RE: Lightweight Fighters

>Subject:	Re: Lightweight Fighters
><snip>
>Dean Gundberg wrote:
><snip> 
>>  Lightweight Fighters
><snip> 
>>  Any comments?
>> 
>>  Dean
>>  <dean.gundberg@bcbsnd.com>
>
>Dean,
>     Comment, 1 EA, as requested.
>
>One could make a good case for the current FT 'fast fighter' as 
>a lightweight fighter. (I.E. higher thurst to weight ratio than 
>the standard fighter.)
>
>The mass number in the construction of ships includes the fighter
>and all support equipment/weapons/crew/spares, the actual weight/
>mass of the fighter is almost zero when constructing the ship.
>
>Good thought, but I think your covered.
>John L.

taking into account the thrust to weight ratio and the speeds attainable
by 'light fighter/fast fighters', couldn't it be surmised that one of
these 'light fighters is more specifically designed for dog-fighting.  I
know the rules are already in place for that, but could they possibly
get a better manueverability bonus?  Also, being 'light', wouldn't they
also act more as fast 'interceptors' rather fighters and have
restrictions on carryable payloads?

just my thoughts.

Gil
The guy with no tag line
(haung@emh10.eustis.army.mil)