FFS3 for T5

[robject]

Sorry, yes, it's only implied, I didn't list it. And with a modular system, it seems easier to compute power plant fuel solely based on the power plant.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">200t hull (200t) MCr??
Jump-2 Drive 15t 40t fuel MCr20
M-1 Drive 2t 1 EP MCr 4
Power Plant-1 4t (2 EP) 2t fuel MCr 8

Subtotal 21t (1 EP) 42t fuel MCr32</pre>[/QUOTE]I haven't "done" the hull.

 

[robject]

By the way, these rules create a problem with X-Boats. They end up with huge amounts of extra space, perfect for outfitting with power plant, M-Drive, a triple turret, things like that. It just ain't canonical.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">Jump drive: 15t + 40t fuel
Bridge: 20t
Staterooms: 8t
Cargo: 1t

Total: 84 tons. </pre>[/QUOTE]

 

[SanDragon]

As long as you don't forget the data storage and transmission. Not much of an X-boat if you're not delivering the news!

 

[daltoncalford]

Originally posted by robject:
Ahhh, Perl.

What where you hoping for? (I have not done alot of windows programming for a few years since it has been dropped as a operating environment at my work). I used to do alot of MSaccess, MSQL, Oracle etc work as well as visual studio and vb. (it is rare that I admit to that shady part of my past).

best regards

Dalton

 

[robject]

I never hope for another Perl programmer, we're too uncommon. It's always a pleasant surprise.

 

[daltoncalford]

Originally posted by robject:
I never hope for another Perl programmer, we're too uncommon. It's always a pleasant surprise.

Well, there are perl programmers, perl hacks (far more common) and of course, perl script kiddies who mod an existing file so that it does not resemble the original file in the least.

Perl and PHP are equivalent to BASIC for our company. If you don't know both perl and php, you don't get hired.

best regards

Dalton

 

[robject]

Sounds like a good company.

 

[daltoncalford]

Originally posted by robject:
Sounds like a good company.

So, what are you currently working on, what do you need to have done and what do you hope to finally accomplish?

(sorry, my project manager training always starts with a situation analysis)

best regards

Dalton

 

[robject]

I hope to produce a modular vehicle design system reasonably compatible with Book 2 Classic Traveller. I hope for it to have the TL and options range of MegaTraveller's design system.

A successful implementation allows people to use detailed design to create (less detailed) modules. The modules, in turn, allow people to create vehicles. This would not prohibit people from creating vehicles using the detailed design system, but it does encourage "gearheads" to create "non-gearhead"-friendly modules.

I'm currently generalizing the process used to produce power plants, jump drives, and maneuver drives.

A major effort will be required to understand and model weapons design.

 

[daltoncalford]

Alright, sounds good, so, why don't we make it a general purpose database.

It sounds like a standard Bill of Materials job.
A 'part' can be either a unique item, a collection of unique items with extra details or a catalogue of 'parts'.

This whole thing would need a way of calculating parts given a variety of different design criteria.

I would approach this with a database that generates html from a select statement. Stored procedures for each individual formula.

I would have the system group themselves so that different Traveller Referees could use the database and each have a unique or slightly modified version of the database.

I would use a open source database that supports .net, odbc, jdbc and has bindings for perl/php.

I know of three different databases that are close to the requirements.

What do you think?

best regards

Dalton

 

[robject]

Sounds like scope creep to me, but the idea is certainly General Purpose, and your proposal sounds like it's right down the LAMP alley, with the significant bits being MySQL and PHP.

 

[robject]

Upon reflection, Dalton, that's very close to how I'm approaching the problem. My goal is to churn out the process for creating starship components on two levels: (1) a "device" level, with stats for surface area, cubic meters, megawatts, and the like, and (2) a "module" level, with the stats abstracted slightly to tons and EPs.

The methods for calculating the parts is what I'm concentrating on, borrowing from Fire, Fusion, and Steel and CT/MT.

As mentioned, the output would be devices and their corresponding modules, which people could then build a "portfolio" which their "corporation" sells from.

 

[daltoncalford]

I am willing to give it a go.

I have the tools, servers, etc. to make it happen, but, I will have to insist that any tool we make also runs natively on linux.

I would suggest Firebird (firebird.sourceforge.net) for the database (I have over a terrabyte of data that I currently manage with this system) and lazarus for the user interface (lazarus.freepascal.org). Lazarus fully support Firebird as well as being a cross platform native compiler.

First step in the project would be a discussion of full project scope so we have some jello to nail to the wall......

Once we have a specification, the data design would be next.

best regards

Dalton

 

[robject]

I would suggest Perl and YAML and Text::Template (or Template Toolkit) rather than PHP, and I still suspect that a database could be overkill, but meh.

I would also be wary of trying to design a whole solution: I think something that can generate lists of components to specs is 80% of the solution.

 

[robject]

I've been thinking about computers, and am thinking that they are for all intents and purposes zero volume unless they are military-grade (hardened, fault-tolerant, redundant, blah-blah), in which case I'd probably require 2 tons plus 1 ton per jump number (so a J4 ship requires 6 tons "set aside" for the computer).

 

[Tobias]

Originally posted by robject:
Yep. Apparently, very little of those fusion plants is actually fusing. The rest of it must be managing the fusion somehow.

People have for decades now (and that is only a very slight exaggeration) argued how Traveller starships dispose of their heat. The high fuel requirements may very well be part of the answer. Just an idea, though.

Regards,

Tobias

 

[robject]

Heat is a bugaboo, and I'd hate to intertwine fuel into the mess.

Kim Stanley Robinson has answered the heat question for me in the Red/Green/Blue Mars trilogy by using ceramic coils for heat storage.

 

[daltoncalford]

Heat is how I always explained the large quantities of fuel that could not be reduced due to engine efficiencies.

The idea was that the energy to required to jump was used at the beggining of the jump.
Jump space is hot, hot enough that their is a net heat increase in the ship over the course of the jump.
The fuel tankage was actually coolent and was solid until used and disappated into j-space.
Using colder/more dense materials is possible, allowing for less overall requirements for fuel, but, the overhaul of the vessel combined with the extra costs and difficulting in obtaining coolent was the limiting (economic) factor.

IMTU, drop pods never would work, and are not used.

best regards

Dalton

 

[robject]

Luckily, using Book 2 as a basis permits me to focus on detailing the system, rather than explaining it. As we all know, explanations are a dime a dozen, and can be just as problematic as the problem itself.

While there are lots of things in Book 2 that are conceptually hard to reconcile with the universe as we know it, as a design system the only complaints I've heard are regarding its level of detail: not enough accessories, no TL effects, high abstraction.

 

[robject]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
...the rule of thumb in FF&S1 is that 10t of thrust are needed to produce 1G acceleration per displacement ton of ship - provided that the ship's final density isn't greater than 15 tonnes per displacement ton, if it is then the true maneuver thrust has to be calculated.

So a 150t ship would require 4500t of thrust to make 3G, which requires 4500/40 = 112.5m^3 of thrusters or 8 displacement tons rounding to the nearest 0.5 displacement ton.

[...]

Sigg, which one of [FFS1, FFS2] is closer to CT than the other? Or is that an unanswerable question?