As I was saying .Does not need to be over range zero for being a point
defense/anti small craft or a strike fighter weapon.What is the range of a
fusion weapon in space combat?
________________________________
From: Eamon Watters
Sent: Fri, June 29, 2012 9:31:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Projectile throwes in space combat
The old unit conversion problem (gets us all sometimes...)
6000 m/sec = 6 km/sec
1800 sec*6 km = 10,800 km in 30 mins
10,800/30,000 = 0.36 hexes
________________________________
From: John Potter
Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012, 23:07
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Projectile throwes in space combat
6000m/sec
30min = 1800 sec
1800 * 6000 = 10,800,000m in 30min
10,800,000 / 30k = 360 range bands
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Antony Farrell <> wrote:
>
>At 6000ms-1 a slug from whatever source would only cover 10,800 km in a 30
>minute turn (ie less than half a hex)
>6000ms-1 for 1800 seconds (not accounting for launching vessels vector).
>
>Antony
>
>From: [] On
>Behalf Of John Potter
>Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012 9:28 PM
>To:
>Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Projectile throwes in space combat
>
>
>
>To this point I went and looked at Mass Drivers and Autocannons in FF&S. The
>upper limits for muzzle velocity make slug throwers viable per say as the upper
>limit is 6000m/s which translates into 360 range (36 light seconds) bands in
>combat turn for space combat. However the required MW of power to move a KEAP
>round is staggering so you are limited to slugs that are not very useful verse
>armored targets.
>
>Obviously you don't need 360 range bands to be effective as others discussed in
>another thread you only need to be able to cover 40ish range bands due to
>anything beyond that being ineffective.
>On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Charles P <> wrote:
>
>From looking and reading everything . Due to lack of range I would limit them to
>point defense and mounting on fighter. If you arm Strike fighters with
>fusion/plasma guns then why not slug throwers? It would be a nice way to ruin
>someones days . A nice nimble fighter chews you up. Might even make Light
>fighters viable as offensive weapons and also as anti-small craft.
>
>
>
>
>--
>
>If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you would
>have been deserved.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2437/5099 - Release Date: 06/28/12
--
If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you would
have been deserved.
defense/anti small craft or a strike fighter weapon.What is the range of a
fusion weapon in space combat?
________________________________
From: Eamon Watters
Sent: Fri, June 29, 2012 9:31:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Projectile throwes in space combat
The old unit conversion problem (gets us all sometimes...)
6000 m/sec = 6 km/sec
1800 sec*6 km = 10,800 km in 30 mins
10,800/30,000 = 0.36 hexes
________________________________
From: John Potter
Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012, 23:07
Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Projectile throwes in space combat
6000m/sec
30min = 1800 sec
1800 * 6000 = 10,800,000m in 30min
10,800,000 / 30k = 360 range bands
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Antony Farrell <> wrote:
>
>At 6000ms-1 a slug from whatever source would only cover 10,800 km in a 30
>minute turn (ie less than half a hex)
>6000ms-1 for 1800 seconds (not accounting for launching vessels vector).
>
>Antony
>
>From: [] On
>Behalf Of John Potter
>Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012 9:28 PM
>To:
>Subject: Re: [Traveller_TNE] Projectile throwes in space combat
>
>
>
>To this point I went and looked at Mass Drivers and Autocannons in FF&S. The
>upper limits for muzzle velocity make slug throwers viable per say as the upper
>limit is 6000m/s which translates into 360 range (36 light seconds) bands in
>combat turn for space combat. However the required MW of power to move a KEAP
>round is staggering so you are limited to slugs that are not very useful verse
>armored targets.
>
>Obviously you don't need 360 range bands to be effective as others discussed in
>another thread you only need to be able to cover 40ish range bands due to
>anything beyond that being ineffective.
>On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 5:47 AM, Charles P <> wrote:
>
>From looking and reading everything . Due to lack of range I would limit them to
>point defense and mounting on fighter. If you arm Strike fighters with
>fusion/plasma guns then why not slug throwers? It would be a nice way to ruin
>someones days . A nice nimble fighter chews you up. Might even make Light
>fighters viable as offensive weapons and also as anti-small craft.
>
>
>
>
>--
>
>If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you would
>have been deserved.
>
>
>
>
>
________________________________
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2012.0.2178 / Virus Database: 2437/5099 - Release Date: 06/28/12
--
If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you would
have been deserved.