Previous Message: Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :)
Next Message: Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :)
Month Index: September, 2007
From: Charles Taylor <nerik@?????????.?????.??.uk> Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 08:35:37 -0700 Subject: Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :)
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007 14:20:10 +0100, Steven <steven.james.1@??????????.??.uk> wrote: >9461 cubic feet, not including wings, wing roots and other such, only >the volume enclosed by the main parts of the hull itself :) > Hmm, Thats... 3.5 Tons (Using 1 SJ ton = 100 cubic yards) 7 Tons (Using 1 SJ Ton = 50 cubic yards) or, for Hackjammer 9 1/2 Tons (Using 1 HJ Ton = 100 cubic feet) Just a bit on the small size :-) Ok, the wings & wing-roots should add a bit more volume, and when you say "the volume enclosed by the main parts of the hull itself", is that the internal volume, or the volume including the thickness of the hull? At the size it is, it still looks good, and would make a nice scoutship/courier. Charles
Previous Message: Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :)
Next Message: Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :)
Month Index: September, 2007
| Subject | From | Date (UTC) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Steven | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Charles Taylor | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Michael Billard | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Michael Billard | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Loki | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Loki | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Michael Billard | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Steven | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Charles Taylor | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Charles Taylor | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Steven | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Charles Taylor | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Michael Billard | |||
| Re: Rebuilding the Man-O-War :) | Steven |