Re: [SG/DS] Orbital assault was RE: Troop Quality was RE: [SG2] weapons

> It need not be Orbital Defense Systems (name change to avoid conflict
with
> PDS) -- it might just be that systems designed to shoot through vacuum
> don't work too well through atmosphere.  IIRC you want a
neutral-charge
> particle beam for vacuum, for instance, but a charged particle
accelerator
> weapon works better through air.  Ortillery ships would then be the
ones
> fitted with CPAWs.

Actually, this is not true.  JTAS #20 on page 40 has a very good artical
on
Spinal Mounts, especially the differences between NPAW's ad CPAW's.  It
very
strongly implies that you should be able to switch every NPAW into CPAW
mode
when need for orbital bombardment. But please, don't take my word for
it.
TNE Fire Fussion and Steel, page 112, left column, center, "Thus, N-PAWs
are
the space weapons and C-PAWs the ground weapons.  But because a neutral
particle beam can produce charged particle beams simply by disengaging
its
particle neutralizer, the N-PAWs is effectively a dual purpose weapon,
as it
can be set to fire beams appropriate to either enviroment."  TNE-FFS
goes on
to state the requirments of using C-PAWs and dual purpose N-PAWs for
orbital
bombardment.  You have be in a low orbit (upper atmosphere) to use them,
otherwise the beam scatters before entering the atmosphere.  This means
all
beam batteries on FT ships can be used for orbital bombardment if the
ship
is in a low orbit (currently undefined in FT)

> Of course, some of us don't *have* an atmosphere, so ODS will be a
> necessity.

Well that just makes orbital bombardment all the easier, because you
don't
have to enter a low orbit.  See the TNE Fire, Fussion, and Steel page
112
for more details.

ias