Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Peter Mikulsky)
Subject: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Sun Aug 18 05:05:01 2002
Hello,

I was trying to build a new submarine with a Auxiliary Engine and came
a cross the following line:

CF Consumed: (Body + 1) x 2 or (Hull + Hull Factor) x 2

So, what the Hack is a Hull Factor??
Can someone give me a hint where I can find the Hull Factor(s)?

Thank you.



--
Best regards,
Peter
Message no. 2
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Sun Aug 18 05:30:14 2002
According to Peter Mikulsky, on Sun, 18 Aug 2002 the word on the street was...

> So, what the Hack is a Hull Factor??
> Can someone give me a hint where I can find the Hull Factor(s)?

*searches through Rigger 3* Dammit, I _know_ I've seen the concept of Hull
Factor explained somewhere, but I'm having a hard time finding it again...
Ah, here we are: page 114, in the right-hand column. "Hull Factor" is a
shorthand for (100 x Hull^2).

So in the case of the auxilliary engine you mentioned, if it takes (Hull +
Hull Factor) x 2 CF in a ship-size submarine, in a light commercial sub (Hull
3) it requires (3 + 100 x 3^2) x 2 = 903 x 2 = 1806 CF.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Huh?
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 3
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Peter Mikulsky)
Subject: Re[2]: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Sun Aug 18 09:15:01 2002
Hello Gurth,

Sunday, August 18, 2002, 11:35:08 AM, you wrote:

> *searches through Rigger 3* Dammit, I _know_ I've seen the concept of Hull

<snip>

Thank you for that page reference. I have found it now.
I assume that most of the subs in R3 have all ready an Auxiliary
Engine.

--
Best regards,
Peter
Message no. 4
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Re[2]: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Sun Aug 18 12:40:01 2002
According to Peter Mikulsky, on Sun, 18 Aug 2002 the word on the street was...

> Thank you for that page reference. I have found it now.
> I assume that most of the subs in R3 have all ready an Auxiliary
> Engine.

If it isn't listed in the chassis stats as a standard fitting, then IMHO it's
safe to assume they don't. After all, a nuclear submarine, for example,
wouldn't need an auxilliary engine.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Huh?
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998
Message no. 5
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Re[2]: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Mon Aug 19 06:05:01 2002
>From: Gurth <Gurth@******.nl>
>If it isn't listed in the chassis stats as a standard fitting, then IMHO
>it's
>safe to assume they don't. After all, a nuclear submarine, for example,
>wouldn't need an auxilliary engine.

According to Tom Clancy (who admittedly isn't an absolute reference but most
people who are can't answer the question so...) Boomers at least have
auxillary engines, outboard motors running for 3-5 knots. Hey it makes sense
to have something in the way of redundancy, if the prop shaft burrs or the
bearings get damaged you still want the sub to be able to do its job while
you also need to take the main prop offline to clear the problem up.

_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com
Message no. 6
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Mon Aug 19 07:25:01 2002
In article <02081818333000.00602@***************>, Gurth
<Gurth@******.nl> writes
>If it isn't listed in the chassis stats as a standard fitting, then IMHO it's
>safe to assume they don't. After all, a nuclear submarine, for example,
>wouldn't need an auxilliary engine.

Of course it does - what happens if you have to scram the reactor for
any reason? Even nuclear submarines have auxiliary power.

On the Trafalgar-class submarines, there's a large battery bank which
(among other things) powers a podded, traversable electric motor (used
to help in docking, as well as for emergency power).

The batteries are part of the boat's power supply and are kept topped up
by generators driven by the reactor: if the reactor's down, then there's
a diesel generator (need to be at or near the surface). For redundancy
and flexibility, the batteries can provide either direct DC power or
(via motor-generators in some boats, inverters in others) AC.

(Been a while since I was working on this stuff, so forgive any errors)
>

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 7
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Valeu John EMFA)
Subject: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Mon Aug 19 10:10:01 2002
> <Gurth@******.nl> writes
> >If it isn't listed in the chassis stats as a standard fitting, then IMHO
> it's
> >safe to assume they don't. After all, a nuclear submarine, for example,
> >wouldn't need an auxilliary engine.
>
> Of course it does - what happens if you have to scram the reactor for
> any reason? Even nuclear submarines have auxiliary power.
>
> On the Trafalgar-class submarines, there's a large battery bank which
> (among other things) powers a podded, traversable electric motor (used
> to help in docking, as well as for emergency power).
>
> The batteries are part of the boat's power supply and are kept topped up
> by generators driven by the reactor: if the reactor's down, then there's
> a diesel generator (need to be at or near the surface). For redundancy
> and flexibility, the batteries can provide either direct DC power or
> (via motor-generators in some boats, inverters in others) AC.
>
> (Been a while since I was working on this stuff, so forgive any errors
>
[Valeu John EMFA]
No.... you hit the nail squarely on the head. Kinda surprised
too.....
>
Message no. 8
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Lone Eagle)
Subject: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Mon Aug 19 10:40:00 2002
>From: "Paul J. Adam" <ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk>
>On the Trafalgar-class submarines, there's a large battery bank which
>(among other things) powers a podded, traversable electric motor (used to
>help in docking, as well as for emergency power).
<Snip™>
>(Been a while since I was working on this stuff, so forgive any errors)

You worked on the Trafalgar class? Isn't there the tiniest problem with the
Official Secrets Act when it comes to revealing the workings of British
warships? I know that a lot of stuff can be inferred and deduced from
information in the public domain but that is very different from straight
out saying something (or writing it). Some of the people I work with work or
used to work on projects which may or may not be related to the current
subject and they have to be very very careful about what they say.

_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Message no. 9
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Paul J. Adam)
Subject: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Mon Aug 19 12:15:01 2002
In article <F98I7jkriVpRsjnqKwt0001653e@*******.com>, Lone Eagle
<loneeagle2061@*******.com> writes
>>From: "Paul J. Adam" <ShadowRN@********.demon.co.uk>
>>On the Trafalgar-class submarines, there's a large battery bank which
>>(among other things) powers a podded, traversable electric motor (used
>>to help in docking, as well as for emergency power).
><Snip>
>>(Been a while since I was working on this stuff, so forgive any errors)
>
>You worked on the Trafalgar class? Isn't there the tiniest problem with
>the Official Secrets Act when it comes to revealing the workings of
>British warships?

Depends what. The above has been described in Navy News and elsewhere.
If I were to start telling you details of the sonar fit, then there'd be
problems.

There was a very detailed description of the Spearfish torpedo
powerplant on-line, written by Gordon Osborne (the design authority).
Told you everything about how it worked without giving away a single
useful fact.

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 10
From: shadowrn@*********.com (Gurth)
Subject: Rigger 3 Question
Date: Mon Aug 19 13:05:01 2002
According to Paul J. Adam, on Mon, 19 Aug 2002 the word on the street was...

> Of course it does - what happens if you have to scram the reactor for
> any reason? Even nuclear submarines have auxiliary power.

I stand corrected -- submarines aren't my ara of interest :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Huh?
-> Probably NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Triangle Virtuoso <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://plastic.dumpshock.com <-

GC3.12: GAT/! d- s:- !a>? C++(---) UL+ P(+) L++ E W--(++) N o? K w(--)
O V? PS+ PE@ Y PGP- t- 5++ X(+) R+++$ tv+(++) b++@ DI- D+ G+ e h! !r y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Rigger 3 Question, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!