T4 QSDS Question tmr0195@xxxxxx (25 Apr 2015 22:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question Bruce Johnson (26 Apr 2015 02:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question tmr0195@xxxxxx (26 Apr 2015 03:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question Derek Wildstar (28 Apr 2015 16:21 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question tmr0195@xxxxxx (28 Apr 2015 22:25 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question Derek Wildstar (29 Apr 2015 20:19 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question tmr0195@xxxxxx (29 Apr 2015 23:39 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question Derek Wildstar (30 Apr 2015 12:58 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question tmr0195@xxxxxx (30 Apr 2015 15:35 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question Derek Wildstar (30 Apr 2015 21:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question Ethan McKinney (30 Apr 2015 21:18 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question tmr0195@xxxxxx (01 May 2015 02:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question tmr0195@xxxxxx (01 May 2015 00:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question Derek Wildstar (01 May 2015 15:49 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question tmr0195@xxxxxx (02 May 2015 04:48 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (02 May 2015 15:10 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (03 May 2015 15:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (04 May 2015 19:29 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors Derek Wildstar (05 May 2015 01:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (05 May 2015 06:34 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (05 May 2015 20:43 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors Derek Wildstar (05 May 2015 21:22 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (06 May 2015 15:29 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (06 May 2015 20:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (07 May 2015 15:45 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors Derek Wildstar (07 May 2015 20:34 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (08 May 2015 00:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (08 May 2015 03:23 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (08 May 2015 13:40 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors Ethan McKinney (09 May 2015 02:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (09 May 2015 21:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors Ethan McKinney (09 May 2015 21:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (11 May 2015 18:54 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors Ethan McKinney (11 May 2015 19:59 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (11 May 2015 23:48 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors Derek Wildstar (05 May 2015 01:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx (05 May 2015 05:43 UTC)
Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors Derek Wildstar (05 May 2015 21:19 UTC)

Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors tmr0195@xxxxxx 05 May 2015 06:34 UTC

Hello again Guy,

-----Original Message-----
From: Derek Wildstar
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2015 6:31 PM
To: xxxxxx@simplelists.com
Subject: Re: [TML] T4 QSDS Question: Sensors

Tom,

> If I understand correctly, the issue is that the minimum length was
> computed assuming that the antennae would be a folding array if necessary,
> but
> the volumes were computed assuming that the antennae would be a fixed
> array.

The QSDS 1.5e HRT/PEMS antenna volumes appears to be calculated using the
fixed array modifier of 0.05. A HRT with a short range of 60,000 km has a
fixed antenna diameter of 10 m per TNE FF&S p. 53. The QSDS 1.5e TL-9 Basic
Package has the min length of a hull as being 5 m, which would be my guess
as the length of a 10 m diameter array being folded down for storage.

On May 4, 2015, at 3:29 PM, Tom Rux <xxxxxx@comcast.net> wrote:
>> My recommendation is to change the table Min Length data to match the
>> antenna diameter in TNE FF&S Mk I Mod 0 for the HRT in TL-9 and the
>> PEMS in TL-10+.  An alternative would be to recalculate all of the values
>> based on a folding array.

> I'd support either approach.  The only "gotcha" I can think of is that
> there needs to be some type of TL-9 sensor array that will fit on a
> 100-ton hull.

The TL-9 Basic and Improved packages with a 60,000 km HRT has a fixed
antenna diameter of 10 m. Per the note below the TNE FF&S HRT table: "AD:
Antenna diameter, in meters. If the antenna diameter is greater than the
hull length (unmodified by configuration), the antenna must be a folding
array.

On the Hull Size Table, TNE FF&S Mk I Mod p. 11, a 100 Td hull has a length
(L) of 14 m which means that a 60,000 km HRT with a 10 m fixed antenna can
be mounted on a 100 Td hull.  Of course the amount of surface area as
discussed in the reply dated 5/4/2015 6:26 PM has to be considered when
selecting an array. The actual "gotcha" is that the 100 Td Scout/Courier can
not use a small military sensor package. To fix the "gotcha" I would used
the scouts full 45 m versus the base length of 14 m.

> ---Guy "Wildstar" Garnett
> xxxxxx@prismnet.com

Hopefully I'll be posting the TL-9 sensor packages on 5/6 or 5/7. The
Improved and Small Military packages only have adjusted MCr. The Basic, as
already posted, changed volume and MCr.  My calculations for Medium Military
package have returned different volume, , power, cost, and area values using
both the spreadsheet and manual calculations.

Tom Rux