Re: FT: Squadron Question

textfilter: chose text/plain from a multipart/alternative

We just had external racks as 6 mass for the squadron, but you can't
land and rearm during the battle.
 
You might also have a rule for such ships that they must have at least
one internal bay 6 mass for repairs and maintenance of the fighter
squadrons.


________________________________
From: Patrick Connaughton <ptconn@earthlink.net>
To: "gzg@firedrake.org" <gzg@firedrake.org> 
Cc: "gzg@firedrake.org" <gzg@firedrake.org> 
Sent: Wednesday, 20 February 2013 6:38 AM
Subject: Re: FT: Squadron Question

How would one estimate costing out the external rack?

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 17, 2013, at 7:13 PM, John Tailby <john_tailby@xtra.co.nz> wrote:

> textfilter: chose text/plain from a multipart/alternative
> 
> It seems quite reasonable to design carriers with a larger hanger
capacity than the launch capability.
> 
> most modern aircraft carriers have the ability to store ~50 planes but
the ability to launch only 2-4 at a time.
> 
> in FT terms thats 8 squadrons and one launch bay.
> 
> So maybe the launch bay is 6 mass and the squadron takes up 3 mass.
> 
> Even BSG seemed to have the large flight bays and the capacity to only
launch some squadrons at once. The Cylons didn't seem to have hangers
for the raiders they were attached externally to the hull.
> 
> most of the babylon 5 ships seemed to launch squadrons some at a time.
Only the raider ship seemed to be able to launch all fighters at once
from external racks.
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Ken Hall <khall39@yahoo.com>
> To: "gzg@firedrake.org" <gzg@firedrake.org> 
> Sent: Monday, 18 February 2013 10:39 AM
> Subject: Re: FT: Squadron Question
> 
> textfilter: chose text/plain from a multipart/alternative
> 
> If the need were seen as sufficient, I wouldn't be surprised to see
something like a CAM ship (cf. _Empire Darwin_ and later examples).
Recovering the pilot of a "ditched" fighter in space might be more of a
sporting challenge.
> 
> Best,
> Ken
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Patrick Connaughton <ptconn@earthlink.net>
> To: "gzg@firedrake.org" <gzg@firedrake.org> 
> Cc: "gzg@firedrake.org" <gzg@firedrake.org> 
> Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 8:03 PM
> Subject: Re: FT: Squadron Question
> 
> Expedient 1 shot launches from freighters or launches from static
stations might make for interesting scenarios. 
> 
> Adding functionality to allow multiple fighter launches and retreuvals
from the same bay would requires retooling the base rules or a "house"
rule. 
> 
> Any thoughts?
> 
> Patrick from St Louis, MO
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On Feb 16, 2013, at 4:08 AM, Samuel Penn <sam@glendale.org.uk> wrote:
> 
>> On Saturday 16 Feb 2013 00:02:10 Roger Burton West wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 06:54:18PM -0500, Doc wrote:
>>>> 1 of our group, wants to build a carrier with, only 3 launch bays,
but put
>>>> 1 to 2 extra squadron in per bay at Mass 6, and use them like
"Missile
>>>> launcher bay" and rotate them up, so they can launch and be
recovered at 1
>>>> squadron per launch bay pre turn.
>> 
>>> Not possible under the standard rules.. A fighter squadron needs a
>>> fighter bay in order to be deployed in combat.
>> 
>> I agree with the 'deployed in combat' part. I don't see a problem
with
>> it for just storing fighters, but they won't be in a launchable
state.
>> 
>> If he instead wanted to be able to keep spares to replace losses
between
>> battles (useful in a campaign game) then the 6 mass/squadron seems
reasonable.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Be seeing you,	 Games: http://www.glendale.org.uk/
>> Sam. 		 Posts:
http://www.google.com/profiles/samuel.penn
>> 
>> 
>> 
>