Re: Brigade's SemFed designs

Oerjan Ohlson wrote:

> > > CAPITAL SHIPS
> > >
> > > Ben Gurion Class SDN is NPV 611, not 610.
> >
> > Hull mass 176 = 176 pts
> > Hull Integrity 3 (average) = 53 (52.8) mass = 106 pts
> > Main Engines 2 = 18 (17.6) mass = 36 pts
> > FTL = 18 (17.6) mass = 36 pts
> > Armour 9 = 9 mass = 18 pts
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Here's the difference - well, half of it, anyway. It says 8 armour on
> the web page (at least it did last when I looked at it two days ago).
>
> > Screens 2 = 18 (17.6) mass = 54 pts
> > PDS x 4 = 4 mass = 12 pts
> > FCS x 4 = 4 mass = 16 pts
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> And here's the other half: the web page says 5 FCS. I'm still in
error;
> the design on the web page should be 612 pts :-/

Aha, so you are fallible after all ! ;-)

I think I'll go with the 4 FCS / 9 armour version. I like lots of FCS on
most ships (no point having loads of weapons if your one-and-only fire
control is kaput) but four should be plenty - don't often fire at more
than
two targets anyway.

> It's just that you describe the Mass 48 hangar on the Merkava as a
> "hangar space-32" :-/

To be corrected ... I'll use the Merkava convention (ie usable hanger
space
as opposed to hull space occupied).

> OK. Remove 5 Cargo space for Partial streamlining, cost 126?

I'd say yes, but I've just read Thomas Barclay's complete redesign of
the
ship so I might go with that - once you've proof-read the design, of
course
:-)

> Somehow it doesn't feel right to me that commercial shipping lines -
> *Jewish* commercial shipping lines, who have an age-old reputation to
> live up (down?) to ;-) - would shell out a lot of cash for a system
> which doesn't provide any real protection, when they could get at
least
> far better protection for a lower cost... <g>

Moving dangerously close to stereotyping there ...

However, consider me convinced.

> > Thanks for all that (I think).
>
> <g> I did the same for Jon, though in that case it was prior to
> publishing rather than afterwards  <g>
>

Most mistakes were due to errors in typing / copying, rather than
calculations (although you have helped me knock a couple of bugs out of
the
spreadsheet). What I really need is a facility that guarantees no errors
between spreadsheet design and HTML output ... have to get to grips with
Excels HTML exporter.

Cheers

Tony