OTU Only: Gypsy Queen Class Fast Merchant, LBB2, 199Td, J26GP7

[AnotherDilbert]

I would argue that if you are introducing s function, eta (H), to get the progression that the drive potential table indicates you no longer have a "simple formula"

Agreed, obviously not.

I'm wondering if some sort of sine function, possibly in the imaginary plane, may produce a value for eta (H) that would give the coefficient necessary for the J drive and the W->Z drives.

Both numerator and denominator are continuously increasing, so a single phase of a sinus function with a variably stretched base would presumably work.

Polynomial functions would trivially work, too.

 

[mike wightman]

So I wonder if I have been wrong all these years, the folks at GDW did use a formula...

there must have been a couple of maths graduates on staff.

 

[atpollard]

So I wonder if I have been wrong all these years, the folks at GDW did use a formula...

there must have been a couple of maths graduates on staff.

My money is on whoever simplified LBB2 down to FF&S.

 

[Spinward Flow]

So I wonder if I have been wrong all these years, the folks at GDW did use a formula...

Probably not for LBB2.77 and probably yes for LBB2.81 ... but the explanation (and thus, show your work, factor) of the formula(s) they wound up using were kept hidden and unpublished (presumably to save precious page layout space).

The LBB2.77 table looks mighty arbitrary in the way it's constructed.
Fill in the table first with what "looks right" ... don't sweat the details (even afterwards) ... never mind trying to use any kind of rational mathematical formula to compute (and verify) the values entered into the table.

LBB2.81 cleaned up a LOT of that with the revision, but (in my opinion) "grandfathered" too much of the LBB2.77 "table shaping" into the revised table (creating new errors and inconsistencies in the process).

 

[Grav_Moped]

presumably to save precious page layout space).

Intellectual property reasons, too.