Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
anything higher than a hundred gs.

Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.

On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 9:01:29 AM UTC+1, David Johnston wrote:
> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>
> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
This has at least precedent in David Weber's novels, where there is a gravity compensator so the passengers and cargo aren't mashed flat, but you want to measure acceleration in the sense of forward progress. ?Charles Sheffield? had a harder science version, where you use a black hole to provide energy and thrust, and as a side benefit you position the living quarters so that the balance of acceleration and gravitational pull from the black hole gives the passengers the perceived gravity they want.

On Tuesday, 6 September 2022 at 09:01:29 UTC+1, David Johnston wrote:
> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>
> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.

Hmm. Spaceship classes in Jack Campbell's "The Lost Fleet"
series usually run around in planetary systems of stars
with 0.1c as a comfortable cruising speed for warships;
almost every other ship, such as feight, is slower. You can't
leave by jump point (at the system edge) at speed above 0.1c
anyway. So if I've now done the math right, which is questionable,
accelerating at 100 gravities gets you to 0.1c in about 8 hours.
And at that rate, the Lost Fleet would still be lost. They burn
fuel cubes a lot faster than that.

David Johnston <davidjohnston29@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
-0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>anything higher than a hundred gs.
>
>Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.

Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
quote?
--
pyotr filipivich
This Week's Panel: Us & Them - Eliminating Them.
Next Month's Panel: Having eliminated the old Them(tm)
Selecting who insufficiently Woke(tm) as to serve as the new Them(tm)

On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
> >Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> >carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> >cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> >anything higher than a hundred gs.
> >
> >Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> >War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
> quote?

Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.

100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed of light.

The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
Mach 10 in 5 seconds.

Pt

In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>> >Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>> >carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>> >cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>> >anything higher than a hundred gs.
>> >
>> >Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>> >War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>> quote?
>
>Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>
>100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed of light.
>
>The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
>Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>

But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with), which outclass
freighters.
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>
>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>> quote?
>>
>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>
>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed of light.
>>
>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>
>
> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with), which outclass
> freighters.

Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
military perspective.)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
>> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>>> quote?
>>>
>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>>
>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
>of light.
>>>
>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>>
>>
>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>which outclass
>> freighters.
>
>Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
>military perspective.)

(Hal Heydt)
Unless it's a Q-ship.

Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
Honor Harrington books.

On Thursday, 8 September 2022 at 17:56:21 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3...@dont-email.me>,
> Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> >> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> >>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
> >>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
> >>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> >>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> >>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> >>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> >>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
> >>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
> >>>> quote?
> >>>
> >>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
> >>>
> >>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
> >of light.
> >>>
> >>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
> >>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
> >>>
> >>
> >> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
> >> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
> >which outclass
> >> freighters.
> >
> >Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
> >military perspective.)
> (Hal Heydt)
> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>
> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
> Honor Harrington books.

<https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Q-ship>
refers to Second World War activity, and a suggestion of
using secret military boats disguised as targets for
"modern pirates". But I think I wrote on the Quora web site
that I'd heard that present-day pirates do their research on
good targets coming their way in the near future, they don't
just see a ship on the horizon and go at it. The page also
mentions the works of David Weber.

And there's usually a Russian fishing trawler close to NATO
naval exercises, of course. And the CIA doing this in the 70s:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Azorian>

On 08/09/2022 12.17, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 September 2022 at 17:56:21 UTC+1, Hal Heydt wrote:
>> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3...@dont-email.me>,
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>>> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a...@googlegroups.com>,

>>>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
>>>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>>> which outclass
>>>> freighters.
>>>
>>> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
>>> military perspective.)

>> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>>
>> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
>> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
>> Honor Harrington books.
>
> <https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Q-ship>
> refers to Second World War activity, and a suggestion of
> using secret military boats disguised as targets for
> "modern pirates". But I think I wrote on the Quora web site
> that I'd heard that present-day pirates do their research on
> good targets coming their way in the near future, they don't
> just see a ship on the horizon and go at it. The page also
> mentions the works of David Weber.

But not the _Brittania_ in _Galactic Patrol_. People have no
respect for the classics any more!

--
Michael F. Stemper
Indians scattered on dawn's highway bleeding;
Ghosts crowd the young child's fragile eggshell mind.

On 9/8/2022 9:42 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3@dont-email.me>,
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
>>> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>>>> quote?
>>>>
>>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>>>
>>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
>> of light.
>>>>
>>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
>>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
>>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>> which outclass
>>> freighters.
>>
>> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
>> military perspective.)
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>
> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
> Honor Harrington books.

They were used in WW2 as well.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 5:56:21 PM UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3...@dont-email.me>,
> Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> >> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> >>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
> >>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
> >>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> >>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> >>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> >>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> >>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
> >>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
> >>>> quote?
> >>>
> >>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
> >>>
> >>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
> >of light.
> >>>
> >>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
> >>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
> >>>
> >>
> >> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
> >> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
> >which outclass
> >> freighters.
> >
> >Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
> >military perspective.)
> (Hal Heydt)
> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>
> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
> Honor Harrington books.
People put all sorts of things in shipping containers these days, and there have been a number of schemes that involve putting those containers on ships and then firing missiles out of them.

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 1:17:11 PM UTC-4, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Thursday, 8 September 2022 at 17:56:21 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3...@dont-email.me>,
> > Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> > >On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> > >> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> > >>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
> > >>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
> > >>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> > >>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> > >>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> > >>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> > >>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
> > >>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
> > >>>> quote?
> > >>>
> > >>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
> > >>>
> > >>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
> > >of light.
> > >>>
> > >>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
> > >>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
> > >> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
> > >which outclass
> > >> freighters.
> > >
> > >Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
> > >military perspective.)
> > (Hal Heydt)
> > Unless it's a Q-ship.
> >
> > Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
> > it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
> > Honor Harrington books.
> <https://military-history.fandom.com/wiki/Q-ship>
> refers to Second World War activity, and a suggestion of
> using secret military boats disguised as targets for
> "modern pirates". But I think I wrote on the Quora web site
> that I'd heard that present-day pirates do their research on
> good targets coming their way in the near future, they don't
> just see a ship on the horizon and go at it. The page also
> mentions the works of David Weber.

Not always: (SFW)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3FQplpIcX8

pt

On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 2:02:15 PM UTC-4, mcdow...@sky.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 9:01:29 AM UTC+1, David Johnston wrote:
> > Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> > carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> > cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> > anything higher than a hundred gs.
> >
> > Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> > War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
> This has at least precedent in David Weber's novels, where there is a gravity compensator so the passengers and cargo aren't mashed flat, but you want to measure acceleration in the sense of forward progress. ?Charles Sheffield? had a harder science version, where you use a black hole to provide energy and thrust, and as a side benefit you position the living quarters so that the balance of acceleration and gravitational pull from the black hole gives the passengers the perceived gravity they want.

It was indeed Sheffield, most notably in the McAndrew story "Moment of Inertia"
which I coincidentally just read last week.

Tony

On 9/8/2022 11:42 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3@dont-email.me>,
> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
>>> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>>>> quote?
>>>>
>>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>>>
>>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
>> of light.
>>>>
>>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
>>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
>>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>> which outclass
>>> freighters.
>>
>> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
>> military perspective.)
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>
> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
> Honor Harrington books.

We, the USA, put up cardboard tanks in WWII in order to fool the Germans
where the cavalry was heading.

Lynn

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> on Thu, 8 Sep 2022 08:48:43
-0700 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
>> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>>> quote?
>>>
>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>>
>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed of light.
>>>
>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>>
>>
>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with), which outclass
>> freighters.
>
>Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
>military perspective.)

There is that.

Which, (again "needs of the plot") means that military or
passenger service considers 100g acceleration to be "slow".

I keep recalling the FedEx ad, where the first guy at the shipping
office window is adamant "It positively has to be there by next year!"
Now adays, we complain because our Amazon order won't be here for
three whole days! "OMG We're all gonna die!"
--
pyotr filipivich
This Week's Panel: Us & Them - Eliminating Them.
Next Month's Panel: Having eliminated the old Them(tm)
Selecting who insufficiently Woke(tm) as to serve as the new Them(tm)

"pete...@gmail.com" <petertrei@gmail.com> on Wed, 7 Sep 2022 21:10:07
-0700 (PDT) typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>> >Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>> >carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>> >cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>> >anything higher than a hundred gs.
>> >
>> >Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>> >War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>> quote?
>
>Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>
>100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed of light.

Got it.

OTOH, "it all depends on the needs of the plot." and it could be
a typo, too. But I see your point, too.

>The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
>Mach 10 in 5 seconds.

Yeee-haaa!

>
>Pt
--
pyotr filipivich
This Week's Panel: Us & Them - Eliminating Them.
Next Month's Panel: Having eliminated the old Them(tm)
Selecting who insufficiently Woke(tm) as to serve as the new Them(tm)

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 9/8/2022 11:42 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> > In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3...@dont-email.me>,
> > Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
> >> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
> >>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a...@googlegroups.com>,
> >>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> >>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
> >>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
> >>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> >>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> >>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> >>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> >>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
> >>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
> >>>>> quote?
> >>>>
> >>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
> >>>>
> >>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
> >> of light.
> >>>>
> >>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
> >>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
> >>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
> >> which outclass
> >>> freighters.
> >>
> >> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
> >> military perspective.)
> >
> > (Hal Heydt)
> > Unless it's a Q-ship.
> >
> > Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
> > it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
> > Honor Harrington books.
> We, the USA, put up cardboard tanks in WWII in order to fool the Germans
> where the cavalry was heading.

That's kind of an inversion, Q ships look like easy target freighters, but are in fact heavily armed.
A cardboard tank looks dangerous, but isn't.

One of Patton's roles in WW2 was setting up, and appearing to be in charge of,
a phony 'ghost army' to convince the Germans that invasion would take place at
the Pas De Calais.

https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_S._Patton#Phantom_Army
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joHE1ydj1JE&t=42s

Right at this moment, the Ukrainian forces are using dummy wood HiMars
MLRS launchers which they leave in place when the real ones shoot and scoot.
At this point, Russia claims to have destroyed 44 of the 16 the US sent.

Pt

On 9/6/2022 3:01 AM, David Johnston wrote:
> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>
> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.

There is a short story about a transport space ship accelerating at two
gravities with AI pilots. On board is 50 AI passengers and 50 human
passengers. A pirate is chasing them and when it gets close, the robot
pilots say "screw the humans" and crank the acceleration to 50 gravities
and get away. The two AI pilots and the 50 AI passengers are saved from
slavery. The humans are turned into paste. Oh well.

Lynn

In article <tfdu4k$r3u3$2@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 9/8/2022 11:42 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3@dont-email.me>,
>> Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr
>filipivich wrote:
>>>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made, could
>>>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>>>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series (Grimm's
>>>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>>>>> quote?
>>>>>
>>>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>>>>
>>>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
>>> of light.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It reached
>>>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a comparison
>>>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>>> which outclass
>>>> freighters.
>>>
>>> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
>>> military perspective.)
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>>
>> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
>> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
>> Honor Harrington books.
>
>We, the USA, put up cardboard tanks in WWII in order to fool the Germans
>where the cavalry was heading.

(Hal Heydt)
The better analogy to a Q-ship would be what the British did in
Egypt to disguise a bunch of tanks as trucks.

The point to a Q-ship was to make it look innocent...right up until
a submarine was so rash as to decide to engage it on the surface.
Then reveal that it was actualy fairly heavily armed. The
opposite, which has--as you note--been done is to try to make
something that actually is innocent look like a peice of
military hardware.

One WW2 British effort in Egypt was to try to make a WW1 ship
(cruiser? battleship?) look like they were incompetently trying
to hide a modern battleship.

In article <78161d17-5a5d-46f1-9e81-a1d8b3b53831n@googlegroups.com>,
pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 7:33:45 PM UTC-4, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 9/8/2022 11:42 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> > In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3...@dont-email.me>,
>> > Dimensional Traveler <dtr...@sonic.net> wrote:
>> >> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>> >>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >>> pete...@gmail.com <pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr
>filipivich wrote:
>> >>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>> >>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>> >>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar
>made, could
>> >>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>> >>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>> >>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series
>(Grimm's
>> >>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>> >>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>> >>>>> quote?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're at more than 1/4 the speed
>> >> of light.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly.
>It reached
>> >>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do. Clearly it's a
>comparison
>> >>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>> >> which outclass
>> >>> freighters.
>> >>
>> >> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for? (At least from a
>> >> military perspective.)
>> >
>> > (Hal Heydt)
>> > Unless it's a Q-ship.
>> >
>> > Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1? I know Weber did
>> > it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
>> > Honor Harrington books.
>> We, the USA, put up cardboard tanks in WWII in order to fool the Germans
>> where the cavalry was heading.
>
>That's kind of an inversion, Q ships look like easy target freighters,
>but are in fact heavily armed.
>A cardboard tank looks dangerous, but isn't.
>
>One of Patton's roles in WW2 was setting up, and appearing to be in charge of,
>a phony 'ghost army' to convince the Germans that invasion would take place at
>the Pas De Calais.
>
>https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_S._Patton#Phantom_Army
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=joHE1ydj1JE&t=42s
>
>Right at this moment, the Ukrainian forces are using dummy wood HiMars
>MLRS launchers which they leave in place when the real ones shoot and scoot.
>At this point, Russia claims to have destroyed 44 of the 16 the US sent.

(Hal Heydt)
That's kind of like a very thorough account of the Battle of
Britain I've read. The author--who was a British Spitfire pilot
during the battle--accounted for every aircraft lost on both
sides, right down to ran out fuel, training accidents, landing
accidents, and the like.

One of the conclusions was that the British overcounted kills of
German aircraft by about 2 to 1. The Germans, on the other hand,
overcounted kills by about 3 to 1.

Hence the (probably apochyphal) story of the German pilot being
told his claims of how many opposing fighters there were being
told that the RAF was down to its last 50 Spitfires, and then
asked where were they? To which the pilot replied, "After me!"

On 9/09/22 07:05, Andrew McDowell wrote:
snip
> People put all sorts of things in shipping containers these days, and
> there have been a number of schemes that involve putting those
> containers on ships and then firing missiles out of them.

Amazing. Thank you for that Good Grief moment. Living in sleepy hollow,
such things never enter my imagination let alone my reading. In the USA
TV series "The Wire" there was an episode on the docks involving
bypassing container security which was absolutely fascinating but such
practicalities as ensuring your missile would be pointing in the right
direction or capable of escaping the ship were not an issue so not
considered.

On 9/8/2022 4:33 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
> On 9/8/2022 11:42 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3@dont-email.me>,
>> Dimensional Traveler  <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr
>>>>> filipivich wrote:
>>>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar made,
>>>>>>> could
>>>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to accelerate at
>>>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series
>>>>>>> (Grimm's
>>>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>>>>> quote?
>>>>>
>>>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>>>>
>>>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're  at more than 1/4 the speed
>>> of light.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It
>>>>> reached
>>>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do.  Clearly it's a
>>>> comparison
>>>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>>> which outclass
>>>> freighters.
>>>
>>> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for?  (At least from a
>>> military perspective.)
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>>
>> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1?  I know Weber did
>> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
>> Honor Harrington books.
>
> We, the USA, put up cardboard tanks in WWII in order to fool the Germans
> where the cavalry was heading.
>
Inflatable tanks, not cardboard. And not just tanks.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 9/8/2022 11:02 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
> On 9/8/2022 4:33 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>> On 9/8/2022 11:42 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3@dont-email.me>,
>>> Dimensional Traveler  <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>>>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr
>>>>>> filipivich wrote:
>>>>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>>>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar
>>>>>>>> made, could
>>>>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to
>>>>>>>> accelerate at
>>>>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series
>>>>>>>> (Grimm's
>>>>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>>>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>>>>>> quote?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're  at more than 1/4 the speed
>>>> of light.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It
>>>>>> reached
>>>>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do.  Clearly it's a
>>>>> comparison
>>>>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>>>> which outclass
>>>>> freighters.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for?  (At least from a
>>>> military perspective.)
>>>
>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>>>
>>> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1?  I know Weber did
>>> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
>>> Honor Harrington books.
>>
>> We, the USA, put up cardboard tanks in WWII in order to fool the
>> Germans where the cavalry was heading.
>>
> Inflatable tanks, not cardboard.  And not just tanks.

Ah, that sounds familiar. Thanks for the correction.

Lynn

In article <tfefdn$v5ro$1@dont-email.me>,
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 9/8/2022 11:02 PM, Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>> On 9/8/2022 4:33 PM, Lynn McGuire wrote:
>>> On 9/8/2022 11:42 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>>> In article <tfd2sq$om5a$3@dont-email.me>,
>>>> Dimensional Traveler  <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 9/8/2022 5:41 AM, Ted Nolan <tednolan> wrote:
>>>>>> In article <360a699e-724b-4e9a-a844-46835ce76146n@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>> pete...@gmail.com <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:51:01 PM UTC-4, pyotr
>>>>>>> filipivich wrote:
>>>>>>>> David Johnston <davidjo...@yahoo.com> on Tue, 6 Sep 2022 02:01:22
>>>>>>>> -0600 typed in rec.arts.sf.written the following:
>>>>>>>>> Bulk freighters, like the huge M-Class Cargo ships Zuckabar
>>>>>>>>> made, could
>>>>>>>>> carry literally millions of tons of goods, but they were slow and
>>>>>>>>> cumbersome. Their mass made it virtually impossible to
>>>>>>>>> accelerate at
>>>>>>>>> anything higher than a hundred gs.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Haskell, Jeffery H.. Against All Odds: A Military Sci-Fi Series
>>>>>>>>> (Grimm's
>>>>>>>>> War Book 1) (p. 43). Aethon Books. Kindle Edition.
>>>>>>>> Call me clue less, but what makes you want to groan over that
>>>>>>>> quote?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Characterizing 100g as pokey is groan worthy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 100g is not trivial. After 1 day, you're  at more than 1/4 the speed
>>>>> of light.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The Sprint ABM could accelerate at that rate, but only briefly. It
>>>>>>> reached
>>>>>>> Mach 10 in 5 seconds.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But's it's not a comparison to things we can do.  Clearly it's a
>>>>>> comparison
>>>>>> against other ships in that setting (which I am unfamiliar with),
>>>>> which outclass
>>>>>> freighters.
>>>>>
>>>>> Isn't being outclassed what freighters are for?  (At least from a
>>>>> military perspective.)
>>>>
>>>> (Hal Heydt)
>>>> Unless it's a Q-ship.
>>>>
>>>> Has country actually used Q-ships since WW1?  I know Weber did
>>>> it--with both purpose-built and converted ships--in at least two
>>>> Honor Harrington books.
>>>
>>> We, the USA, put up cardboard tanks in WWII in order to fool the
>>> Germans where the cavalry was heading.
>>>
>> Inflatable tanks, not cardboard.  And not just tanks.
>
>Ah, that sounds familiar. Thanks for the correction.

(Hal Heydt)
There's a book about the "Ghost Army" that goes into considerable
detail. Dorothy bought it some years ago and we both read it.

There's also a book about the the stage magician that took up
camoflague and misdirection for the British and did much of his
work in the Middle East. IIRC, his name was Maskelyne and the
book is "The War Magician."