Obvious it's never been published even in stellar shadows or some such...so that answers my question.


It's a Type II or V drone with the faster fuel injection systems those drones use, coupled with an M or F motor and grants the drone the ability to carry external modules and still move as though it didn't have them.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 06:59 am: Edit

Oh, I thought it was a drone that didn't use the metric system.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 11:20 am: Edit

It's in proposals somewhere...never published.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 11:21 am: Edit

I still don't remember it, so whatever it was, the key point seems to be that it's not an integral part of any imminent plan, just one of many many proposals. If we ever do any new kind of drone, it's own rules will be responsible for integration so we just don't have to worry about it here or now.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 06:09 pm: Edit

Thanks SVC.

I just wanted to make sure.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 11:05 pm: Edit

Abbreviation, pdl. One poundal is the force that accelerates a mass of 1 pound at a rate of one foot per second per second. One poundal is approximately 0.1382550 newton.

Major scientific work was done in this system in the 19th century, but it was gradually eclipsed by various versions of the “metric system.”

Found this definition on the web. Seems RBN is correct.

MJC is this a drone that continues to accelerate?

By Stacy Brian Bartley (Bartley) on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 11:12 pm: Edit

A drone with variable speeds? That sounds interesting.
respects
Stacy

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 11:46 pm: Edit

J.R.C:

No.
IIRC that is a Seahorse drone...an ECMdrone-based varrible drone motor that can only move at specific speeds ( 8, 12, 20 or 32 ) because it's not in close proximity to the target it's tracking ( the target vessel, just like ECM drone move at full speed until they reach their target ) but also requires a second drone control channel to control the drones speed setting, with 8 impulses between speed changes.

The second drone control channel is the big penalty...two ATG Drone and an SP allows a D6b to hurl 8 drones ( at R8 or closer ) and would cost fewer BPV ( although more drones ) but the two seahorse drone in an SP and 2 rack launched drone the D6b could dish up would be less effect ( except on the upside you wouldn't need three turns to organise it ).


Poundal drones have the advantage that if you see a speed 26 drone you KNOW it'll take exactly 8 points of damage to destroy it...with a poundal drone a type VF-Xa drone would be moving at speed 32 and you'ld actually have to use a lab to identify it.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 06:26 pm: Edit

...So it's a way to dodge the speed restrictions associated with extrernal modules.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Monday, November 15, 2004 - 07:12 pm: Edit

...So it's a way to dodge the speed restrictions associated with extrernal modules.

Yeah but the drawback is you're limited to the Endurance of a type II drone ( no extended range ) and it costs you extra BPV to have the advanced heat-shield between your fuel and the motor/high-rate-fuel-injection assembly.

So you skip out on a penalty but you pay through the nose to do it.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 04:03 pm: Edit

Not really.

How often does a drone need to last multiple turns?

It's not a huge disadvantage for a definite advantage.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 08:44 pm: Edit

Tractor solutions are very effective against type II & V drones.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 10:13 pm: Edit

This does not, in my view balance the ability of a poundal drone to move at speed-32 while carrying the max amount of extrnal armor allowed by the rules.

A 2-space poundal drone could conceivably survive a T-bomb blast AND carry a decent warhead, something impossible otherwise without sacrificing a lot of speed.

The advantage isn't balanced by the disadvantage. The disadvanatage is not sufficient to balance.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - 02:41 am: Edit

The BPV of the heat shield can be made to make balance better.

Furthermore since currently internal and external armour can not be mixed, the best poundal drone would be 24/10/32 which wouldn't survive a T-bomb.
As for a type VIII poundal drone surviving a T-bomb...well that part of the reason I brought up poundal drones here.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - 07:20 pm: Edit

You've made that point about other unabalancing ideas and it doesn't fly.

Just throwing points at a system doesn't balance it.

making the heat shield cost warhead spaces could conceivably do so.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Wednesday, November 17, 2004 - 07:51 pm: Edit

I don't really think it's muchof problem...you can ID drones with labs and then fire on them once you know how much they cost.
The added advantage of having a 24/10/32 drone with a two turn Endurance isn't really all that unbalancing.
It can be killed by other drones.
It can be killed with phasers particularly after you've IDed it.
It can be killed by a T-bomb.
It can be held in a tractor until the Weapons-recycle/fuel-runs-out.
It can be killed with ADDs.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, November 18, 2004 - 06:06 pm: Edit

Yes it is or the speed restrictions wouldn't be there in the first place.

Note that there's a whole topic on this and space doesn't need to be taken up here with an idea that isn't necessarily even X-technology.

I'm done with this.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 10:38 pm: Edit

Has anyone given much though to X1 support ships? The WYN applied X tech to a small freighter to produce an Aux Cruiser because that is what they had available.

Would other races make Aux X Cruisers and military X Freighters? Also the Operations Base can be mobile as an OAL. Would anyone make an OAX?

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 10:48 pm: Edit

There has been thought of building X-Support ships to support OpU.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Friday, March 25, 2005 - 11:04 pm: Edit

Tos,

I created an SSD for a large freighter with skids and ducktail. I replaced the port side skid with an X power module.

I was thinking that during the pre-unity crisis races would build X freighter to supply the outer reaches of their territory because the Andros (and GW) have blow up a lot of the BATS. Also an X freighter would be harder to intercept and destroy.

During OpU it would be meat to see some new specialized types of X freighters. One thought: An Unrep ship for the long hauls between levels. One or two would accompany a fleet as it moved forward toward the next level. Just behind would be an OAX (provides a close supply and repair point). The MB would be built at each level. Some form of an LTF would complete the supply grid between the MB and OAX.

By R. Brodie Nyboer (Radiocyborg) on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 09:05 pm: Edit

To make it cost-effective, support ships should focus on getting X-ship warp drive (for range) and defensive systems.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 09:57 pm: Edit

Loren had a really good plan for an X-freighter type of ship; maybe he can re-post it.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Wednesday, March 30, 2005 - 11:47 pm: Edit

Huhm what, how where? Did someone say my name?

Oh ya, Tos has all that and submitted it with his X1R proposal.

It's a modular freighter basically. It's designed to reflect basic improvements in every-day ship tech too (it appears during the late X1/early X2 period and is X1 based). It consists of three sections: Command, drive and a rack. The rack docks 1/4 pie pods (four cargo and these are called Containers). The small rack (8 pods) actually holds more cargo that the normal small freighter (32). There is a medium and large rack. There are veriants of pods so a successful freighter Captain might have a couple self defense containters but would be sacraficing some cargo volume.

The idea is that these were primarilly intended to make the runs between the MW and the LMC but ended up being more common that that.

Their function is small containers are loaded on the ground at a manufaturers location and the Container Freighter picks them up directly from there. No need for shipping material up to orbit and have it sitting in a standard pod. Companies can now work out their own schedules. Furthermore, one container might be on one planet and onother on another planet or system. There was less need for local support. This meant exploiting new resources was much easier as orbital facilities were not required in any way (although orbital facilities serve other functions as well).

Corporations and Freighter Captains loved them but local inspection authorities hated them... until they were able to adjust to the new paradigm.

Orions drooled over them and REALLY loved the the period of adjustment local authorities had to go through.

Container freighters were never used as bulk haulers.

Most of all the Container Freighters were as fast as early GW ships, although with the rack the engines could only accelerate by 10. Without the rack the resulting mini ship made of the Command and Drive system could move like any other standard ship. It was also capable of moving single standard pods. The warp filed was designed to move the long rack system and not the extra wide hull of a double pod configuration.

Standard freighters remained in service up to and presumably beyond the end of recorded history.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, May 26, 2005 - 04:36 pm: Edit

If anything else needs to move to the new "first generation x technology sub-folder" please let me know.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, July 25, 2005 - 09:07 pm: Edit

I have been working on an X-Tug and X pods. The standard NX pod is 200 meters X 40 meters; the volume is about 251,200 cubic meters.

The original tug was made from a modified CA and had the same warp, 30. So I am operationing on a similar premise. An X-Tug is based on a modified CX and has 40 warp. It can carry all the standard non-powered pods. Since it has more warp I figured it could carry more. If you increase the pod size to 225x50, the volume is 441,562 cubic meters. I figure the movement cost for the pod is 1/2 and is a 1.5 weight pod (could be wrong).

Is there any power issues attaching an NX battle pod to an X-Tug? I am assuming one can't have SC2 X battle Tug, since you can't have an XDN. With a larger Pod size (225x50) one could create a 1.5 weight battle pod with fighters (an SCS?).

I am interested in comments.