Honorverse ramblings and musings

Weird Harold wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:On the other hand that means if the morgue is in vacuum or has a toxic atmosphere from fire or battle damage that a Marine can't don their power armor because they have to strip out of their skinsuit, slide into a new custom fitted bodysuit - which takes a while. And you also get the fun of redoing the plumbing connections; oh joy.

It seems to me that battle armor is assigned and custom fitted to a particular marine. So it would make sense that Marines assigned to a heavy weapons platoon would have the body-glove for their armor fitted as their normal skin-suit. That would ameliorate most of your objections; at least the major point about having to change suits before donning the Battle armor.

If that is indeed the way thing are set up, the body-glove for battle armor would be roughly comparable to Navy skin suits as armor, but lack -- or have removable -- thrusters and other systems not needed inside the battle-armor.

Since not every situation would require full battle-armor, heavy weapons platoon would have to have enough armor and capability to fight in just skin-suits. In any event, those Marines would be in the "Morgue" as their GQ station. They would have their skin-suits/body-glove stored there and have a choice of which to don according to the situation that prompted "General Quarters."

Your and Jonathan's post begs the question of comfort. It seems it could become unbearably hot wearing a skin suit and powered armor. Which I beg the question of whether powered armor somehow provides internal atmospheric control?

cthia wrote:Your and Jonathan's post begs the question of comfort. It seems it could become unbearably hot wearing a skin suit and powered armor. Which I beg the question of whether powered armor somehow provides internal atmospheric control?

Skin suits are space suits. Isn't built in atmosopheric controls and temperature controls a given?

Theemile wrote:

cthia wrote:Your and Jonathan's post begs the question of comfort. It seems it could become unbearably hot wearing a skin suit and powered armor. Which I beg the question of whether powered armor somehow provides internal atmospheric control?

Skin suits are space suits. Isn't built in atmosopheric controls and temperature controls a given?

Yes, but neither are powered armor. Isn't the armor the outermost layer?

In effect, what I'm asking is whether battle armor can serve a two in one utility.

cthia wrote:

Theemile wrote:Skin suits are space suits. Isn't built in atmosopheric controls and temperature controls a given?

Yes, but neither are powered armor. Isn't the armor the outermost layer?

In effect, what I'm asking is whether battle armor can serve a two in one utility.

Battle Armor is made specifically for boarding operations and high atmosphere drops, so I would say, yes, they do also.

Why do the treecats sign to Nimitz when they meet?

IIRC it is his transmitter that has gone not his receiver.

I am not sure, but wasn't there some stuff in Basilisk that suggested that the different grades of armor were at least somewhat interchangeable? My guess is that there is a personally fitted base component, sort of a Skin Suits with Hard Points, and then Large, Medium or Small Heavy or Utility Shell components that mated with the "hard points". I also don't remember anything that would suggest that Sollie and Star Kingdom/Empire or even Havenite armor had significantly different tech.

Max wrote:I am not sure, but wasn't there some stuff in Basilisk that suggested that the different grades of armor were at least somewhat interchangeable? My guess is that there is a personally fitted base component, sort of a Skin Suits with Hard Points, and then Large, Medium or Small Heavy or Utility Shell components that mated with the "hard points". I also don't remember anything that would suggest that Sollie and Star Kingdom/Empire or even Havenite armor had significantly different tech.

You might be thinking of standard vs recon configuration. [quote="On Basilisk Station: Ch "23] "—our powered armor is designed to confer maximum tactical flexibility by allowing us to configure it for specific mission parameters. Normally, we operate with fairly heavy weapon loads, but that limits our endurance in two ways. First, the weaponry itself displaces power cells we might otherwise carry, and second, most of our heavy weapons are energy intensive, which ups the drain on the cells we can carry. It gives us a lot of firepower, but only over relatively short engagement times.
"In the recon role, weaponry is cut back to a bare minimum in favor of additional sensor systems, which simultaneously allows us to add additional cells, reduce overall power requirements, and substantially upgrade sensor capability. A Marine in standard armor configuration has an endurance of less than four hours under sustained combat conditions; in recon configuration, his endurance is over fifty hours, he can sustain speeds of sixty kilometers per hour even through rough terrain, and he can 'see' much better. The trade off is that his offensive power is little greater than that of a Marine in standard battle dress."[/quote]That seems more a difference in what you bolt to the armor (weapons and ammo packs, or power cells) than a difference in protective qualities of the armor.

They do talk about power armor being more protective than the unpowered body armor, which would be worn over the Marine skinsuits (themselves already lightly armored) - but nothing that implies that there are high, medium, and low protection choices for power armor...


I had forgotten that they were suiting up in their power armor during the pinnace drop from Fearless that must have been interesting to achieve, since it's very crowded conditions and you have to get naked to make skin-suit style plumbing connections and slip into it's (apparently) built in bodysuit.
But mostly because of the cramped quarters and need to hurry.

Is this an inconsistency or does it infer that Tankersley was a two-timer? Or did the long legs of Harrington lure Paul away from Cindy? Or are we to just assume that their relationship had simply run its course through a rocky debris field?

Cindy was the assistant to Vice Admiral of the Red Sir Craig Warner, assigned to the space station Hephaestus. She started to see Commander Paul Tankersley of HMS Warlock when the vessel was in refit at the shipyard. Admiral Warner did not think anything of it, because he thought that Cindy had good sense. (HH1)

There's an HMS Invictus and an HMS Invincible. Invictus means unconquerable or undefeated. We all know what invincible means but once these ships do suffer a defeat then what of the inappropriate name? Which shows why a ship's nomenclature designated after an intangible—and perhaps unrealistic ideal—instead of after a personage is a problem. Justa rambling.

cthia wrote:Is this an inconsistency or does it infer that Tankersley was a two-timer? Or did the long legs of Harrington lure Paul away from Cindy? Or are we to just assume that their relationship had simply run its course through a rocky debris field?

Cindy was the assistant to Vice Admiral of the Red Sir Craig Warner, assigned to the space station Hephaestus. She started to see Commander Paul Tankersley of HMS Warlock when the vessel was in refit at the shipyard. Admiral Warner did not think anything of it, because he thought that Cindy had good sense. (HH1)

very likely with his deployment to Hancock that the two went separate ways, assuming it was even semi serious to begin with.