twilight2000-digest Saturday, May 17 1997 Volume 1996 : Number 044 The following topics are covered in this digest: U.S. to Provide Bosnia 116 Heavy Cannons (fwd) Assorted Rants Gamers-L-Digest V2 #74 (fwd) Jane's News Briefs (fwd) Gamers-L-Digest V2 #75 (fwd) Introduction Gamers-L-Digest V2 #76 (fwd) Re: Re[2]: Bad language, guns (way off subject) (fwd) Re: Smoke (was- Gamers-L-Digest V2 #74 (fwd) Re: Gamers-L-Digest V2 #76 (fwd) Re: Introduction Hi Re: Hi [Fwd: Re: Javelin AAWS/M] Re: Hi Gamers-L-Digest V2 #80 (fwd) Re: Bad language, guns (getting far off subject) (fwd) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 12:46:52 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: U.S. to Provide Bosnia 116 Heavy Cannons (fwd) From another mailing list: SARAJEVO, May 9 -- The United States will supply Bosnia's Muslim-Croat federation with more than 100 heavy cannons...116 155mm howitzers will be sent to federation forces, which until now had six. An additional 51 slightly smaller howitzers will be manufactured locally with American help. Bosnia received 45 military surplus M60A3 tanks and 80 armored personnel carriers from the United States in November, along with 46,100 M-16 rifles, 1,000 M-60 machine guns and more than 6,000 tactical radios and telephones, using most of the $100 million that Congress has authorized for the program. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 23:13:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: Assorted Rants Greetings All: I'm overdue for a nice long message to this list, so I'll try to make it up to you :) : **Item 1: Did anyone see Nova last week, about the 1993 floods in the Midwest? It seems that the rising waters ripped several huge propane tanks off of their mounts and started carrying them downstream. Apparently some leaks were sprung during the "dismounting" process, and gas was leaking out of the tanks. Propane is heavier than air, so the fumes were accumulating near the surface in an ever-expanding blanket. The concern was that if the cloud intercepted an ignition source, a huge explosion would result, a la Fuel Air Explosive devices. No one can tell me that this can't be worked in to some kind of M2k scenario. :) **Item 2: To anyone looking for maps: I recently got an advertisement in the mail for a company called Land Info Int'l, which sells maps on CD-ROM. I haven't checked out their website yet, but the ad says that they have 54,000 maps covering the US, 12,000 covering Canada, and 300,000 maps covering a total of 60 other countries. The URL is: http://www.landinfo.com/ , and the phone number is: (303) 369-6800. As I said, I have had no dealings with this company, so I cannot vouch for them. **Item 3: I don't have it with me to verify, but it looks like the _Operation: Crouching Dragon_ module may soon be a historical simulation rather than a futuristic adventure. Looking at some Reuters stories...
It is anticipated that by the end of the century, maritime defence expenditure in the Asia-Pacific region may well outstrip that of Western Europe and even North America... Countries that have already beefed up their navies include Thailand, which recently took delivery of its first aircraft carrier... China is reported to have taken delivery of two Russian missile cruisers that will allow it to project power into the vital sea lanes of the South China Sea. Increased naval spending is also being spurred by overlapping claims...to areas like the Spratly Islands that are believed to hold rich deposits of oil and gas. The dispute erupted anew when the Philippines protested at the presence of three Chinese naval warships in the area... The Spratlys are claimed in whole or in part by China, Taiwan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Brunei, and the Philippines. Security experts say it may be the next hot spot in the region.
Another story indicated that each of the interested countries has a small garrison stationed somewhere in the islands. **Item 3: From _Jane's Defence Weekly_, Vol 27 No 18 7 May 1997:
The Russian Army is reported to be on the verge of deciding on a new assault rifle. According to IZHMASH representatives in Russia, the 5.45x39mm AN-94 has been type classified by the army and slated as its next generation infantry weapon.
**Item 4: The US government is looking at developing the Patriot missile as a limited ABM system, to be deployed as the THAAD missile or (I can't remember what it's called) the navy equivalent around the coast of the continental US. It is because of this possibility that development (and deployment) of the Patriot missile is a violation of the ABM Treaty. When the missile was first being developed and fielded, the former Soviet Union did not object, so we continued. However, Russia is getting upset about NATO expansion, and the Patriot may yet become a bone of contention between our two countries in the near future. In short, the Patriot missile is illegal! There is an informative, if somewhat dry, article about it in the May/June 1997 issue of _MIT Technology Review_. **Item 5: I never got any response to my question about the M16A3. I know there are some vets on the list. C'mon guys, where're y'at? I am on a quest to find this knowledge. :) The sources I've seen indicated that they were supposed to have gone into service circa 1992-1993. Has anybody seen one? Is it a standard -A2 w/ a scope, a flat-top -A2, or a "half-flat" - -A2? Is it still "burst-capable", or is it semi-auto only? I'll close for now. You guys got off easy. :) ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 23:29:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: Gamers-L-Digest V2 #74 (fwd) Greetings All: This is an excerpt from the digest of another mailing list I'm on... Smoke is more effective today than in WWII for 3 reasons: 1) Standard bore size for smoke rounds in WWII was 75mm or 105mm, now it is 155mm. 2) Improvements in the actual munitions 3) the Variable-time (VT or M728) fuze which gives a much more accurate first round ideal burst height for the White Phosphorus (WP) round. Basically these mean you can put more smoke of higher quality out there in the same amount of time with a lower volley count (critical for counterfire reduction) and have better intial placement. Smoke Types There are 2 major types of smoke. The 'hot smoke' is still just good old Willy Pete (WP). WP has a quick build up time, burns hot, sets all kind of stuff on fire, but doesn't last very long (avg of 2 minutes). Its found in 105mm and 155mm. A newer version is impregnated into felt wedges (M825) for a more sustained sustained build up (burns avg of 8-10 minutes). Standard Unit Basic Load (UBL) for a 155mm battery would be 30 rounds of WP and 30 rounds of M825 (felt wedge WP). This is enough for 2 smoke screens of 4-5 minute duration covering 250-350 meters assuming the wind is reasonable and the observer chose a good aim point. The second type of smoke is the HC (high capacity) smoke. This like the stuff in the hand held smoke grenades you see on TV. It takes longer to build than WP but lasts longer. UBL for 155mm is usually 18 rds per battery (3/gun). This is enough for a smoke screen of 7 minute duration covering 250-350 meters again assuming the wind is reasonable and a good aim point. General Generally 105mm versions are less effective just due to volume delivered. Heavy units have 155mm Bns as Direct Support (DS) where the Light Infantry have 105mm. In heavy units, we have the WP really for anti armor ambushes or for attacking certain types of tgts (ie. a 'shake & bake' for a refuel site etc.). As a Fire Direction Officer (FDO), I used the 1st platoon to pop M825 WP and the 2d platoon to shoot the HC for any planned obscuration fires. Large smoke operations to assault a bn sized objective or in urban terrain would usually rate a FA bn smoke mission. Again, I'd fire a BN 1 round (24 actual rounds) of WP and follow with a by-battery volley of HC at the appropriate intervals to maintain a good level. I'd also segment the tgt and have 3 aimpoints (1 per battery). We used this tactic Against the Republican Guard strongpoints with good success. The WP will wash your NVGs for a minute, but it burns out fast. As for thermals, it has to be on you to mess you up, because the heat-signature of a T72M1 is still large, and no chunk of phosphorus is gonna change that part. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 22:42:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: Jane's News Briefs (fwd) Greetings All: From another mailing list... UK offers mini-subs GEC Marine of the UK has held discussions with Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates regarding the sale of Piranha class mini-submarines for covert special forces operations. The 150 tonne design was relaunched during March's IDEX exhibition. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 22:50:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: Gamers-L-Digest V2 #75 (fwd) Greetings All: From another ML... > How do 60mm and 81mm smoke mortars (on AFV's) and AFV smoke > generators compare to these battery-size fires for size, duration and > effectiveness? > As far as mortars go, the '4-deuce' (107mm or 4.2") is standard in mech and tank Bns. This is the way to go for smoke. They only have WP, but it has the same capacity as a 105mm round (not the range though), and we plan on a rate of fire of around 15 rounds per minute. This is THE ticket for anti-armor ambushes. Planning figures for obscuration fires are very similar to 105mm FA. 81mm mortars can pop WP. It would take an intial volley of roughly 15 rounds to build a similar curtain as before (under perfect conditions) and then another 4-10 rds per minute to maintain depending on conditions. Thats alot of ammo to move and consequently, most Lt. Inf bn mortar sections only carry enough smoke for 1 screen. 60mm mortars have WP as well and slightly less effective than the 81's, but they are used in 2 tube sections vs. 3 tube sections in an 81mm unit. As an FSO (Fire Support Officer) I would use the BN asset (81mm) to do my smoke and have my company mortars carry a few WP only for setting good stuff on fire. The AFV smoke dischargers can screen a good 100 meters with some quick build-up WP. If all platoon vehicles were on line and let all dischargers go, you could screen 400 to 500 meters (depending on wind conditions and humidity). It wouldn't last real long though. Remember, they were meant as a defensive weapon against ATGMs and such. For large screens, Bradley's and M1s can generate 'diesel smoke'. That's fairly effective if the INF doesn't mind the exposure to fire to do it [tankers would rarely be delegated that duty! :-)] On a side note, you mentioned wash-out of NVG's and thermals. The best deal for that is some ILLUM on the deck. That messes up things really well and silohouettes the enemy to boot. Worked well in the desert, and became one of our standard practices. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 09:32:16 EDT From: tora-no-yoro@juno.com (David c neely) Subject: Introduction Hello, my name is David Neely. I am new to this mailing list. I am also new to Twilight2000 gaming,just got involved. I love war gaming. My interest are in warfare in any way shape, form or fashion. I'm involved in everything from medieval warfare studies to futuristic war simulations. I would also like to know about any other war related mailing list. If you know of any please e-mail me and let me know. David Neely tora-no-yoro@juno.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 18:40:13 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: Gamers-L-Digest V2 #76 (fwd) Greetings All: A follow-up to a previous post on another ML... > Didn't this wash out our thermals, too? Also, did the Iraqis use any smoke > which could defeat our thermals? We were usually putting the ILLUM on them 3,000-5,000 meters away and let it burn while we moved up to maingun / TOW engagement range. We were very careful to not use it when we were too close because we would erase our technological advantage in night engagements. ILLUM is more degrading to NVGs (Passive night vision) than thermals. The Republican Guard just had the PVS-5 equivelent (not PVS-7 which is a huge difference). But, because of the distances involved when I first would call the stuff in, my thermal sight worked okay. Depending on range and target angles, the Bradleys would either use conventional sights or still use thermals. We never had much trouble in either regard. The worst thing for my thermals was when my sight angle placed several vehicles close together along the line of sight and a TOWII hit one. At 3,000+ meters, it became more difficult to judge how many heat signatures you had in the pile. The Iraqi's never used smoke on our BDE and to my knowledge not against our division. None at 73 Easting either. My feeling is that the OP TEMPO was to high for them, and they weren't gonna waste volleys on smoke. Our counter battery fire was quick and brutally effective, so I'm sure volley count / exposure was a consideration for their FA BNs. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 13:44:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: Re: Re[2]: Bad language, guns (way off subject) (fwd) From the Aikido ML I subscribe to... - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 09:26:35 -0700 From: Julian Frost Reply-To: Aikido List To: AIKIDO-L@PSUVM.PSU.EDU Subject: Re: Re[2]: Bad language, guns (way off subject) > The gramarians' interpretation of the meaning of the 2nd is supported by > everything written by those who created the amendment, at the time they > were doing so as well as at other times in their lives. ...as is in evidence when you read the following... WHAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS THOUGHT ABOUT "GUN CONTROL" Benjamin Franklin: Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." (Nov 11 1755, from the Pennsylvania Assembly's reply to the Governor of Pennsylvania.) Thomas Jefferson: "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are niether inclined or determined to commit crimes. Such laws only make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assassins; they serve to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater condidence than an armed man." (1764 Letter and speech from T. Jefferson quoting with approval an essay by Cesare Beccari) John Adams: "Arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individul discretion in private self defense." (A defense of the Constitution of the US) George Washington: "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone...the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them [guns] by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference [crime]. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." (Address to 1st session of Congress) George Mason: "To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them." (3 Elliot, Debates at 380) Noah Webster: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every country in Europe." (1787, Pamphlets on the Constitution of the US) George Washington: "A free people ought to be armed." (Jan 14 1790, Boston Independent Chronicle.) Thomas Jefferson: "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (T. Jefferson papers, 334, C.J. Boyd, Ed. 1950) James Madison: "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed, unlike the people of other countries, whose people are afraid to trust them with arms." (Federalist Paper #46) WHAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS MEANT BY THE "MILITIA" George Mason: "I ask you sir, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people." (Elliott, Debates, 425-426) Richard Henry Lee: "A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." (Additional letters from the Federal Farmer, at 169, 1788) James Madison: "A WELL REGULATED militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." (1st Annals of Congress, at 434, June 8th 1789, emphisis added. [See Mike Bartman's description of the term "Well Regulated", and remember that it does NOT refer to a professional army. The 17th century folks used the term "STANDING Army" to describe a professional army.] Patrick Henry: "The people have a right to keep and bear arms." (Eliott, Debates at 185) Alexander Hamilton: "...that standing army can never be formidable (threatening) to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in the use of arms." (Federalist Paper #29) "Little more can be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equiped." {responding to the claim that the militia itself could threaten liberty} "There is something so far-fetched, and so extravagant in the idea of danger of liberty from the militia that one is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or raillery (mockery). FOUNDING FATHERS INTENT BEHIND THE CONSTITUTION: Samual Adams: "The Consitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms." (Convention of the Commonwealth of Mass., 86-87, date still being sought) Noah Webster: "Good intentions will always be pleaded for every assumption of authority...the Constitution was made to guard against the dangers of good intentions. There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters." (Source still being sought) Thomas Jefferson: "On every occassion...[of Constitutional interpretation] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying [to force] what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, [instead let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed." (June 12 1823, Letter to William Johnson) Julian - -- INET: jmfrost@uci.edu - Public Key for Encrypted Mail available. ** Irvine Aikikai (USAF Western Region) Home Page -- ** http://odaiko.ss.uci.edu/Aikido/Aikido.html ## The Unofficial SIG-Sauer Home Page -- ## http://odaiko.ss.uci.edu/sig/sig.html ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 04:55:04 EDT From: q-guy@juno.com (Christopher Stainton) Subject: Re: Smoke (was- Gamers-L-Digest V2 #74 (fwd) Chris, Keep sending stuff like this to the list, I thinl we could use ANY traffic. The only thing about smoke is that the thermal imagers of tanks, aircraft, etc., completely see through smoke and render it useless. Of course at the point in the war, only very few thermal imagers would be left (hence it's high price on the equipment lists).................... Chris ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 04:55:04 EDT From: q-guy@juno.com (Christopher Stainton) Subject: Re: Gamers-L-Digest V2 #76 (fwd) >The Iraqi's never used smoke on our BDE and to my knowledge not against our division< Well, the Iraqis used a kinda smoke screen when they ignited Kuwait's oil wells. The reasons for that were 3 fold, to deprive the Kuwaiti's of their precious oil, to cause incredible damage, and to (unsuccessfully) shield their retreating troops from the Allied Coalition's air attacks. Thermal vision saw right through the smoke.......................... and I remember being in that nasty black smoke............... yuk Chris ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 04:55:05 EDT From: q-guy@juno.com (Christopher Stainton) Subject: Re: Introduction > Hello, my name is David Neely. hello David Neely, > I am new to this mailing list. I am also new to Twilight2000 >gaming,just got involved. My god, man! Where have you been? It's good to see another new player to this game. > My interest are in warfare in any way shape, form or fashion. I'm >involved in everything from medieval warfare studies to futuristic war >simulations. Sounds like me 13 years ago.......................... I hope you have some 1st edition stuff, not just the 2nd ed. The modules and sourcebooks of that era are a lot better (IMO). keep the torch burning for this game.................................................................... Chris ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 05:54:13 -0500 From: John Clune Subject: Hi Hi. My name is John and I'm new to this list. I've been playing T:2000 for four years now... mainly second ed. I was wondering if anybody knew where I could buy t/m:2000 stuff on the net... i know it's out of print but there has to be a game store somewhere. Second... is GDW planning on doing more t/m:2000 stuff? Thanks John Clune FHSU Debate ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 09:09:04 -0700 From: "Judy I. Hale" Subject: Re: Hi John Clune wrote: > Hi. My name is John and I'm new to this list. > I've been playing T:2000 for four years now... mainly second ed. > I was wondering if anybody knew where I could buy t/m:2000 stuff on the > net... i know it's out of print but there has to be a game store > somewhere. > Second... is GDW planning on doing more t/m:2000 stuff? > Thanks > John Clune > FHSU Debate Welcome! My name is Ron Hale. To answer your first question, I don't know. I've got one or two duplicates of things, but, I have plans for them. Sorry. To answer your second question, they (GDW) no longer owns the rights to T2K, Merc2K. They sold it to a company called Tantulas(spelling may be off). Know to answer your next question. The guy to contact at Tantulas is Rob Miracle. I E-Mailed him and asked if he was the one. He replied that he was. So I sent him several questions, and still haven't recieved any reply. If and when I get a reply from him I will post it to the list. TTFN Ron Hale ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 May 1997 09:10:33 -0700 From: "Judy I. Hale" Subject: [Fwd: Re: Javelin AAWS/M] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------7D0279B25F2A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Here is some info from another list I'm on. TTFN Ron Hale - --------------7D0279B25F2A Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-POP3-Rcpt: rrrj@twilight Return-Path: nostromo!MP-GG-error@nostromo.gate.net Received: from osceola.gate.net (root@osceola.gate.net [199.227.0.18]) by twilight.c-zone.net (8.8.5/8.8.0(twilight)) with ESMTP id KAA22018 for ; Thu, 15 May 1997 10:24:19 -0700 Received: from inca.gate.net (uucp@inca.gate.net [199.227.0.11]) by osceola.gate.net (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id NAA189382; Thu, 15 May 1997 13:23:52 -0400 Received: (from uucp@localhost) by inca.gate.net (8.8.5/8.6.9) id NAA19808; Thu, 15 May 1997 13:25:04 -0400 Received: by nostromo.gate.net (V1.17-beta/Amiga) id ; Thu, 15 May 97 12:17:40 EST Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970515082008.006e4094@torrey> Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 08:20:08 -0700 In-Reply-To: <199705142332.TAA15890@sparky.transdata.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Reply-To: MP-GG@nostromo.gate.net (Mailinglist 'MP-GG') Sender: MP-GG-error@nostromo.gate.net Precedence: bulk From: Bill Garmer To: MP-GG@nostromo.gate.net (Mailinglist 'MP-GG') Subject: Re: Javelin AAWS/M At 07:09 PM 5/14/97 -0400, Gary wrote: >Ok Here you go.. > >Specs. > >Calibre of Warhead: 127 mm >Weight in Firing Order: 15.88 kg >Length of Launcher: 1 m >Maximum Range: 2000 m >Maximum Velocity: 290 m/sec >Penetration of Armour: >400 mm >Manufacturer: TI/ Martin Merietta > >Thats all I have right now, that I can give you. Here is some more: > > The following is technical information on the U.S. Army AAWS-M or Javalin >fire and forget medium range infantry anti-armor missile. Penetration >distances given are Metric, weights are English system. You convert the >weight to kilograms at a ratio of 2.2 lbs to a kg. All mis-spellings and >technical mistakes are mine. > > > The Javalin (AAWS-M) weighs 49.5 lbs full up. This is broken down into a > command launch unit (CLU) which weighs -- including 2.5 lbs BA5590 SINGARS > standard battery and carrying case -- 14.1 lbs and a missile round weighing > 35.4 lbs. > > The CLU has a day/night thermal sight able to operate continuously for 4 > hours with the battery. The initial focal plane array (FPA) thermal sight >will be of a less capable, but still second generation technology, due to > producability problems at Texas Instruments. (In tests, the degraded FPA >sight was acceptable in 12 of 13 combat scenerio's called out in the >original specification. The fully capable sight will be fielded in 2000 -- >four years late.) > > The imaging infra-red (IIR) fire-and-forget missile reachs at least 2000 >meters i.e. the range of the U.S. TOW missile> and can be launched on a direct >attack or "Lofted" trajectory against heavily armored targets. The 127mm (5 >inch) tandem warhead is credited by Armed Forces Journal International with >a 750mm RHA penetration in a direct attack mode and 1,450mm RHA in a >"Lofted" attack mode. > > The higher rating for the loft attack is due to the fact that the missile > dives down at a 30 (+) degree angle into highly sloped armor. This high >angle attack "De-multiplies" the advantage that good armor shaping provides, >thus increasing the relative penetrating power of the missile. > > doubles the amount of armor the shot has to travel through without >increasing weight. A diving attack eliminates this design advantage.> > > The Dragon, by way of comparison, weighs 73.2 lbs with a day tracker (8.6 > lbs with carrying case) Thermal night tracker (32.8 lbs with one battery, >one coolent bottle, and carrying case) and a missile round (28.8 lbs). > > To achieve a 4 hour operating time requires two nonstandard batteries > weighing 1.5 lbs and two coolent bottles at 1.5 lbs a piece -- i.e. add > another 3 lbs to Dragon (76.2 lbs total!) to get equal operating time with >the Javalin. > > SOURCES: > > "Anti-tank Weapon Faces New Delay," By Barbra Starr, JANES DEFENSE WEEKLY, > 20 July 1991, Pg. 93 > > "Javalin: A Leap Forward," by Capt. John Davis, INFANTRY Jan-Feb 1992, pgs > 14-15. > > "Soviet Gains in Armor/Antiarmor Shape US Army Master Plan," by Robert > Ropelewski, ARMED FORCES JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL, Feb. 1989, Pgs 68-78. > > > Bill - arn't connections great >------------ >Gary.. >ggore@mail.transdata.ca >http://www.transdata.ca/~ggore/morrow.htm > >Heres something else for you. > > >Javelin > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > FY 1997 Descriptive Summary > >Program Element: 0604611A >Budget Activity: 5 - Engineering and Manufacturing Development >Program Element Title: Javelin > >Project Number and Name >Cost (In Thousands) >FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 FY1998 FY1999 FY2000 FY2001 Cost to Total >Actual Est. Est. Est. Est. Est. Est. Comp Cost > >D499 JAVELIN >29550 973 1643 1548 0 0 0 0 617476 > > >A. Mission Description and Budget Item Justification: This Program >Element (PE) provides for the continuation of Engineering and >Manufacturing Development (EMD) of a manportable antitank weapon >system for the combined arms team employment. The infantry must have >the capability to defeat numerically superior armored forces. The >present medium infantry antitank weapon is DRAGON. The system >developed within this PE will replace the DRAGON to provide enhanced >lethality for the early entry force. It will have a high kill rate >against all known armor threats at extended ranges under day/night, >adverse weather conditions and in the presence of battlefield >obscurants. This system will be hardened against countermeasures and >will not require extensive training for effective employment. Active >protection system developments will be considered and modifications >studied to defeat these devices if necessary. EMD/Technical Support >will conclude in FY 1995. This project supports research efforts in >the engineering and manufacturing development phase of the acquisition >strategy and therefore is appropriate to Budget Activity 5. > >Acquisition Strategy: Not applicable. > >FY 1995 Accomplishments: >-- 21752 EMD Contract/EPP Contract/FTT Upgrade/Advanced Warhead >Major Contracts > >-- 3386 In- House Support (Program Management Office and >RDEC) >-- 982 Other Government Agency Support >-- 3430 Test Support >Total 29550 > >FY 1996 Planned Program: >-- 14 Program Management Support >-- 935 Test Support >-- 22 SBIR/STTR >-- 2 Revised Economic Assumptions, not available for >execution >Total 973 > > FY 1997 Planned Program: >-- 1544 Tracker Performance Upgrade Contract >-- 99 Program Management Support >Total 1643 > >B. Project Change Summary FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 >Previous President's Budget (FY 1996) > 31337 0 0 >Appropriated Value (FY 1995) > 33549 >Adjustment to FY 1995 > -3999 >Appropriated Amount (FY 1996) > 983 >Adjustment to FY 1996 > -10 >Adjustments to Budget Year (FY 1997) since > FY 1996 President's Budget > 1643 >Current Budget Estimate Submission > 29550 973 1643 > > >Change Summary Explanation: >Funding: FY 1995 - Reprogrammed out of PE (-3999). > FY 1996 - Revised Economic Assumption (-10). > FY 1997 - Program adjustment (+1643). > Schedule: The Live Fire Test and the Limited User Test are >currently scheduled for FY 1996. A tracker performance upgrade >program will be completed in > FY 1998. > Technical: FY 1997 and FY 1998 funding is provided for a >tracker enhancement effort. This program is designed to improve >lethality of the system. > >Other Program Funding Summary >FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 FY1998 FY1999 FY2000 FY2001 Cost to Total >Actual Est. Est. Est. Est. Est. Est. Comp Cost > >Missile Procurement, Army > >CC0007 Javelin (AAWS-M) >212583 200858 162104 147399 339693 603777 657858 99155 2649000 > >D. Schedule Profile >FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 >1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 >Award LRIP II Contract > X * >Conduct Physical Configuration Audit > X* >Initiate Production Verification Test > X* >Award LRIP III Contract > X* >Conduct System Level Live Fire Tests > X >First Unit Equipped > X >Full Rate Production Decision (ASARC) > X >Award FRP Multiyear > X >* Milestone Completed. > > >A. Project Cost Breakdown FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 >Major Contract Support > 21752 1544 >Support Contractor > 0 >Program Management Support > 2647 14 99 >Research and Development Center Support > 739 >Test Support > 3430 959 >Miscellaneous (OGA) > 982 >Total > 29550 973 1643 > >B. Budget Acquisition History and Planning Information > >Performing Organizations > >Contr Prog Off Prior To Total >EAC EAC FY1995 FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 Comp Prog > >Total Program >Product Development Organizations > >Performing Activity: TI/MM JV EMD >Contract Type: C/CPIF >Award Date: 06/21/89 >462700 465500 473975 19481 493456 > >Performing Activity: TI/MM JV ALT WHD >Contract Type: CPIF >Award Date: 03/28/94 >N/A N/A 2250 2271 4521 > >Performing Activity: TI/MM JV Upgrd >Contract Type: TDB >Award Date: 12/31/96 >N/A N/A 1544 1120 2664 >Support and Management Organizations > >Performing Activity: Support Contractor >Contract Type: 8(a)/CPFF >Award Date: >N/A N/A 6747 6747 >In-House Support >(Core,Collocated, > >Performing Activity: Labs, OGA's) >Contract Type: >Award Date: > 75864 4368 14 99 368 80713 >Test and Evaluation Organizations > >Performing Activity: Redstone Technical >Contract Type: Test Center, >Award Date: RSA, AL > 18067 1446 19513 > >Performing Activity: Other >Contract Type: >Award Date: > 6859 1984 959 60 9862 > >Government Furnished Property: Not Applicable > > Prior To Total > FY1995 FY1995 FY1996 FY1997 Comp Prog >Total Program > >Subtotal Product Development > 476225 21752 1544 1120 500641 >Subtotal Support and Management > 82611 4368 14 99 368 87460 >Subtotal Test and Evaluation > 24926 3430 959 60 29375 >Total Project > 583762 29550 973 1643 1548 617476 > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Information Copyright (c) 1996 Phillips Business Information. Inc. All >rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in any part in any form or medium >without express written permission of Phillips Business Information Inc. is >prohibited. Phillips and the Phillips logo are trademarks of Phillips >Publishing International, Inc. > > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >+ The Morrow Project Guns and Gear List! To unsubscribe send E-mail + >+ to: ListServ@nostromo.gate.net and in the body of message type: + >+ delete yourname@yoursite MP-GG + >+ All other questions should be sent to walt@digital.net + >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + The Morrow Project Guns and Gear List! To unsubscribe send E-mail + + to: ListServ@nostromo.gate.net and in the body of message type: + + delete yourname@yoursite MP-GG + + All other questions should be sent to walt@digital.net + ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ - --------------7D0279B25F2A-- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 00:57:36 -0500 From: Robert Beck Subject: Re: Hi At 09:09 AM 5/16/97 -0700, John Clune wrote: > Hi. My name is John and I'm new to this list. > I've been playing T:2000 for four years now... mainly second ed. > I was wondering if anybody knew where I could buy t/m:2000 stuff on the > net... i know it's out of print but there has to be a game store > somewhere. > Second... is GDW planning on doing more t/m:2000 stuff? > Thanks > John Clune > FHSU Debate Hi John, Sorry to greet you with bad news, but GDW's gone. I see Ron mentioned who bought the rights. It's the same guys who run this mailing list. Good places to buy Twilight 2000 material, and a lot of other GDW material for that matter are Sword of the Knight, which is a used game company out of Henderson, KY. They have a web page which has a generic spreadsheet copy of their used inventory. Prices are good and Kevin Knight's good about getting stuff out to his customers. Info is: Sword of the Knight Publications, Inc. 2240 Schuette Lane Henderson, KY 42420 USA Voice/Fax: 502-826-1218 web page: http://members.aol.com/SwrdKnght/sok.htm Another good company is Titan Games, run by Quincey Koziol. He sells a pretty good mix of GDW material himself. Titan Game's web page is: http://titan-games.com/titansite/rpg_items/index.shtml Hope that helps. Rob. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 15:02:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: Gamers-L-Digest V2 #80 (fwd) Greetings All: From another ML... << Didn't this wash out our thermals, too? Also, did the Iraqis use any smoke which could defeat our thermals? >> The US is just fielding Smoke generators with IR (Thermal) defeating smoke systems. Iraq has nothing that can touch it. Traditional Oil based smoke systems are no impediment to thermals. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 17 May 1997 15:11:25 -0700 (PDT) From: Christopher Callahan Subject: Re: Bad language, guns (getting far off subject) (fwd) Greetings All: From another ML... - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- I'm not about to argue with the FBI, but expansion does not equal wounding. You know without my telling you that wounding energy is proportional to mass times velocity squared, and that transfer of that kinetic energy to the tissues does far more than any penetration or cutting to cause tissue damage. You have no doubt seen the military films, side view, of a bullet of various calibers or muzzle velocities passing through a clear gel block. You know that the millisecond-long existence of the cavitation around the track is far more important to the production of wounded tissue than is the bullet itself. Example in point: The muzzle velocity is the only difference between the wounds produced by a .22 rifle and a .22 handgun. With a .22 handgun, if Black Talons were made for it, the cutting edges of the jacket might actually have some effect, since the wound track produced by a .22 is almost equivalent to that of an icepick inserted the same distance; its cavitation is barely larger than the track of the bullet itself. As muzzle velocities increase, the bullet becomes irrelevant, save that an unjacketed round changes shape as it strikes bone and becomes a flattened discoid that more effectively transfers kinetic energy to the tissue, accelerating the production of the wound cavitation. However, the total amount of wound cavitation is still utterly dependent on the muzzle velocity of the projectile. When you come to high-velocity weapons this stares you in the face. There's nothing like looking at the track of a rifle bullet through the liver. The track itself is a hemorrhagic perforation in a straight line that damages maybe 6-10 cubic centimeters of replaceable parenchyma. The area pulpified by the milliseconds of cavitation is a cylinder around the track 30 cm in diameter. Hemorrhage from the disrupted vessels in the damaged area is intense and almost always fatal. Not long ago we had a case of a woman magnum-shot in the neck whose brain was partly pulpified by the blast injury, i.e. the propagation up her carotid artery and mastoid process of the kinetic energy delivered by the slowing down of the bullet as it winged her vertebral column and continued on its merry way. John Hinckley shot President Reagan with exploding ammo. The effect of exploding ammo on producing tissue wounding is no greater than the effect of ordinary ammo. This is because mass times velocity squared overwhelmingly dwarfs the effect of any talon, explosion, anything the bullet can do. The major effect the bullet can produce is flattening versus exiting. Naturally a fully jacketed bullet that exits will not transfer all its mv2 to the tissues. I am not a ballistics expert. I am quoting my colleague, Dr. O.C. Smith, ex-Marine, captain US navy, combat veteran, sniper trainer, ballistics expert, who plays with those gel blocks himself downstairs. (He has an experimental gun laboratory in his private range in the basement of the morgue. Visits are by invitation only.) He says Black Talons do not produce any more tissue disruption than any equivalent round of the same weight and muzzle velocity that does not exit. The military has a hell of a lot of published literature on this subject besides what he says. What I'm saying is that the FBI tests could not have been set up to measure wounding energy and actual tissue disruption. Perhaps they were studying penetration of clothing, vests, other blocking factors along with stopping power, rather than specifically tissue disruption. Every FBI agent I have met knows it's fundamentally muzzle velocity that makes the difference. All homicides are X rayed and if we see from the rays that it's a goddamn frigging Black Talon again, we take it out with forceps, so the bleeding fingers are hyperbole, except if you run across it before you expect it -- then they're truth. If we're gonna sympathize with autopsy experts, let us both turn and direct our highest sympathy to those forensic anthropologists under William Rodriguez and his forensic pathology colleagues in the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, who, while autopsying Gulf War casualties, found that whole body x ray did not always locate and pre-identify *live rounds* still in the deep tissues of corpses. They say there's nothing like working away and suddenly hearing that awful, quiet "chink!" as forceps hits metal. Everybody back, crouch down, while sweating Dr. Susan H. attempts to extract the live round without detonating it... ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1996 #44 ************************************