Re: EMP (was Why big ships are too good...)

At 09:10 PM 12/12/96 +0100, you wrote:
>
>
>Okay, so we still get EMP effect caused by the metal hull of the
>ship. But will ship hulls be necessarily metallic? I've always
>considered FT ship hulls to be made of some 'other' material,
>possibly ceramics, plastics or some molecular structure we can
>only hypothesise about today (GP hulls?? At least casualties
>would be low if all you can do is burn off external weapon mounts).

Good point. Question: can a strong enough EMP pulse affect a human
brain? If
it can, you might want a hull that's essentially a Faraday cage. Give
the
hull a tight lattice of electrically conductive material and pump an
electric current through it. The hull is now impervious to EMP.

Personally, my favourite type of hull was a metallic hydrogen hull (I
first
came across metallic hydrogen in the novel _The World is Round_). Of
course,
you'd need something like a small singularity to forge it...

>Also, there's the possibility of optical computers (and considering
>the size of the fire control computers (3 mass?!?!?! I'd say that's
>about 3 mass too big), it seems JT had Lensman style vacuum tubes
>in mind, which I believe are resistant to EMP), hardened circuits,
>or any other future technology which would make EMP a problem of
>the past.

Well, now we're getting into the discussion of FT as a game versus FT as
a
simulation. I can live with EMP missiles even if they are a bit
anachronistic. Call them what you want; it's the game results that
matter.
This is probably the best argument for FT to not become more complex. As
long as the weapon systems are kept as generic and unspecific, we can
justify the weapons anyway we want. Too bad no one makes "Steampunk"
figures; I'd love to do a game with Space 1889 like Ether Flyers.

Allan Goodall:	agoodall@sympatico.ca 
"You'll want to hear about my new obsession.
 I'm riding high upon a deep depression. 
 I'm only happy when it rains."    - Garbage