RE: FT: Missiles and Gas Tanks

> Last I heard torpedoes tended to be rocket powered (at least some of
them)< >which allows them to move much more  quickly than ships but with
a very poor< >range (on the order of a hundred miles was the longest I
remember hearing< >about).  So although ships and torpedoes operate in
the same medium, they< >use different propulsion methods and therefore
operate differently<
.
I'd have to ask about this, but all the torps in the current US
inventory I know of are "steam turbine powered" propellers. They have a
higher velocity than a ship or sub, but this is due to thrust to wieght
ratio. Ranges sound about right, but a rocket under water wil burn out
faster than a miissle engine, due to increased drag. And due  to the
seekers on most torps being acoustic, (sonar) the sound of the motor
burn would be a great problem.

>Even if you ignore the possibility for different types of propulsion<
>(a near future FT might have only rocket power available, eg) there<
>are still matters of efficiency.  Missiles, being small and expendable<
>and needing to travel only a short distance, might be able to use more<
>volatile fuels than a ship that needs to travel for extended periods<
>and reuse its engines throughout its lifespan.<

Again using todays missles for example, volitile fueled munitions is the
LAST THING you want stored in magazines on your war ship. There are
currently several hiigh efficaincy liquid fuels availible for missle
engines, but we still use mostly solids due to the stability of it. You
can store them safer, and you haave a much less chance of having them
cook off due to a hit on the ship, (AirCraft, whatever)
Randy

-joachim