Prev: Re: [ST] Some more thoughts on System Thrust | Next: Re: [FT] WotW #11 Stealth Systems - review |

Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 18:25:53 +0100

Subject: Re: [FT] WotW #11 Stealth Systems - review

```
In message <628148a24a.Charles@cableol.co.uk>
Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@cableol.co.uk> wrote:
> In message
<6B3C0EEAB4FED3119F5F009027DC5E9E01D7335D@spacemsg3.jhuapl.edu>
> "Izenberg, Noam" <Noam.Izenberg@jhuapl.edu> wrote:
>
> > > Level of Stealth Effective Range Multiplier Fighter/Missile
> > Lock-On
> > > 1 x1.33 4.5 mu
> > > 2 x1.5 4 mu
> > > 3 x2 3 mu
> >
> > THis makes thestep between stealth 2 and 3 larger than the step
between 1
> > and 2. A range multiplier of x2 should be the equivalent of stealth
"5".
> > (step 1-2 = 13% improvement , step 2-3 = 33% improvement).
> >
> > Noam
> >
[snip my previous answer]
Well, with the current range multipliers; the steps are as follows:
Stealth Level Range Multiplier Difference
None x1
1 x1.33 x1.33
2 x1.5 x1.125
3 x2 x1.33
So the step between 2 and 3 is the same as the step between none and 1.
Changing the range multipliers thus:
Stealth Level Range Multiplier Difference
1 x1.25 x1.25
2 x1.5 x1.2
3 x2 x1.33
With a MASS of 5% of hull mass per level gives a cost of 10 times the
MASS of the stealth system.
Missile/Fighter 'Lock-On' ranges are as follows:
Stealth Level Cinematic Vector
none 6 3
1 5 2.5
2 4 2
3 3 1.5
OTOH, I'm increasingly in favour of extending the Holofield concept to
embrace stealth.
Charles
```

Prev: Re: [ST] Some more thoughts on System Thrust | Next: Re: [FT] WotW #11 Stealth Systems - review |