Search SJML Archives! (Powered by Google)

Previous Message: Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?
Next Message: New and Updated Spheres
Month Index: October, 2007


From:     Adam Miller <night_druid3000@?????.com>
Date:     Tue, 9 Oct 2007 15:53:28 -0700
Subject:  Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?
--- Charles Taylor <nerik@?????????.?????.??.uk>
wrote:

> Fortunately, I have the book here: 1 HJ ton is
> equivalent to a 10' × 10' × 10' cube. 1 ton means
> enough air for 1 man-sized creature for 4
> months.
>
> From calculating the volumes of their ships, at
> least the easy to calculate ones, like the beholder
> doomship (a cone) does tend to match the ships
> volume assuming 1 ton is a 10' cube.

> Divide by 10×10×10 to get volume in HJ tons = 83.78
> tones.
> Actual listed tonnage = 80 tons - which is close
> enough.

It should; I was very careful to make the ships fairly
internally consistent in terms of tonnage.  We went
with the 1 ton = 1,000 cf because of all the various
systems, that one matches closest to most classic SJ
ships, barring exceptions like scorpions, nautaloids,
& mindspiders.  Using that system, ships like the MoW,
hammership, & squid work out to their listed tonnage,
to a reasonable margin of error (and ignoring the fact
that most of said ships are "missing" a few decks,
like the dragonfly & tradesmen ;) ).

I've found that no matter what you do, there just is
no system that will work for all SJ ships; the
tonnages are too damned inconsistent.  A lot of "big"
ships end up not much more than boats (scorpion,
mindspider, nightwolf), while some smaller ships end
up behemoths (nautaloid, werewolf).  And if you use
the artwork as a guide, it gets even worse...the
whaleship is 90 tons, but the deckplans make it much
bigger, and the art makes it insanely huge.  From the
number of window rows, it should rival the size of our
largest cruise liners! :O

Adam



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Take the Internet to Go: Yahoo!Go puts the Internet in your pocket: mail, news, photos & more. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/go?refer=1GNXIC


Previous Message: Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?
Next Message: New and Updated Spheres
Month Index: October, 2007

SubjectFromDate (UTC)
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    David Shepheard    08 Oct 2007 20:58:57
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    Paul Westermeyer    09 Oct 2007 07:43:20
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    Charles Taylor    09 Oct 2007 15:54:43
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    Steven    09 Oct 2007 21:41:10
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    Adam Miller    09 Oct 2007 22:53:28
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    Edward Swing    10 Oct 2007 11:39:19
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    Adam Miller    10 Oct 2007 11:51:59
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    Charles Taylor    09 Oct 2007 13:23:38
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    Adam Miller    10 Oct 2007 16:07:05
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    David Shepheard    10 Oct 2007 22:11:29
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    David Shepheard    11 Oct 2007 00:05:35
Re: Tons, tons and more tons - Was: Are Attached files ok?    David Shepheard    11 Oct 2007 00:56:28

[ SPJ-L@Cornell.edu ] [ Spelljammer@Leicester.ac.uk ] [ Spelljammer@MPGN.com ] [ Spelljammer-L@Oracle.Wizards.com ]