Re: Flat top carriers

jeremy claridge wrote:

> > favored since I dislike the carrier versions of the FSE (why
> > wet navy style flight decks?).
>
> Just picked up on this comment, especially since I have just finished
painting 3 new carriers
> by brigade minatures all flat tops :)
> I like em

Good ... (sorry they took so long !)

> and in my opinion no one has justified other means for handling
fighters on space vessels.
> All very well launching out of tubes but what about landing?
> In Battlestar Galactica the fighters launched out of tubes, but for
landing they used a big open deck,
> albeit a covered over one.
>
> Oh and as an aside anyone else notice in the film Starship Troopers
that the second fleet action had the
> fighters on flat sections of the ships ?
>

Yep - it appeared to be a slightly different variant of ship.

>
> I like flat tops :)

Ditto (why else would we make 'em !?).

I don't know about anyone else, but there's a discrepancy here (and in
other places in FT) about what I
believe a future space war fought in vacuum will be like and what I
would prefer it to be like - but I'm
prepared to live with this. In truth, I don't believe space fighters
will exist at all in the near future,
but I like my games to feature them because they're fun. If they were to
exist, they certainly won't be
launched from flat top carriers (more likely from launch bays open to
space a la Babylon 5), but I prefer
the look of an open flight deck and prefer to depict them that way.

Some of the other concepts in FT and other games are similarly not valid
from a scientific viewpoint, but we
can quietly put that aside because the game is fun ! I think this is
something we must be careful not to
lose sight of.

I guess it comes down to how much you're willing to put aside your
scientific views in favour of your sense
of gaming fun !

Tony