Re: [FT\DS2] Fleet and Army sizes for games

At 06:05 PM 8/17/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Reconfigurable warships should be more expensive than standard
>because of the increased access points needed in the wiring,cabling,
>ducting,plumbing and structural systems to allow them to be
>configurable.
>The reconfigurable ship is more fragile because it is designed to come
>apart.  Lastly, the reconfigurable ship is less reliable because there
>are many more things to go wrong, but they are easier to fix because
>of all that accessability.
>
>So a reconfigurable hull is massx2 instead of massx1, must set
>aside 10% of mass for accessways/connection points, and add 1 to the
>die for threshold and damage control rolls.
>
>There is a reason that no wet navy has tried this, even though it is
>nice on paper.

Hmm... check out the SSN-774 Virginia-class sub.  I don't think it's
quite
as modular as you're talking -- no sail in to port to quick swap a
module
-- but it does sound like they designed the sub with more modularity in
mind than normal.

See "http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/nssn.htm", about halfway down
the
page.

					Aaron