On 11/09/2007, Pauli Hakala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > DataPacRat wrote: > > On 10/09/2007, DataPacRat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> They were called Pigeons because they could be launched in flocks that > >>> could > >>> number a thousand bombs and had a tendency to wheel about in the air like > >>> a > >>> flock of pigeons. > I guess that the main problem with a design concept like this > would not be with the actual hardware, but with the software > - It would be much more easier to program a fixed-wing robot > or a helicopter than an ornithopter.. I would presume that this is covered under the fact that software for Routine Vehicle Operation is more expensive for Piloting than Driving. And, since this is a military device, I think it's safe to assume that once they have their first copy of that software, they're not going to pay full G:V price for all the other copies of that program. :) Here's another question. I've come up with two near-identical variants of the Pigeon, differing in that one's powered by a battery, the other by a TL8 hydrogen combustion engine. Both have about 8 hours duration, both have similar top speeds that are good enough for the task... so, from a logistics viewpoint rather than a tactical one, when getting ready to launch a 30,000-strong flock of these things in some random part of the world, do you think it would be better to power them up by plugging them into a charger or filling up all of their 1/3-gallon hydrogen tanks? Thank you for your time, -- DataPacRat VA3BOS "You shall not accept any information, unless you verify it for yourself. I have given you the hearing, the eyesight, and the brain, and you are responsible for using them." -- Qur'an 17:36, Khalifa translation. _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
