Re: FT-Fighters and launch bays

I could be wrong, but I think the rules were changed
to avoid the x turns of pre-engagement dancing while
both sides gradually deployed their fighter groups.

Most spaceship carriers do have such a parallel
system, so maybe that's why they chose this system
as the norm. The B5 Omega Destroyer has a 
simultaneous launch, single recovery system, as
does the Battlestar Galactica, the Above and Beyond
carrier, etc.

Our carriers are dependent on the steam catapults
and required deck space for recoveries. In space,
this wouldn't be necessary as the fighters could just
be dropped (or pushed) out. So, the bottleneck that
characterizes modern carrier operations doesn't
really seem to be a factor in space.

--- Bif Smith <bif@bifsmith.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
> I was thinking of my post about deployed SMR pods,
> and I came up with this
> idea for fighters. The fighter bays can be
> considered as the launch bays
> (after all, a ship can launch all it`s fighters at
> once), we could have the
> fighters carried as cargo in cargo bays, with the
> fighter bays use for just
> launching/landing/rearming fighters, and the
> fighters transfered from the
> cargo bays to the launch bays when launching is
> required. After all, I don`t
> think a present carrier can launch all it`s fighters
> at once, it requires
> them to be transfered from the hangers to the
> catapults. If we did this, a
> CVL could replace 2 of it`s launch bays with cargo
> space for 3 fighter
> groups, increasing it`s fighters to 5 groups, but
> only be able to
> launch/land/rearm 2 fighter groups at once.
> 
> Any comments?
> 
> BIF
> 
> "Yorkshire born, yorkshire bred,
> strong in arms, thick in head"
> 
> 
> 
> 

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/