Volker:

Hey!  Thanks for the response!
I'm pretty much in agreement, but within a G:Space framework, how does one 
reflect the differences in technological aims, as you call it?  FrEx, looking 
at airliner engines vs. jet fighter engines.  I can tell the difference, but 
how can that be represented in two starships using GURPS-like build rules?

Would you make a provision-- at a specific TL, an M-Drive can sacrifice thrust 
in exchange for decreased cost and/or improved reliability?  And/or increases 
in thrust/unit M-Drive can be had at a given TL (up to 50%) for decreases in 
reliability, increases in cost?

-vk



 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Volker Bach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I don't think that works. A societal TL reflects what that society is capable 
> of, not necessarily what is general practice. Thus, a society that has 
> reached TL8 on its own would be TL8 no matter whether it actually used TL7 
> engines in private cars or TL5 tin openers in its kitchens. 
> 
> In any society where the government has significant control of technology, 
> its 
> agents will be equipped with cutting edge tech. Imagine, on the other hand, a 
> Cyberpunk setting where the corporations give *their* agents the best gear. 
> Would you advocate a corporate/general TL split? I wouldn't. 
> 
> Now, if for some reason the military, and only the military, had access to a 
> technology that was not just the most advanced, but based on breakthroughs 
> the rest of society is unaware of, you could justify a split TL. But unless 
> those UFOs at Area 51 and the HAARP orbital mind control rays are real, we 
> don't qualify IMO. The latest U-Boat design uses better fuel cells than the 
> local bus, but it's fuel cells. An F-22 uses jet engines that pack more power 
> into smaller space than an A 380, but they're jet engines. And I'm not at all 
> sold on the idea that the latest offerings of Boeing and Airbus are less 
> advanced than the latest warplanes. They just aim for different 
> specifications. 
> 
> What I would do is allow for differences within a TL. Things can be built for 
> low price, ease of maintenance, ruggedness, energy efficiency, power, 
> compactness, emission standards, or a combination thereof, and that will be 
> reflected in the price and weight/size. I don't think anyone still builds TL6 
> or even early TL7 engines, anywhere.
> 
> Volker
> 
> 
> Am Sonntag, 14. Mai 2006 19:16 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> > Hello all:
> >
> > Has anyone looked at TLs in society from a military vs. civilian setting? 
> > Or do we feel this is already built-in by available equipment?
> >
> > For example, is the relative technology the same for the Boeing 787 as it
> > is for the F-22 Raptor?  Comparing the same parts, of course.  Engines,
> > airframe, materials.  Or is it more reasonable in creating a new society to
> > say that Military likely has access to more advanced technology in certain
> > areas?  Certainly weapons/armor are available to civilians-- but it's rare,
> > and illegal.
> >
> > I'm especially looking at an advanced sci-fi society relative to (of
> > course) starships.  Is the Navy Destroyer really going to have the same
> > M-Drive technology that the Luxury Liner is?  Or is the Liner likely to use
> > the cheaper version from the TL-1?  In our society, one could argue that
> > M-Drive 'technology' is the same, but one is for fuel economy and
> > reliability and the other is for sheer thrust to weight and high
> > performance.   If there is going to be disparity, in what areas do you guys
> > think it will be?  How else can one address the differences one sees in RL
> > examples of similar technology application?
> >
> > I guess I wasn't thrilled with the Interstellar Wars treatment on this
> > subject.  I liked the 'Van Rijn' design concept from Space 3e better.
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> > -vk
> >
> > --
> > "We are not permitted to choose
> > the frame of our destiny, but what
> > we put into it is ours."  --Dag
> > Hammersjold
> >
> > "When the rate of change outside
> > an organization exceeds the rate
> > of change inside it, then it is
> > not a matter of if, but when that
> > organization will fail."  --Jack
> > Welch
> >
> > "Just keep swimming/just keep
> > swimming/just keep swimming
> > swimming swimming..." --Dorie from
> > Finding Nemo
> >
> >  -------------- Original message ----------------------
> > From: "Jay P. Hailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > Did anyone save a copy?  I cannot find it anywhere.
> > >
> > > Jay ~Meow!~
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
> > > http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
> > http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
> 
> 
>       
> 
>       
>               
> ___________________________________________________________ 
> Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
> _______________________________________________
> GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l


_______________________________________________
GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]>
http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l

Reply via email to