Johannes replied to me:
> Based on common sense, rather then actual knowledge i would guess, that 
> ramming would work different for differently sized vehicles, as it does 
> not seem all invovled factors scale easily, with if vehicles of the same 
> size hit each other, they make less relative damage the smaller they are.

There is square-cube. 
 
> Matchbox cars barely damage each other, cars have minor damage, oil 
> tankers sink each other.

A matchbox car is about 1:64. If the weight was to scale, it would
be less than one gram.

> For a ramming submarine and propably for some exotic surface ships as 
> well, you could come up with a different design, where a ram is mounted 
> like an outrigger, the actual submarine passes under the attacked ship, 
> and the ram rips off at a predeterminated breaking point. That should keep
> the attacker from being damaged, and put some max damage on the ramming 
> damage. No idea about specific values though and how realistic it actually
> is. 

Or a ram on a spur with shock absorbers and a predetermined break
point (Sollbruchstelle, it seems there is no English word) on the
spur. VXi26 for a TL8 model.

> Sticking mines to a ship that way, likely is more efficient. But i 
> could imagine it as steam punk design.

Spar torpedo?
 
> Regarding Victoria-Camperdown, according to the wikipedia article, pretty 
> much all the officers on both ships seem to have known, that the maneuver 
> was stupid, but they thought, that the admiral, who ordered it, had 
> something up his sleeve and thus it would make sense in the end. So it 
> seems to have more to do with information distribution systems, then with 
> sailing.

The Admiral (the most senior officer) screwed up and nobody was
sure enough to protest loudly.

What would you do if somebody told you to run a car into a wall?

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

Reply via email to