Thread: Re: Space projectiles vs regulations

How about Imperial Regulations concerning littering/environmental impact? Since the shots can travel a very long distance, it affects the Imperium as a whole, rather than just one solar system. Similar to if a planetary government affects Imperial Trade, then the Imperial Navy asks them to stop.

Todd Kes

--- On Thu, 6/28/12, wrote:
> 2. That said, I absolutely believe that people armed with
> ideas and FF&S
> can find a way to make them work, at least in finite
> scenarios. For
> example, ships moving through space have to get someplace: a
> planet to
> land, a gas giant to refuel, etc., and they have only a
> finite number of
> G-turns with which to do so, match vectors to enter orbit,
> etc. So you
> could fire sheafs of projectiles to interdict the paths they
> need to use,
> forcing them to do something else or risk damage. Whether
> that's cost
> effective I don't know, but it's not cheap. But if people
> are able to make
> these things lethal in these scenarios, they will remain
> lethal to anyone
> else who blunders across them again. Long before we put
> FF&S out, the TML
> and Xboat lists were advocating projectiles, and where
> there's a will,
> there's a way.
>
> I find the idea very interesting to work out, "what would
> happen?" given
> some assumptions, and that was the idea behind the "Top
> Laser" thing we
> never got to do: let people simulate thousands of years of
> operational evolution and see what they get.

Yeah, the logic follows, and the requirement to have people chasing down
all of the post-battle debris, and the impact that it would have on design
of the weapons to avoid citation under the Law of Not Filling up Imperial
Space with Deadly Junk, and databases of known clouds of deadly darts and
their current location which could be announced to you on arrival when you
check into local space traffic control, similar to the database of orbital
debris the USAF maintains now, but it gets pretty cumbersome pretty fast.

Thank God there's no such thing in TNE, huh? :-)

> How about Imperial Regulations concerning littering/environmental impact?
> Since the shots can travel a very long distance, it affects the Imperium
> as a whole, rather than just one solar system. Similar to if a planetary
> government affects Imperial Trade, then the Imperial Navy asks them to
> stop.
>
> Todd Kes
>
> --- On Thu, 6/28/12, wrote:
>> 2. That said, I absolutely believe that people armed with
>> ideas and FF&S
>> can find a way to make them work, at least in finite
>> scenarios. For
>> example, ships moving through space have to get someplace: a
>> planet to
>> land, a gas giant to refuel, etc., and they have only a
>> finite number of
>> G-turns with which to do so, match vectors to enter orbit,
>> etc. So you
>> could fire sheafs of projectiles to interdict the paths they
>> need to use,
>> forcing them to do something else or risk damage. Whether
>> that's cost
>> effective I don't know, but it's not cheap. But if people
>> are able to make
>> these things lethal in these scenarios, they will remain
>> lethal to anyone
>> else who blunders across them again. Long before we put
>> FF&S out, the TML
>> and Xboat lists were advocating projectiles, and where
>> there's a will,
>> there's a way.
>>
>> I find the idea very interesting to work out, "what would
>> happen?" given
>> some assumptions, and that was the idea behind the "Top
>> Laser" thing we
>> never got to do: let people simulate thousands of years of
>> operational evolution and see what they get.
>

This reminds me of this scene from mass effect 2.

On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 1:52 PM, Todd Kes <> wrote:

> **
>
>
> How about Imperial Regulations concerning littering/environmental impact?
> Since the shots can travel a very long distance, it affects the Imperium as
> a whole, rather than just one solar system. Similar to if a planetary
> government affects Imperial Trade, then the Imperial Navy asks them to stop.
>
> Todd Kes
>
> --- On Thu, 6/28/12, wrote:
> > 2. That said, I absolutely believe that people armed with
> > ideas and FF&S
> > can find a way to make them work, at least in finite
> > scenarios. For
> > example, ships moving through space have to get someplace: a
> > planet to
> > land, a gas giant to refuel, etc., and they have only a
> > finite number of
> > G-turns with which to do so, match vectors to enter orbit,
> > etc. So you
> > could fire sheafs of projectiles to interdict the paths they
> > need to use,
> > forcing them to do something else or risk damage. Whether
> > that's cost
> > effective I don't know, but it's not cheap. But if people
> > are able to make
> > these things lethal in these scenarios, they will remain
> > lethal to anyone
> > else who blunders across them again. Long before we put
> > FF&S out, the TML
> > and Xboat lists were advocating projectiles, and where
> > there's a will,
> > there's a way.
> >
> > I find the idea very interesting to work out, "what would
> > happen?" given
> > some assumptions, and that was the idea behind the "Top
> > Laser" thing we
> > never got to do: let people simulate thousands of years of
> > operational evolution and see what they get.
>
>

--
If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
would have been deserved.

Wouldn't shooting bits of ships produce debris every bit as dangerous? The
TNE and for that matter the earlier versions of Traveller are full of
descriptions of space battle fields (Battle of Two Suns anyone) which are
posted as dangerous due to debris, partly wrecked ships etc.

As a plot hook (very Firefly) I am sure the imperium would not be happy with
people salvaging wrecks and restoring them without their permission. Does
the imperium/solomani etc have such a concept as a wargrave?

Antony

-----Original Message-----
From: Todd Kes
Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012 4:53 AM
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Space projectiles vs regulations

How about Imperial Regulations concerning littering/environmental impact?
Since the shots can travel a very long distance, it affects the Imperium as
a whole, rather than just one solar system. Similar to if a planetary
government affects Imperial Trade, then the Imperial Navy asks them to stop.

Todd Kes

--- On Thu, 6/28/12, wrote:
> 2. That said, I absolutely believe that people armed with ideas and
> FF&S can find a way to make them work, at least in finite scenarios.
> For example, ships moving through space have to get someplace: a
> planet to land, a gas giant to refuel, etc., and they have only a
> finite number of G-turns with which to do so, match vectors to enter
> orbit, etc. So you could fire sheafs of projectiles to interdict the
> paths they need to use, forcing them to do something else or risk
> damage. Whether that's cost effective I don't know, but it's not
> cheap. But if people are able to make these things lethal in these
> scenarios, they will remain lethal to anyone else who blunders across
> them again. Long before we put FF&S out, the TML and Xboat lists were
> advocating projectiles, and where there's a will, there's a way.
>
> I find the idea very interesting to work out, "what would happen?"
> given some assumptions, and that was the idea behind the "Top Laser"
> thing we never got to do: let people simulate thousands of years of
> operational evolution and see what they get.

> Wouldn't shooting bits of ships produce debris every bit as dangerous?

Dangerous, but probably not "every bit as dangerous." The KKMs would have
been accelerated to the highest speeds possible, and would retain that
speed. Ship hulks, not so much.

> The
> TNE and for that matter the earlier versions of Traveller are full of
> descriptions of space battle fields (Battle of Two Suns anyone) which are
> posted as dangerous due to debris, partly wrecked ships etc.
>
> As a plot hook (very Firefly) I am sure the imperium would not be happy
> with
> people salvaging wrecks and restoring them without their permission. Does
> the imperium/solomani etc have such a concept as a wargrave?

I would think that the government's first priority is to clean up the
debris to make the space lanes safer. There would probably be a great deal
of regulation on how bodies must be handled in order to hold a salvage
license. I'm thinking of the recently released accounts of when the Glomar
Explorer raised the Russian sub from the Pacific floor.

>
> Antony
>
> -----Original Message-----
From: Todd Kes
Sent: Friday, 29 June 2012 4:53 AM
Subject: [Traveller_TNE] Re: Space projectiles vs regulations
>
> How about Imperial Regulations concerning littering/environmental impact?
> Since the shots can travel a very long distance, it affects the Imperium
> as
> a whole, rather than just one solar system. Similar to if a planetary
> government affects Imperial Trade, then the Imperial Navy asks them to
> stop.
>
> Todd Kes
>
> --- On Thu, 6/28/12, wrote:
>> 2. That said, I absolutely believe that people armed with ideas and
>> FF&S can find a way to make them work, at least in finite scenarios.
>> For example, ships moving through space have to get someplace: a
>> planet to land, a gas giant to refuel, etc., and they have only a
>> finite number of G-turns with which to do so, match vectors to enter
>> orbit, etc. So you could fire sheafs of projectiles to interdict the
>> paths they need to use, forcing them to do something else or risk
>> damage. Whether that's cost effective I don't know, but it's not
>> cheap. But if people are able to make these things lethal in these
>> scenarios, they will remain lethal to anyone else who blunders across
>> them again. Long before we put FF&S out, the TML and Xboat lists were
>> advocating projectiles, and where there's a will, there's a way.
>>
>> I find the idea very interesting to work out, "what would happen?"
>> given some assumptions, and that was the idea behind the "Top Laser"
>> thing we never got to do: let people simulate thousands of years of
>> operational evolution and see what they get.
>
>

Garbage patrol!!

Community service!!

:D

Regards
Michael Jenkins

On 29/06/2012, at 14:15, "Antony Farrell" <> wrote:

> Wouldn't shooting bits of ships produce debris every bit as dangerous? The
> TNE and for that matter the earlier versions of Traveller are full of
> descriptions of space battle fields (Battle of Two Suns anyone) which are
> posted as dangerous due to debris, partly wrecked ships etc.
>
> As a plot hook (very Firefly) I am sure the imperium would not be happy with
> people salvaging wrecks and restoring them without their permission. Does
> the imperium/solomani etc have such a concept as a wargrave?
>
> Antony
>
>
>