I agree with your reasoning.
So, what you're saying is that reactionless drives snuck into TNE despite
Frank's prohibition? :-) That's kind of ironic, but also kind of
inescapable, as we had already established repulsors in earlier editions,
and tractors were just a higher-tech extension of that. I don't recall if
anyone ever realized that or not.
Frank used to try to insist that any game we put out should "only violate
one law of physics per game." That sounded good, but in practice, that was
impossible in an SF game that attempted to cover SO MUCH of the existing SF
literature as Traveller did.
Dave
On Fri, 15 Jun 2012 03:48:57 +0100 (BST), Eamon Watters
<> wrote:
> I had the idea that a corollorary of tractor and pressor beams was that
> while they could be used to push and pull against an object, - with
> Newton's 3rd Law - if the object was large enough (eg, a mountain or a
> moon) the reaction would be greater on the pusher/puller than the beam's
> target. Kind of reactionless, but what the power/volume requirements are
> for a vehicle to manouver well I don't know. I had the idea when I
came
> up with a scenario with an AHL cold-sleep crew waking up in the New Era
> and having to try an avert a collision with a planet in a ship with
fried
> HePLAR. Eamon
> ""
>
> Friday, 15 June 2012, 1:32
> Re: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Armor XXI
>
> That is related to Frank's decree that there would be no
> reactionless drives in TNE. Just a
> gravity negating field and reaction thrusters.
>
>
>