[TML] Molding Ships

[shadow at shadowgard.com]

On 3 Oct 2007 at 11:42, Charles Prevatte wrote:

> > From: tml-bounces at travellercentral.com
> > [mailto:tml-bounces at travellercentral.com]On Behalf Of James Ramsay
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2007 2:43 AM
> > To: The Traveller Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [TML] Molding Ships
> >
> >
> > Charles Prevatte wrote:
> > >
> > > Sorry, you missed the point.  I was mainly talking about what a
> > very small
> > > group of "space men" and their ship could have done reasonably in that
> > > situation.  Even a very few spy or comunications sats would
> > have taken more
> > > tech than could be cobbled together from one small space ship.
> > Leonard already answered this. If the ship has a missile turret they
> > could probably launch a ton of sats and never leave the ground.
> >
> > > While upgradeing a factory, or even several, to produce year
> > 2000+ engines for
> > > helecopters would have been trivial.
> > Combat useful helos require more than the airframe. Training the pilots
> > would take significant amounts of time, especially as you have to start
> > the training program with no senior pilots.
> 
> Ouch, got me there.  Well if you assume one of your "space men" is a pilot
> you have a work arround.

Only if he's a *helicopter* pilot. It's a rather arcane skill and 
nothing else transfers well.

> > No I don't. I said increasing production of already combat active
> > machines or doing minor improvements to those machines (such as the
> > T-34/85), and improving logistics using the computers on a space ship
> > would be a better idea. Improved logistics and satellite tracking would
> > affect the outcome of a war more then 50's and 60's war machines.
> 
> Again the sats.  I do not see them as posible with 1920-1945 tech.  No solar
> cells, batery life would be short, and the electronic would be very power
> hungery.  Drop the sats, and you could be on the right tract.  It depends on
> what the tactical situation is and how mush time you have to get the "help"
> to the front lines.  Oh and by the way, there wer ehelecopter in WW2, they
> just were not very effective because of the engines power to weight ratio.
> That was one of the reasons I mentioned them.  1942 to be exact.

Selenium cells existed. You need more of them for the same power, but 
they were known tech. And a lot of better battery designs exist.

Though just building something big enough to have techs on hand may 
take a bit longer but is easier to work with long term.


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