Prev: Re: Scale for SG Next: [FT] Fighter vs PDS & Soapbubbles

RE: Soap bubbles?

From: Michael Brown <mwbrown@s...>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 17:35:09 -0800
Subject: RE: Soap bubbles?

Doesn't help when you open up to vacuum :)  Given that most FT ships are

probably built like aircraft to begin with, a "Soap Bubble" is more on
line 
with a dirigible.

PSB / genre oriented of course.

Michael Brown

-----Original Message-----
From:	Jaime Tiampo
Sent:	Tuesday, February 18, 2003 4:54 PM
To:	gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject:	Re: Soap bubbles?

Mike Hillsgrove wrote:
>
> Not really.  The attendent benefit includes survivability. It does
force you
> to build a ship that a sane individual would be willing to serve in.	
A
> soap bubble is really a cheat, a way to build a killer force that no
> responsible military could ever sanction.  Looking at it from the
> perspective of "my sons and daughters  have to serve on that ship".
Imagine
> if our warships had cardboard walls and were held together by duct
tape.
> Why use steel when wax paper or doped canvass will do?

Strangely enough the move modernly is to thinly armoured warships. Ships
with bulkheads thin enough to let missiles pass through without setting
off the warheads are more survivable then those that have hard armour
and let the missile explode.

Jaime

Prev: Re: Scale for SG Next: [FT] Fighter vs PDS & Soapbubbles