Re: PDAF and ADAF's

Rob Paul wrote:
>A passing thought:  as most of us probably use the C-battery against
>fighters/missiles idea, how about letting an ADAF add C-batteries, if
the
>ship has them, to it's supporting anti-fighter fire.  Say, up to 2
>C-batteries per ADAF, at double points but no extra mass for the
batteries.

Interesting, but typically like weapons will share a fire control and
the
C-batts are somewhat different than the ADAF or PDAF systems.  One way
to
think of it is the C-batts work like dual purpose 5" guns and the ADAF
and
PDAF resemble 40mm AA systems.	Both systems have different rates of
fire,
ranges, etc. that a fire control system would need to coordinate without
being overly complex and costly.

It might be appropriate to use an all new fire control system that is
designed to link different weapon types.  The new firecon would have
increased mass and cost to reflect its design.	I think there was
something
like this in Traveller:2300 called UTES or "Unified Target Engagement
System".  I personally like this designation better than Aegis, which
makes
me think of 20th century technology aside from just being used way too
often
in like games.

Proposed system:

UTES
Cost: 20 + 5 per additional weapon type. 
Mass: 5
Desc: Works as a firecon allowing two or more different weapon types to
share a targeting solution.  Base UTES will operate two different weapon
systems.

What do you think?

Mike Miserendino