote:

> More on the topic of Automation in Traveller:
>
> Here´s another problem I have with Traveller, though YMMV. But I
> imagine we can mostly agree that if a ship is in orbit around planet
> X, and planet Y is the same star system and has a known orbit and
> known physical characteristics, and the ship has the necessary fuel to
> get there, etc... etc..., that getting from the orbit of planet X to
> the orbit of planet Y ought to be as simple as asking the computer to
> plot a course and then hitting the "engage" button, or whatever is
> required in order to tell the computer, "Yes, do that and let me
> know when it´s done."
>
> In other words, it ought not to require the assistance of a sophont
> with given level of piloting and navigation to achieve such a
> maneuver. Of course, this sentiment comes from someone who has seen
> computers advance from floppies (the five-and-a-quarter inch ones that
> were actually floppy) all the way to today.

Oh, it's worse than that. Given constant accel drives, and a simple
telescope, you can *literally* fly the course "by eye". It'd be
slightly less efficient thhan an ideal computer calculated course,
but it'll be more than "good enough".

once you break orbit, you can just point the ship at the planet until
you reach the halfway point (which is not that hard to determine,
again with just a telescope and a few simple tables) then more or
less point the stern at the destination until you are ready to enter
orbit.

It's actually harder to figure out the burn to enter a stable orbit
than it is to fly between planets.

--
Leonard Erickson (aka shadow)
shadow at shadowgard dot com