Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
No kidding. (Was gonna make a triple dog dare joke, but at -40 it's not even funny any more.)
Rules Only: Alternate Methods of Life Support Recharge?
- Thread starter Greylond
- Start date
No kidding. (Was gonna make a triple dog dare joke, but at -40 it's not even funny any more.)
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
The biggest problem is if you get a flat tire. You cannot change it as the lug bolts just sheer right off. You have to be towed in and the vehicle warmed up before attempting anything. Also, we had problems with the aluminum engines on the old Gamma Goats getting cold soaked and then blowing the cylinder jacket when you tried to start them. Same for the deuce and a halfs, interesting seeing the pistons while still attached to the crankshaft.
That's why people who live in those climes carry butane torches...
And block heaters....
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
My 4-wheel drive had an engine block heater in the oil pan, but I did not know anyone that carried butane torches. Not sure that I would try heating a bolt-nut combination that was at minus forty with one. As for the military vehicles, no engine block heaters, the Army at that time could not afford them.
Generally, no. The spark usually dies before igniting the butane. And the butane remains liquid - it's boiling temp is about -1°C (30°F). Plus, the pressure medium gas is also often cold-shrunk.
Propane works to about -42°C/-45°F... but again, the spark may be hard pressed to light it.
Both can be lit in the car, then used, provided they are not cold soaked before you got in.
At -60°F, you call for a tow, and get in the first car that stops while you wait. You also either use a block heater, or start it again in March.
At -60°F, your bic can implode from cold-shrinkage and brittleness.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
Now, that's the sort of color you can throw into a game. "Well, I *always* keep a lighter in the glove compartment....." :smirk:
I wonder... how does a computer do in that level of cold? Do soldered connections with ICs become problematic? How about friction insertion connections? Does it stay warm enough as long as it is never shut down? If it's a data plate, does it shatter if you drop it? Hmmm... more color.
DangerousThing
SOC-13
That's good.
The symbiont is distributed as a large amount of microscopic worms, about 2 kg worth. They use the energy improving their environment, keeping him healthy, closing small cuts, removing toxins, ec. This was taken from David Weber's Apocolapse Troll, which is a fun piece of military SF.
I am not a doctor and don't know how many calories would be required for this, above the worms' own metabolic needs.
(it was propane) Sorry for the typo. We and all our neighbors did. No problem lighting it and using it at -40.
Here in the Midwest we usually don't have temps THAT low.
But our truck drivers carry butane torches to unfreeze their brake lines.
(I work in a lumber yard. We had a flatbed truck stuck in the exit lane two weeks ago, for over 4 hours. It took him 2 hours to start it. Then the brake system's air compressor froze about 200 feet later... And the torch still didn't clear the brake lines... the temp was about -10 or -15F)
I've seen failure to light propane torches at around -45°F. Thing is, the tank was cold soaked, so the propane was all in fact liquid and unwilling to boil. It didn't come out the torch!
That kind of cold is dangerous. I've experienced below -65°F, before wind chill. Never want to do it again, but boy, boiling water tossed out hits the ground as tiny slivers of ice.... as it freezes fast enough to detonate.
Yep, THAT would be a problem. Go below -40 and all kinds of things go wrong and stop working. The best auto's I experienced for low temps were the old Volkswagen's with air cooled engines. The engine being over the rear drive wheels didn't hurt either.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
A mass of 2 kilograms would equate to 4.4 pounds, while 3,600 calories a day of food masses about 6 pounds, so your calorie requirement would have them with a metabolic rate greater than that of a shrew, which requires its own weight in food per day.
Given the mass of the worms, and that they are internal to the human host, minimizing the needs for them to generate their own internal heat, I would say that assume that the human host will need 3,600 calories a day for itself and the symbiont worms. That gives the worms an allowance of one pound of food per day, which gives them just under 23% of their mass per day in food, which should be far more than adequate.
Last edited by a moderator:
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I finally went and got this out to quote. The following quote comes from the introduction to the reprint that I did of the Manual for Army Cooks, revised edition 1883, originally published in 1883 by the Government Printing Office. I did a reprint of it in 1995, and control the copyright.
Emphasis added by me. Given what the US Army ration and pay was of the period, that represents a very interesting commentary not only on the British ration and pay scale, but also British society of the late Victorian period in general.
And I do, by the way, have data on the Royal Navy ratio as well. The Royal Army's was better, as it did allow for some fresh vegetables.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
Hmm, that is actually the 1916 manual, which I have, along with the 1910 manual, along with a manual for subsistence from 1916. They are considerably different from the 1883 Manual.
Edit Note: The Quartermaster Museum asked me for a courtesy copy as they were unaware that a cook book had been issued prior to the 1896 one, which was done by the Quartermaster Corps after they were combined with the Commissary of Subsistence Department, which had published cook books in 1879 and also 1883. The 1883 Manual does give some recipes taken from the British Army's Instructions for Military Cooks, Aldershot, London, 1878.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I apologize for resurrecting the thread, but I came across some more data for your one-year trade pioneer/exploration ship. For every 1,000 man-days of operation, you should plan on having 1 (one) individual sufficiently ill or injured so as to require care in your sick bay. As you did not say the size of your crew, I would recommend dividing 1,000 by your crew number to get the number of man-days for a likely illness/injury, and then divide 15 by that number. If you come up with a factor of 1.5 or higher, you need sufficient sick bay space for two persons. Of course, if you have a factor of 2.5, then increase it to three persons, and so on. The Leviathan-class of merchant cruiser is listed as having a crew of 56, so 1000 divided by 56 gives 17.86, so every 18 days on the average, you would have someone sufficiently sick or injured to be in sick bay. As 15 divided by 18 is less than one, for planning purposes, a 1-bed sickbay should be sufficient.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
*Never* apologize for a thread resurrection. 
Good info.
Good info.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
*Never* apologize for a thread resurrection.
Good info.
Thanks. I keep mining my various military field manuals for data, and the more I look, the more that I find. With respect to the data on sickness and non-battle injury, that would also work for any military or quasi-military unit. So that a mercenary unit could use that for planning factors as well, or the guys looking at large fleet units.
Interesting info. Just some thoughts on it:
The problem with any average is that they use to be missleading. If you have a 1000 men crew, you're quite more likely to have your sick bay empty several days and then have an accident (or disease outbreak) that affects several crewmembers, so keeping with the average you talk about, than to have 1 men each day in the sick bay. The larger the numbre of people in your population, the closer averages will be with reality.
But for a single ship, out of contact and with a small crew, this leads to the eternal dilemma of using more ressources than expeted to be needed, so that you can cope with a peack use, or having just the average and hope for the peak need doesn't appear.
In an exploring ship, after about 2 weeks have passed with the crew on it, you can expect that infectious diseases from biological agents carried by the crew will not occur, as any such biological agent would have already provoked the outbreak or your crew is probably immunized (of course there may be diseases with longer latent period, but they are few and unlikely). If they keep in the ship, no new bugs would come aboard, so your crew is relatively safe in this issue.
If your crew is calling to inhabited and known ports, you can expect to know what kind of bugs you can pick at each port, and tak preventive measures against them.
OTOH, if your crew makes landings to unknown planets, you need to quarantine your landing parties after each landing or you risk an unknown bug to infect your crew and provoking an outbreak.
Another thing to take into account about sick bays is the likehood of a single accident to account for more than one crewmember.
And of course, you need always remember that you're out of any help while on jumpspace (and more if your ship is exploratory), unlike current RW ships that are unlikely to be unable to evacuate a crewmember by helo if needed for many days...
Similar threads
