Re: FT in a Fluid

Allan Goodall wrote:

>Here is a set of first thoughts:
> 
>Movement - I could run this as a naval game. I have a concept in mind
>already where ships would have a maximum speed and maximum
>acceleration. Is this necessary, or would a vector game work if the
>"fluid" had it's own modifier on the vector?

If your fluid has any density and viscosity to speak of, the "vector
modifier" will depend to a very high degree on the shape of the ship
and its facing relative to its course - so much so that you'll
effectively end up with something which looks very similar to
Cinematic. Unless, of course, your ships are spherical :-/

Yes, today's 4th-generation fighters can point their noses in
directions other than the one they are flying, but only for very short
periods; you get the same effect by allowing "fixed-forward" weapons to
fire in the entire (F) arc.

>Beams - Beams would remain relatively the same. They are already
>adversely affected by range.
> 
> Pulse Torps - Use as a "fire and forget" torpedo? I don't think
there's >any system in FT akin to the modern wire-guided torpedo.

Sounds more like some variant of MT missiles than P-torps, no?

>Fighters - I can't really see using fighters, though I've been
>considering a weapon that is a cross between a fighter squadron and >a
submunition pack.

>From your replies to Laserlight, I'd say that you're talking about
Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (or, more accurately, Unmanned Combat
Underwater Vehicles). UUVs already exist (used for mine-clearing and
similar tasks); UCUVs are under development (may be in service already,
but in that case the service in question has managed to keep it very
secret <g>).
 
>PDS - Not exactly something you find on submarines, but is there any
>reason they wouldn't be used in this kind of futuristic environment?

Anti-torpedo torpedoes are under development...

Later, 

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."