Re: Re: [FT] OU Defence Force Website now error checked and

> John Atkinson wrote:
> 
> >Not bad, but there are no real capital ships.
> 
> That might be because Alan is aware that the OU is a relatively minor
power
> and therefore isn't attempting to create a four- (or was it
five-)planet
> colonial power which can somehow afford to field a battleline
outmassing
> l'Astromarine des FSE ;-)

Correct.

> Or, it could be because - as Alan suggests on his homepage - the OUDFN
uses
> NAC- or NAC-derived designs for their capitals.

Also correct. In addition, some very good designs (Kosciusko class
carrier etc) have been made on others websites, based on NAC hulls. The
OU shipyards may not be capable of building anything larger than about
mass 100 too, and must rely on export hulls which they then refit for
anything larger.

> Or, it could be because the ships Alan has given stats for are the
ones for
> which there are models commercially available right now.

3 out of 3.

> The choice is yours <g>

 
> BTW, Alan - what happened to the note about the BORON program
originally
> being called "Modular Operational Refit Of Navy"? ;-)

Yes, I'll insert that one back in. Thanks for reminding me. BTW there
was a piece of kit in Royal Australian Navy service (on subs) called the
"Automated Plotting and Charting Table" that was originally called the
"Combined Underwater Navigation Table".