On 16 May 2006 at 7:39, Pauli Hakala wrote: > It is also possible to get some weight savings and performance > improvements by putting thrusters etc. into pods, but this is not > as radical increase in performance as making everything relevant > easily removable modules, since the pods increase the ships > surface area and thus increase the mass fraction of hull, armor > and surface features somewhat. > > I know what I am writing about here, I have been making different > ship designs for a scifi-setting (3rd edition TL 10-11) of my own > for years, and the importance of access space has become very > obvious for ship performance specs. In practice, going modular > can give a starfighter 3G STL acceleration instead of just 1G > with full maintenance access space.
For modules to be easily removable you still need the components they are part of in pods or surrounded by access spaces, unless you are proposing half disassembling the craft to get the modules out, at which point whether the components are modular or not isn't exactly relevant. Besides, arguably modular construction is just as useful for civilain designs as the same arguments about reduced hull and structure costs apply, and being able to simply rip out a module and plug a new one in will cut down on lost revenues due to repair times considerably, and that's important ofr most civilian applications. -- Rupert Boleyn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
