Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: "D. Ghost" <dghost@****.COM>
Subject: Re: Vehicle Storage Requirements (Boy this is getting long :)
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 1998 22:22:42 -0600
On Thu, 26 Nov 1998 16:15:39 EST Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM> writes:
>In a message dated 11/26/98 3:18:48 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
>dghost@****.COM writes:
>> On Thu, 26 Nov 1998 13:06:30 EST Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
>> >The new formula are as follows :
>> > Drone Storage Requirement (Body 1+) = (Body)^2 + (Total CF)
>> > Vehicle Storage Requirement (Body 1+) = (Body)^3 + (Total CF)

>> Why a seperate formula for vehicle and drones? The only difference
>> between drones

>The reason I chose to have different formula is because the design of a
>and a manned vehicle are different. A manned vehicle has space added
into it
>to take into account people and the things that they do while within a
>(like move around and such), whereas in a drone you don't need to worry
>some of those things.

A pretty tall (2m) human of medium build takes up less than 3 CF, yet
bucket seats take up 6 CF, AND if you think about it, most of the extra
space is waist up room. IMO, that accounts for the room that "you don't
need to worry about" in a drone. In fact, think about gutting a car and
turning it into a drone ... It doesn't suddenlty shrink, does yet? yet
the volume available is the same. Now, if you want to toss in some room
for people to move in/out of the vehicle while it is in storage, that's
different ... but even then, change the power in the equation is a bit

>> Let's compare the results with some vehicles (I used as many electric
>> powerplants as possible in order to disregard fuel as much as
>> :):

>I was intending for the drone formula to work on drones, though I am
>of expanding it to include any vehicle which does not have an enclosure
>people to transported in (like bikes and some other types of vehicles.

In those cases, I'd just exclude most of the CF requirements for the
seats in the calculations...

>> Vehicle Engine Body CF Storage*
>> Scooter Electric 2 6 14/10
>> Sedan Electric 3 30 57/39
>> L Crawl Electric 2 2 10/6
>> Airliner Jet 9 612 1341/693
>> Jet Fighter Jet 7 164 507/213
>> FW UAV L Jet 3 5.4 32.4/14.4
>> Tbird Jet 6 174 390/210
>> VT UAV L Jet 3 4.4 21.4/13.4
>> Zeppelin Electric 8 60 572/124
>> Mini-blimp Electric 2 1 9/5
>> Anthroform ? 2 4 12/8
>> *Format Note: The first number is using the "Vehicle" formula, the
>> is using the "drone" formula.
>> Hmmm ... Okay, IMO, the "drone" formula is a pretty good
>> of how much space a vehicle takes up ... except perhaps for the
>> I would reccomend use the "drone" formula for vehicles except for
>> fixed-wing aircraft not equiped with folding or swept wingsand
>> without folding rotors (where the rotors don't fold like folding
>> but rather lay over each other.) and/or folding wings as appropriate.

>I agree, though perhaps it could be said that in a vehicle with the
folded /
>swept / retracted wings that it to is considered to have a Body of 1
less to
>account for the reduction in overall size.

I don't know about that ... I think that has the potential of making too
much of an impact.

>> >There are also special cases when a drone or vehicle can also be
>> >or
>> >collapsed into a much smaller, economical shape. And when doing
this, treat
>> >the vehicle as if having a Body value one (1) less than it already

>> That would make the zepplin & mini-blimp 403/109 CF and 2/2 CF (see
>> format note above), respectively.

>True, a zeppelin could be collapsed, but it would also take a frag of a
>time to put back together again too.

Well, if you want to stow it for a long period of time, you might want to
defliate it ... but actually, I think that's more for blimps ...
Zepplins, IIRC, have a rigid balloon thingy (technical term).

>And on the topic of the mini-blimp, the
>blimp would take up 5 CF (2^2 + 1)when inflated, and 2 CF (1^2 + 1) when

Uhm ... yes, that's what I said. I included the Mini-Blimp in my
calculations in the chart and here ...

>> Nope. The mechanical limbs are 2 CF each (ie, 4 CF for the pair) and
>> everything else is is 0 CF so it's:
>> (Body)^2 + (Total CF)
>> (2)^2+(4) = 8 CF

>True, I forgot about them. Thanks for correcting me. But then again,
>considering that an anthroform is different from a walker drone in that
it has
>mechanical limbs already does mean that it does take up additional

If you don't count the CF for the mechanical limbs, then you souldn't
count the 4 bucket seats in a sedan because they come with the chassis

>Okay, mea culpa, but getting back, even standard armor does not take CF
>up in a vehicle, as the armor is fitted within the vehicle itself, in
>areas which either have nothing in them, or the armor is designed to fit
>within the confined spaces.

Think about what you just said ... it goes into unused spaces within the
vehicle ... That would constitute taking up CF (since those un-used
spaces would become used by the armor) and since standard armor doesn't
take up CF, that can't be the case. Standard armor has to fitted on the
outside of vehicle ... if it is internal, it becomes concealed armor.
now, what it COULD constiute is structural reinforcements. However, the
same would be included in concealed armor and thus the 2 CF per point of
armor must be above and beyond structural reinforcement.

>> >>For example, I'd say the formula for storing an uninflated blimp
would be:
>> >>0.5+(Body * 10)+(Total CF)+(2*non-concealed armor) CF

>> >> Perhaps removing the base 0.5 CF could be a design option.

>> This, btw, was tossed in because of the Bumblebee drone in RA:S
>> I still don't have that book.)

>Get the book if you can Alfredo, it is wonderful, detailing what happens
>you rely on technology too much.

I plan on it. I just need to wait until a friend of mine can give me a
ride to Phoenix (I don't really want to take the bus there ...).

>RA is the Titanic for the Sixth Age.

I thought you were trying to convince me to buy it? ;P~


You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
Message no. 2
From: K in the Shadows <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject: Re: Vehicle Storage Requirements (Boy this is getting long :)
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 02:03:36 EST
In a message dated 11/26/1998 11:35:03 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
dghost@****.COM writes:

<snip obviously huge, long winded conversation about needless space and
"balloon thingy's"> (HEY! Keep that inflatable thingie away from me...)

> >RA is the Titanic for the Sixth Age.
> I thought you were trying to convince me to buy it? ;P~
He is, but, just to NOT spoil the story line for ya, I won't mention anything
about the Girl.... |-)


Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Vehicle Storage Requirements (Boy this is getting long :), you may also be interested in:


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.