Errata - that difficult subject

[DonM]

I can't find anywhere in the Refs Manual, or your superb combined errata that says that the fuel consumption is per litre of power plant

The only place I can find it is in the worked example

If it IS in the Ref's Manual, please can someone give me a page/column/para reference

Which worked example?

 

[christopher.boote]

Which worked example?

Your fixed MegaTravellerStarshipDesignExample.pdf (p.9 Power Supply section, para 3)

And as an aside, have you considered reworking that using two power plants, one for the 'all the time' stuff like manoeuvre, life support, bridge, sensors with 30 days of fuel, and one just for the weapons and screens with only (say) 24 hours fuel?

 

[Major B]

Black Globe capacitors

I just checked the current version of the errata and could not find costs for the capicators used to store excess power absorbed by a Black Globe Generator.

RM Page 95 describes how they work in starship combat and also provides formula to determine the amount of energy that can be stored in the J-Drive. It also says that 1 kl of capacitor can hold 650 MW of absorbed energy. But there is no notation in the design tables to cover the option of installing capacitors or the associated cost.

Am I missing it or is the information provided elsewhere?

 

[Major B]

have you considered reworking that using two power plants, one for the 'all the time' stuff like manoeuvre, life support, bridge, sensors with 30 days of fuel, and one just for the weapons and screens with only (say) 24 hours fuel?

I've been thinking about providing the text of a change doing just this to Don but haven't had the time lately.

I'm trying to finish up a redone version of the Kinunir (converted to MT) that uses this technique. It reduced the amount of fuel required by about half and also helped to calculate the size power plant required to reach the agility needed. I have an early version posted in the file library if you want to take a look (along with a redone SDB that probably needs more work after what I've learned doing the Kinunir).

Why not write up a draft change and post it in a thread so we can all stab at it until it looks right? Don is pretty busy with the work on T5 so it will probably be some time before he can draft a change.

 

[Major B]

Don, here is a draft errata entry that will cover the omission of BGG capacitors from the design tables:

[FONT=Courier New][B]Page 80, Step 4, Black Glodes (addition)[/B]: The energy absorbed by a Black Globe [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]must be stored until it can be released by providing power to the ship's [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]weapons, drives, or other systems. Ships with a jump drive are able to store [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]energy in the drive's capacitors in an amount equal to:[/FONT]
 
[FONT=Courier New]Volume of the Ship in Kiloliters x Jump Number x .005 (unit of measure for the [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]result is MW)[/FONT]
 
[FONT=Courier New]Additional capacitors can be installed to provide more storage. Each kiloliter [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]of additional capacitor storage costs MCr .3 and can hold 650 MW. These [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]additional capacitors are called energy sinks.[/FONT]
 
[FONT=Courier New]See the section on Starship Combat (page 95) for additional information on [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]disposing power stored in the energy sinks.[/FONT]

 

[DonM]

OOPS!

I posted a new version of the errata on New Year's Day, and forgot to announce it!

http://dmckinne.winterwar.org/pdfs/ConsolidatedMegaTravellerErrata.pdf

Sorry about that...

 

[Major B]

Don, quick errata to your errata...

On page 27 of your current version, your corrected entry for missile bays should replace the '8' in the far left column with '7' since part of your correction was to add the UCP factor for a TL 7 missile bay.

 

[Major B]

Another minor fix:

On page 28 of the errata:

The entry beginning with "Page 73, Step 14, Fusion Gun Turrets..."

Should read "Page 74, Step 14, Fusion Gun Turrets..."

Hope you don't mind the nitpicking. I'm doing some pencil entries into my hardcopy RM and noticed these typos.

 

[DonM]

No, nitpicking is important, and in at least one of these cases... not my fault: the official errata did that.

 

[christopher.boote]

Still looking...

I can't find anywhere in the Refs Manual, or your superb combined errata that says that the fuel consumption is per litre of power plant

If it IS in the Ref's Manual, please can someone give me a page/column/para reference
Thanx
Chris

Still hoping someone has either found where this is in the original rules, or written it into the errata

Thanx

 

[Major B]

Looks like another typo on the power plant table...

In the RM, at the top of page 64, it states "Power Out, Weight, and Price are expressed per kiloliter of volume" - it does not specify the fuel consumption figure (shown in the column headed by "kl/hour") as it should.

Recommend the following change to correct this:

[FONT=Courier New][B]Page 64, Step 1, Power Supply (correction)[/B]: On the second line of text, [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]r[/FONT][FONT=Courier New]eplace "Power Out, [/FONT][FONT=Courier New]Weight, [/FONT][FONT=Courier New]and Price are expressed" with "Power Out, [/FONT]
[FONT=Courier New]Weight, Price, [/FONT][FONT=Courier New]and fuel [/FONT][FONT=Courier New]consumption rate in kl/hour are all expressed" [/FONT]

Chris, the data you need is shown in the table on page 64. The accompanying text just failed to specify.

 

[DonM]

Perhaps let's try this as a new reading?

Page 64, Step 1, Power Supply (corrections and clarifications): The table heading is misleading. Power Out, Weight and Price are per kiloliter of volume; Power Out, Weight, Price, and Kl/Hour columns of each table entry are for 1 kiloliter of power plant volume. The Kl/Hour column then represents the fuel consumption rate in kl/hour for 1 kiloliter of power plant volume. The Volume column should be labeled Minimum Volume, the smallest volume to which the described power plant may be built.

Does that better reflect the intended meaning?

 

[Major B]

I think yours is much more clear Don.

 

[DonM]

Ok, I have another update of the errata ready... The v2.16 errata will NOT include anything from the COACC review that is happening on the MegaTraveller Yahoo Group; that material will be considered for 2.17.

I've actually had it ready since March 5th, but that was my birthday...

I was going to post a preview here, but the material would require like 4 posts to cover, so as soon as I get it up on the web, I'll post here.

 

[Major B]

Don, the link in your signature still points to v 2.15.

Can you post an updated link please?

Also, can you provide the URL for the yahoo group you mentioned? PM if the board rules prevent linking to other forums.

Thanks!

 

[DonM]

Actually, I said I'd announce here when I got it posted (I went out with the family after work). So, the site should now be updated with v2.16.

As to the yahoo group, it's http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/megatraveller/ and I hope that use is ok...

 

[Major B]

Sorry Don. I thought that ready meant posted and in my excitement I missed your last sentence.

But, the link in your signature still points to 2.15, so I'll have to wait until I go home to pull it off your website (can't browse most websites from work due to the firewall).

Same for the yahoo group, but I look forward to checking it out over the weekend. Thanks for posting the link and thanks again for the work you do compiling the errata.

 

[DonM]

The link in my sig goes right to the website, and I'm seeing 2.16... do you need to clear your cache?

 

[Major B]

do you need to clear your cache?

Guess so.

Tried it from home and got 2.16.

Checked again from this computer and it still points to 2.15.

Time for some house cleaning...

And thanks Don for all the work you do to keep the errata compiled and continually updated. I don't think you get enough thanks for what you've done and continue to do.

 

[Renard Ruche]

I know my math is bad...

I am a bit confused about a formula presented on page 24 of the Errata PDF (version 2.16):

Page 65, Step 5, Maneuver Drive (clarification): The entire table can be reduced to a percentage of the Displacement Tonnage equal to 3 x the Desired Maneuver Thrust – 1; for example, a 3G maneuver drive always requires 11% of the ship’s displacement tonnage.

Shouldn't the percentage be 8% { (3x3G)-1 }?