Re: Fighter bay design (was: FT-Fighters and bays)

If you direct the blast away from the COG of the carrier, the bay could
be designed to merely blow out the floor, which would be a piece of
carrier shell and totally irrelevant to combat
operations - not very goodstructurally, but in the middle of a firefight
that isn't an issue.

As far as the control and pilot issues, I did say that the deciding
factor was whether or not the fighter could be brought in under control.

As far as bringing damaged fighters into the bay, my assumption is that
as long as the crew is safe, the fighter should wait. There are bound to
be more fighters than bays, and the carrier will
not want to tie up refill bays for active fighters during combat. As I
said, the damaged fighters won't sink, so just let them wait until
later.

> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 13:55:56 -0400
> From: "Thomas Barclay" <kaladorn@fox.nstn.ca>
> Subject: Carrier Ops
>
> But no one seems worried about the fighters.
> In the real world, you lose a $20M fighter you
> didn't need to lose, and you'll get your @ss
> kicked by the Navy I think.
>
> Plus in combat ops, recovering EVERY viable
> ship should be important.
>
> Second, if the pilot is injured, and his suit self-
> seals, he could still be dying. The need to get
> him back aboard (his training cost $2M!) and
> into the surgery FAST is going to be very high.
>
>

<snip of otherwise excellent commentary>

=====
Edward Lipsett
Intercom, Ltd.
Fukuoka, Japan
translation@intercomltd.com
http://www.intercomltd.com
Fax: +81-92-712-9220