Re: Gundam Fleet Composition Examples

Prabal Nandy (nandy@U.Arizona.EDU)
Fri, 8 Jan 1999 09:29:02 -0700 (MST)

> >kick-butt GM in CCA, which is when it first appears! If it wasn't,
> >why would it have lasted that long? (I guess it's possible it's just
> Without "Hathaway's Flash", from 0093 to 0123 you don't have much
> large-scale conflict. No conflict = no high-speed military advancement

  It's true, that's why I suspected that the Jegan may simply have been
really easy to maintain or something and attributed its long service life
to that. Still, it must have had something going for it, after all, when
the F-4 first appeared it was a very capable aircraft even though it was
relegated to support roles by the end of its career.

> > What I mean is that the hypersonic shockwave from the 'bow' of the
> >colony as it slams into the Earth will shoot back through the colony
> >may actually cause the 'tail' of the colony itself to explode while
> >still high in the atmosphere!
> Gads, didnt think about that. But wouldn't it be relatively small in

  Think of how amazing that would look!

> comparison to the expanding sphere of rock, dust and stuff extending
> from the impact point?

  In principle yes, _BUT_ this is a huge cloud of material (Lunar-crete?)
flying out the butt of the colony and being literally _injected_ into
the stratosphere. The Earth can handle alot of crap in the Troposphere,
but once it gets beyond the Tropopause it will take centuries to get rid
  What I want to know is how come there are large intact pieces of colony
remaining in Australia, I would have expected the entire thing to have
been vaporized or pulverized... unless we're looking at big chunks of
material that were blasted off the rear of the colony by the internal
shock front....

> > No, you're thinking of simply 'dropping' an object from a high
> >which is incorrect if it's in an _orbit_. The potential energy of the
> >altitude orbit is dissippated by whatever mechanism
> >is used to slow down the object, effectively reducing its energy and
> >gradually dropping its orbit.
> Again, you're right (how do you argue space physics with a JPL guy?
> ^_^). This would be the cse in CCA; however, wouldn't colonies (assuming
> they came from Sides 3 or 5) come in on a more linear course than being
> inserted into orbit prior to a drop? Or is that up to the drop-ers?

  Well, it depends if you're 'shooting' your colony in (like an asteroid)
or 'coasting' it in by placing it into an orbit and then degrading that
orbit by slowing down your colony.
  Frankly, it probably doesn't make a whole lot of difference. What's
another 30KPS when you're talking about a tetraton of rock and metal
screaming through the gravity well?


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sat Jan 09 1999 - 01:27:05 JST