Re: weapon ranges

Greets to all,

In our last episode, Maximilian said:
>Static said:
>>	On the ground their's friction -- with the air, and eventually
>>ground -- to drop the range of a projectile.  In space, it just keeps
>>on going until it hits something.  How about this:  catapults/ballistae
>>don't have much "power" difference between their sizes, but the mass
>>of the projectile increases more.  For example, let's say that a light
>>catapult gives 10y energy to a shot massing z, a medium catapult gives
>>13y energy to a shot massing 2z, and a heavy catapult gives 15y energy
>>to a shot massing 3z.  As can be seen, each heavier shot has less energy
>>per unit mass for velocity, but still has a higher impact energy, IIRC.
>>On a planet, the lower velocity is what shortens the range.
>
>Yes. No, wait! [trying to remember] Didn't the original poster say that
>ground-based projectiles have longer ranges for heavier weapons? Which
>implies a higher velocity, right?

	But, um, SJ heavy weapons are built differently.  Yeah, that's
the ticket... ;)

	Personally, I chalk it up to TSR's want of a light, long-range
weapon and a heavy, short-range pounder.  Long-range heavy guns would
take away the only advantage that "cool" fighter-type ships have.  Trying
to anylize beyond that makes my head hurt.  Come to think of it, most
discussion on here of late have been making my head hurt.  I need a
vacation... :)

	You're right though.  I must've been high on something when I
wrote that stuff above.  It made sense at the time...

-Static, of the Aching Head tribe

--
       "Follow your dreams, you can reach your goals.  I'm living proof.
        Beefcake.  Beefcake!"  -Cartman, "South Park"

                 --==<< http://www.gwr.com/~eshum >>==--