Archives
| Title | Posted |
|---|---|
| Effectiveness of cruisers-vs-battlecruisers | Feb 2003 |
| <em>Wayfarer </em>and camouflaging itself as a merchantman | Feb 2003 |
| "Buckshot" missile defenses | Jan 2003 |
| Why doesn't Elizabeth <em>pack</em> the Lords? | Dec 2002 |
| Administrative and tactical organization of the RMN | Dec 2002 |
| Fission/fusion power reactors | Dec 2002 |
| Counter-missile canisters | Dec 2002 |
| Counter-missile fire control issues and counter-missile pods | Dec 2002 |
| Does the Manticoran Peerage allow Proxy Voting | Dec 2002 |
| Manticoran Peerage seating | Nov 2002 |
Filters
Pearls of Weber
A collection of posts by David Weber containing background information for his stories, collected and generously made available Joe Buckley.
Compensator failure
- Series: Honorverse
- Date: October 31, 2004
On the compensator issue. No, it isn't possible to kill power to the wedge quickly enough to save the crew's lives in the event of compensator failure. And, no, compensator failures aren't "elastic" enough to permit any sort of controlled shut down or additional inertia dumping to save the crew, either.
The sump is a little elastic, which is how you can at least try to take a compensator beyond its rated top limit and maybe survive, as Honor did on her middy cruise. The odds of doing so are… poor.
I think I've said before that compensator failures are all or nothing. If I haven't also said specifically that they're effectively instantaneous events, I should have. The sump's limits can be strained and even theoretically exceeded -- briefly! -- without the compensator necessarily failing, but the instant it decides to shut down, it dies completely and catastrophically, and with absolutely no detectable warning signs. Either it's working perfectly, even if temporarily in excess of its designed maximum load, or the crew is anchovy paste. On or off. A binary solution.
