Re: More Fighter questions

Re: Activating "crated" fighters

Roger Books:
> I don't find it hard to believe at all.  You have to bring up each
> piece of electronics, test it and verify no problems.  Check
pressurization
> on the cabin.  Provide whatever is needed for fuel.  Verify the
ejection
> seat, etc etc.

There are certainly a number of objections to the idea, but I can't buy
this
one inan SF setting. If the thing was designed to be spaceworthy and
combat
capable, its desgned to take glancing blows from weapons and still be
spaceworthy. If it can't be "assemebled" (and that could be as simple as
unfolding the wings on a carrier-based fighter today) and checked in a
half-hour power-up, it doesn't belong in service, IMHO.

> Remember, space is a much more hostile environment than anything you
> are used to dealing with, and all you need is one defect from the
> manufacturer to kill the person flying the beast.  I wouldn't be at
> all surprised to see an 8 to 10 hour warmup including live tests of
> the engines....You don't just take a spacecraft out of mothballs and
throw
it into
> combat.

This (and other comments) talk about truly "crated" - as in in a box in
several pieces - and never before assmbled or tested fighter. In that
case
I'd agree, but If I were storing "replacement" fighters on-board a
carrier,
they'd be well broken in and at least mostly assembled - the
cost/balance
being storage space vs. activation time. Pack it as small as possible in
the
space available, but still 1 mass per fighter. These are subtleties,
easily
swallowed in PSB.

Again, I think it would have to be scenario specific - probably
involving
the heroic efforts of an outmatched carrier... 
Carrier with minimal escort caught by attack group must get additional
fighters out or be meat.

JTL:
>...The problem is one of divergent views; one group thinks of packing
cases
with fighters
> inside and the other thinks of fighters in an area off the main hanger
deck/bay.  

Bingo. Put me in the latter camp.