--- On Sun, 4/11/10, Rupert Boleyn <[email protected]> wrote: > > For TL6, fire and secondary explosions were a major > factor. For TL7, > > the effects of full fire suppression systems will > render it moot. > In this the rules are far too generous, given the effects > of fire on ships in the Falklands War, and what happened to > USS Stark (hit by *one* not very powerful missile). Fire > still seems to be the major ship-killer. Both USS Stark > (barely saved) and HMS Sheffield (lost) were set on > fire and damaged more by the missile's propellant burning as > by the warhead (though the initial damage and disruption > caused by the warhead breaking up floors and blukheads, > etc., would certainly have helped the fires get a hold). > > Probably the greatest vulnerability of a carrier is that it > has one or two decks that are largely open across the full > length and breadth of the vessel, and these spaces are full > of delicate and flammable (sometimes explosive) aircraft, > and fuel lines run up to them, so there's a ready source of > accelerant of those get damaged.
In the case of the Sheffield, it was that TL7 Expensive Metal armor that did her in. The aluminum superstructure itself caught fire. I'd have to see if I can find any of my Harpoon books to check on if the Stark was built that way. (Related trivia: one of the major bugs of the BMP-1 & 2 MICVs was that their armor was made of an alloy of aluminum & magnesium, and would burn like a flare when hit with a big shaped charge. o_O ) Jon "Thermonuclear interactions, such as hydrogen fusion, may take place in the tomato sauce." Bill, the neighborhood blast physicist. _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
