twilight2000-digest Sunday, November 29 1998 Volume 1998 : Number 056 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. Setting Problems Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. Re: Setting Problems Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. Re: Setting Problems Small Arms Questions Re: Small Arms Questions Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. Re: Small Arms Questions Re: Small Arms Questions Re: Small Arms Questions Re: Small Arms Questions Re: Setting Problems ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 18:12:30 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. If your in the proximity of, or tryin too go thru a hi rad area you will have disruption. If you are far away from either then you will receive a pretty good sky wave, but if the other guyz near a hot spot then he'll suffer the effects. cheers Loonz - -----Original Message----- From: Brad McMillan To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM Date: Saturday, November 28, 1998 5:46 PM Subject: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. > > Hey guys, > > Gotta a question I'd thought I'd throw out to you. With the >discussion on radios evolving nicely, I began to wonder about the affects of >nuclear warfare on radio capabilities. Specificially, with nuclear fallout >all around in the T2K game, patches of high radiation exist at the >epicenters of the nukes used, or where related items were destroyed (nuclear >reactors for vehicles (subs, etc..) and power stations), I was wondering how >these high radiation zones affected radio transmissions, if at all? Does a >high radiation zone disrupt a frequency/transmission that travels through >that zone? If you were trying to radio someone on the other side of a high >RAD zone, would that transmission be fine, poor, or completely disrupted? >Does proximity to high RAD zones have an affect as well on radio >transmission/reception? > > I understand that immediately after a nuke explodes an EM pulse is >released which disrupts all electrical/electronic devices, including cars, >hydro-power, and anything else which relies upon electricity in some way. >How long does the disruption last? Is it permanent? Does the EM pulse >completely make these devices permanently inoperable, or do they eventually >regain their "charge"? > > I don't know if these things have been discussed before, but I would >appreciate any response. Thanks! > >- Brad >-------------------------------------------------- >Brad McMillan, AKA >Brude Mac a'Mhaoilein (Scots-gaelic) >Armchair Celtic Archae-Anthropologist/Historian >Goderich, Ontario, Canada > >Email: bmcmillan@odyssey.on.ca > >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line >'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 06:01:17 -0600 From: Mitch Berg Subject: Setting Problems >Mobile forces do not remain in a constant state of mobility. > >The second paragraph is germain. >cheers I think this entire thread is part of an almost uniquely American faith in the power of technology to win wars. After WWII, the propaganda line was that "Air Power Won the War" - patently false in both Europe (where the air campaign destroyed neither German production nor civil morale) and Japan (where the US submarine campaign essentially won the economic war). The current faith in the Cruise Missile and the Stealth Bomber are, culturally, descendants of that line of propaganda. Air power and standoff weapons have NEVER won a significant war. I don't care if it's cruise missiles or any other wonder weapon - at the end of the day, it's still the dogface grunt who (in the words of BH Liddell-Hart) "has to winkle the other bastard out of the foxhole and make him sign the peace treaty". Any indication that the US could have won the Gulf War (with our without bases in Saudi Arabia) using strictly cruise missiles is - um - ludicrous. Mitch Berg Humanware Design - www.humanwaredesign.com (651)644-4192 User Interface Design, Usability Analysis and Information Engineering. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 16:54:29 -0800 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. The worst effects would be during the first two weeks after the explosion. I don't know much else. The EMP should affect anything solid-state. I don't know whether this would destroy the electronics... Disks and stuff can lose data because of a magnet near them but the data on programmable chips is erased by exposing them to strong UV light for a few minutes... Perhaps someone knows more about this? Loonz wrote: > If your in the proximity of, or tryin too go thru a hi rad area you will > have disruption. If you are far away from either then you will receive a > pretty good sky wave, but if the other guyz near a hot spot then he'll > suffer the effects. > cheers > Loonz > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brad McMillan > To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM > Date: Saturday, November 28, 1998 5:46 PM > Subject: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. > > > > > Hey guys, > > > > Gotta a question I'd thought I'd throw out to you. With the > >discussion on radios evolving nicely, I began to wonder about the affects > of > >nuclear warfare on radio capabilities. Specificially, with nuclear fallout > >all around in the T2K game, patches of high radiation exist at the > >epicenters of the nukes used, or where related items were destroyed > (nuclear > >reactors for vehicles (subs, etc..) and power stations), I was wondering > how > >these high radiation zones affected radio transmissions, if at all? Does a > >high radiation zone disrupt a frequency/transmission that travels through > >that zone? If you were trying to radio someone on the other side of a high > >RAD zone, would that transmission be fine, poor, or completely disrupted? > >Does proximity to high RAD zones have an affect as well on radio > >transmission/reception? > > > > I understand that immediately after a nuke explodes an EM pulse is > >released which disrupts all electrical/electronic devices, including cars, > >hydro-power, and anything else which relies upon electricity in some way. > >How long does the disruption last? Is it permanent? Does the EM pulse > >completely make these devices permanently inoperable, or do they eventually > >regain their "charge"? > > > > I don't know if these things have been discussed before, but I > would > >appreciate any response. Thanks! > > > >- Brad > >-------------------------------------------------- > >Brad McMillan, AKA > >Brude Mac a'Mhaoilein (Scots-gaelic) > >Armchair Celtic Archae-Anthropologist/Historian > >Goderich, Ontario, Canada > > > >Email: bmcmillan@odyssey.on.ca > > > >*************************************************************************** > >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line > >'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line > 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 21:09:27 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. At 04:54 PM 11/28/98 -0800, Peter Vieth wrote: >The worst effects would be during the first two weeks after the explosion. I >don't know much else. The EMP should affect anything solid-state. I don't know >whether this would destroy the electronics... Disks and stuff can lose data >because of a magnet near them but the data on programmable chips is erased by >exposing them to strong UV light for a few minutes... Perhaps someone knows more >about this? > The EMP (the "P" is for PULSE, after all) is supposed to fry electronics by overloaded them--I think it's essentially a very strong current that's induced temporarily by the EM field produced by the explosion (it would obviously interfore with operation during that brief pulse, too, thought that's not so significant). There's an adventure idea in Free City of Krakow based on this (I won't go into more detail, so as not to spoil it). The more long-term effects are, I think, separate from the EMP (or maybe an afteffect of it?)--something to do with disruption of the atmosphere and maybe magnetic fields. Not my area of expertise, though. :) Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 22:21:09 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: Re: Setting Problems I gave up this whole thread cause it started with someone saying something tecnically was'nt possible and some contended it was. Nothing too do with supposition as to the out come of any contest. Now could we all just calm down and talk about radios or damage or nuclear pasta makers or something? Geez Loonz - -----Original Message----- From: Mitch Berg To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM Date: Saturday, November 28, 1998 7:14 PM Subject: Setting Problems >>Mobile forces do not remain in a constant state of mobility. >> >>The second paragraph is germain. >>cheers > >I think this entire thread is part of an almost uniquely American faith in >the power of technology to win wars. After WWII, the propaganda line was >that "Air Power Won the War" - patently false in both Europe (where the air >campaign destroyed neither German production nor civil morale) and Japan >(where the US submarine campaign essentially won the economic war). The >current faith in the Cruise Missile and the Stealth Bomber are, culturally, >descendants of that line of propaganda. > >Air power and standoff weapons have NEVER won a significant war. I don't >care if it's cruise missiles or any other wonder weapon - at the end of the >day, it's still the dogface grunt who (in the words of BH Liddell-Hart) >"has to winkle the other bastard out of the foxhole and make him sign the >peace treaty". > >Any indication that the US could have won the Gulf War (with our without >bases in Saudi Arabia) using strictly cruise missiles is - um - ludicrous. > > > >Mitch Berg >Humanware Design - www.humanwaredesign.com >(651)644-4192 >User Interface Design, Usability Analysis and >Information Engineering. >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line >'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 16:01:42 +1100 From: Peter Grining Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. (Brad) I understand that immediately after a nuke explodes an EM pulse is released which disrupts all electrical/electronic devices, including cars, hydro-power, and anything else which relies upon electricity in some way. How long does the disruption last? Is it permanent? Does the EM pulse completely make these devices permanently inoperable, or do they eventually regain their "charge"? (Me) EMP is only for high altitude airburst nuclear explosions. I think its only large (Megatonne class), but I'n not sure. Low altitude airbursts and ground strikes don't produce EMP. Doctrine calls for units expecting nuclear strikes to shut down radios and other electronic devices. Units fighting in a nuclear environment would have some radios switched off to save them from the effects of EMP. The effect of EMP is permanment. The radios, etc are burnt out. A lot of Russian stuff still uses vacuum tubes, which are immune to EMP. I've heard the Challenger 2 MBT is immune to EMP, so we know a lot or Western military stuff would be OK. The theory is to have all the electrical wiring shielded (?Faraday shielding) which should stop EMP. All civilian devices would be fried. Anything electronic would be OK as long as it is powered down. Peter Grining grining@webnet.com.au *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 00:38:14 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. At 04:01 PM 11/29/98 +1100, Peter Grining wrote: >(Brad) > >I understand that immediately after a nuke explodes an EM pulse is >released which disrupts all electrical/electronic devices, including cars, >hydro-power, and anything else which relies upon electricity in some way. >How long does the disruption last? Is it permanent? Does the EM pulse >completely make these devices permanently inoperable, or do they eventually >regain their "charge"? > >(Me) >EMP is only for high altitude airburst nuclear explosions. I think its only >large (Megatonne class), but I'n not sure. Low altitude airbursts and >ground strikes don't produce EMP. Doctrine calls for units expecting >nuclear strikes to shut down radios and other electronic devices. Units >fighting in a nuclear environment would have some radios switched off to >save them from the effects of EMP. The effect of EMP is permanment. The >radios, etc are burnt out. A lot of Russian stuff still uses vacuum tubes, >which are immune to EMP. I've heard the Challenger 2 MBT is immune to EMP, >so we know a lot or Western military stuff would be OK. The theory is to >have all the electrical wiring shielded (?Faraday shielding) which should >stop EMP. > >All civilian devices would be fried. Anything electronic would be OK as >long as it is powered down. > AFAIK any explosion produces an EMP, but the effects of a low-level bomb are mitigated by intervening terrain. As for vacuum tubs, I don't think they're "immune", but rather just more more resistant to the effects of EMP--which devices were destroyed would depend both on the characteristics of the devices themselves and how strong the pulse was when it reached those devices. (Some might rember that a number of years ago, the Army had a small problem with helicopters in Germany crashing when commercial radio signals intefered with their fly-by-wire systems--recent efforts to shield such circuits probably have as much to do with this problem [which might be very severe over an electronic battlefield] as with EMP.) Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 12:31:49 -0500 From: "Chuck Mandus" Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. That's pretty much my understanding about EMP is what you said is if the electronic item was shut down, the chances of it making it through OK is much better. We amateur radio operators have to understand about EMP as well because we are supposed to be prepared to communicate during emergencies including a nuclear war. What my ham radio magazines tell me is to protect your equipment from EMP or any other high voltage bursts such as lightning strikes is to shut down the radio, disconnect the power sources, antennas, microphones, external speakers, etc so the EMP will have a harder time to get into the radio. Another EMP shielding measure is to enclose sensitive equipment into a metal cage (aka like a Faraday cage) that is grounded so the EMP will take the path of least resistance and go directly to ground bypassing the radio or any other device. Cars, well I'd keep mine shut down plus too the steel body would act like a Faraday cage because cars are very well grounded. I assume a lot of military vehicles are the same way. My sources tell me that VHF/UHF radios are not as susceptible to EMP as well. Chuck DE KA3WRW "Truly those of us with brain cells are an oppressed minority..." - -- Jason Fox said after the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles had been cancelled. - ---------- > From: Peter Grining > To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM > Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. > Date: Sunday, November 29, 1998 12:01 AM > > (Brad) > > I understand that immediately after a nuke explodes an EM pulse is > released which disrupts all electrical/electronic devices, including cars, > hydro-power, and anything else which relies upon electricity in some way. > How long does the disruption last? Is it permanent? Does the EM pulse > completely make these devices permanently inoperable, or do they eventually > regain their "charge"? > > (Me) > EMP is only for high altitude airburst nuclear explosions. I think its only > large (Megatonne class), but I'n not sure. Low altitude airbursts and > ground strikes don't produce EMP. Doctrine calls for units expecting > nuclear strikes to shut down radios and other electronic devices. Units > fighting in a nuclear environment would have some radios switched off to > save them from the effects of EMP. The effect of EMP is permanment. The > radios, etc are burnt out. A lot of Russian stuff still uses vacuum tubes, > which are immune to EMP. I've heard the Challenger 2 MBT is immune to EMP, > so we know a lot or Western military stuff would be OK. The theory is to > have all the electrical wiring shielded (?Faraday shielding) which should > stop EMP. > > All civilian devices would be fried. Anything electronic would be OK as > long as it is powered down. > > Peter Grining > grining@webnet.com.au > > > *************************************************************************** > To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line > 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 13:50:16 -0500 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. At 12:31 PM 11/29/98 -0500, Chuck Mandus wrote: >Cars, well I'd >keep mine shut down plus too the steel body would act like a Faraday cage >because cars are very well grounded. I assume a lot of military vehicles >are the same way. My sources tell me that VHF/UHF radios are not as >susceptible to EMP as well. > Remember, cars are on rubber tires. :) So they're quite insulated--I remember even being told as a child that it was dangerous to sit in a car in a thunderstorm with your leg out the door touching the pavement, since YOU would be the ground that way. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 15:36:24 -0500 From: negril@mindspring.com (C. Webb) Subject: Re: Setting Problems >>I think this entire thread is part of an almost uniquely American faith in >>the power of technology to win wars. After WWII, the propaganda line was >>that "Air Power Won the War" - patently false in both Europe (where the air >>campaign destroyed neither German production nor civil morale) and Japan >>(where the US submarine campaign essentially won the economic war). The >>current faith in the Cruise Missile and the Stealth Bomber are, culturally, >>descendants of that line of propaganda. >> >>Air power and standoff weapons have NEVER won a significant war. I don't >>care if it's cruise missiles or any other wonder weapon - at the end of the >>day, it's still the dogface grunt who (in the words of BH Liddell-Hart) >>"has to winkle the other bastard out of the foxhole and make him sign the >>peace treaty". >> >>Any indication that the US could have won the Gulf War (with our without >>bases in Saudi Arabia) using strictly cruise missiles is - um - ludicrous. Settle down Beavis...Since when does the word technology mean air warfare? You've jumbled a bunch of topics under the subject of the technology thread. I can speak from experience that the U.S. Air Force has no illusions concerning the effects of strategic bombing in both campaigns during World War II. The U.S. Army Air Corps and the RAF dropped millions of bombs on Germany in hopes to pound them into submission. Strategic bombing did not win the war in Europe. The effort failed to destroy Germany's resolve to fight and in the end the war was decided on the ground. This simple fact is what we were taught. Period. With regard to the Gulf War let us never discount the fact that the Coalition Forces were the best trained, most professional soldiers on earth backed with tremendous logistical support. As for technology, no matter how you cut it, Iraq did not have equally advanced equipment both in the air or on the ground and that played a huge role in determining the outcome of that war. Forget about the airpower and the missles for a moment and consider the armor engagements in the early hours of the ground offensive. It was brutally decisive due to the crew, due to the equipment and the strategy born out of their combined capabilities. Iraq's strategy, based on outdated equipment and their outdated capabilities, proved to be quite simply the losing combination. Now, about those wonder weapons. If you care to discount their effect on the Iraqi's then so be it, but I suspect the Iraqi's have a much different opinion. By the way, why is this an "American" thing? Someone's always cryin'... -Chris *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 12:56:19 -0700 From: Kurt Stogrin Subject: Small Arms Questions Hey does anyone have info on what small arms these armies use: Denmark, Sweeden, Finland, Norway, Greece What is the GPMG for Canada in Twilight would it be the MAG or M60? V1.0 lists the MAG and V2.0 lists the M60. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 13:06:23 -0700 From: Kurt Stogrin Subject: Re: Small Arms Questions I'm also trying to find out what Armored vehicles Finland uses. Can any of The Finish members of the List help me with this? *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 20:19:18 -0000 From: "Tas" Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. This echoes what I've been taught pretty much. For most equipment, if it isn't on and plugged in the Electromagnetic Phenomena will pretty much bypass it. As to the residual effects of radiation - I wouldn't have thought it would cause too much of a problem - HF is always full of static at the best of times :-) The way my group used to run it (I haven't played a Twilight game involving radios in a long time) was that an area of very dense radiation acted like Jamming on certain frequency bands. The problem with this is the really short wave length that would be radiated. If you have a fairly powerful HF transmitter it will easily burn through this. VHF (30MHz - 300MHz) and UHF (300MHz - 3GHz) are safer as they only have a limited range an line of sight capabilities. The main loss for UHF and higher wavebands is they tend to use big radio towers and satellites to get round terrain obstacles. These are really unlikely to be switched of and unplugged sufficiently to survive the EMP (and the satellites need telemetry signals all the time) - odds are they really gave up the ghost! For my players it became the norm for them to rely on low VHF manpack radios to talk to each other but they were too paranoid to trust people they didn't know. One of them tried to jury rig a HF transmitter to contact his parent regiment (copper wire cable about 10 metres long would give him good access to most of the HF spectrum and with a big enough generator the sky wave will bounce most of the way around the globe.) Anyway thats my 2p worth and I'm off for a few weeks now! Keep up the good chatter! Tas - -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Mandus To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM Date: 29 November 1998 17:33 Subject: Re: Nuke effect on Radios & Misc. >That's pretty much my understanding about EMP is what you said is if the >electronic item was shut down, the chances of it making it through OK is >much better. We amateur radio operators have to understand about EMP as >well because we are supposed to be prepared to communicate during >emergencies including a nuclear war. What my ham radio magazines tell me >is to protect your equipment from EMP or any other high voltage bursts such >as lightning strikes is to shut down the radio, disconnect the power >sources, antennas, microphones, external speakers, etc so the EMP will have >a harder time to get into the radio. Another EMP shielding measure is to >enclose sensitive equipment into a metal cage (aka like a Faraday cage) >that is grounded so the EMP will take the path of least resistance and go >directly to ground bypassing the radio or any other device. Cars, well I'd >keep mine shut down plus too the steel body would act like a Faraday cage >because cars are very well grounded. I assume a lot of military vehicles >are the same way. My sources tell me that VHF/UHF radios are not as >susceptible to EMP as well. > >Chuck > >DE KA3WRW > > > >"Truly those of us with brain cells are an oppressed minority..." > >-- Jason Fox said after the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles had been >cancelled. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 13:36:33 -0700 From: Rogue09 Subject: Re: Small Arms Questions Kurt Stogrin wrote: > > I'm also trying to find out what Armored vehicles Finland uses. Can any of The > Finish members of the List help me with this? > Well I'm not Finnish but here's some info I have... MBT's: 160 T-72's, 70 T-55's AIFV's & APC's: 110 BMP-2, 40 BMP-1, 50 BTR-50, 110 BTR-60, 220 MT-LB, 310 SISU XA-118's Hope This Helps T.R. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 14:08:12 -0700 From: Rogue09 Subject: Re: Small Arms Questions Kurt Stogrin wrote: > > Hey does anyone have info on what small arms these armies use: > Denmark, Sweeden, Finland, Norway, Greece > What is the GPMG for Canada in Twilight would it be the MAG or M60? V1.0 lists > the MAG and V2.0 lists the M60. DENMARK: FN GP-35, SIG P-210, Possibily SIG P-220's Hovea M49, H&K MP5A3, Possibily Uzi's & Madson M50's C7, C7A1, M-16A1, H&K G3 MG42/59 Browning M2HB PI M-203 GL M51 60mm, M57 81mm, M50 120mm Carl Gustaf M3 84mm, M40 106mm RCL, TOW ATGW, TOW II ATW, M72 LAW, Stinger AAML SWEDEN: Browning HP-35, SIG P-210, Model 58 (S&W Model 10 2 inch for Pilots), Glock Model 17/19's, Walther PP's M45 Swedish K AK-5, Bofors Carl Gustav CG-A2, Carl Gustav CG-A5, AK-4 DSG-90 AW (Modified L96A1), Barrett M82A1 M249, M249 Minmi Para, FN-MAG, M36, M39 PI-M203 M29 81mm, M41D 120mm AT-4 84mm, TOW ATGW, RBS 56 BILL ATGW, Panzerfaust-3 FINLAND: Lahti M35, FN HP-35, S&W Model 19 Used by some Special Operations Units Jati-Matic, Suomi M31, Sumoi M44, H&K MP-5 & Uzi Used by some Special Operations Units Sako M90, Valmet Model 76 Sako TRG-21, Vaime SSR Mark I Valmet Model 78 SAW, RPD, Valmet M60/M62 GPMG, PK GPMG DShK & NSV HMG 60mm Tampella, 81mm Tampella, 120mm Tampella, 120mm M43, 140mm M43 M72 LAW, SS-11 ATGW, TOW ATGW, TOW II ATGW, Apilas, SM58-61 95mm RCL NORWAY: Glock Model 17/19, Walther P1, H&K P7M8, M1912 45 ACP, Sphinx AT-2000S for paramilitary forces, S&W Model 19 used by some Special Operations units MP-40, H&K MP5, Sterling L2A3 used by some Special Operations units G3 MG3, M249, M249 Minimi Para Browning M2HB H&K 79 GL L16 81mm, M30 107mm M72 LAW, M-3 Carl Gustaf 84mm, M40 106mm RCL, TOW ATGW, Eryx ATGW GREECE: EP9S (H&K P9S), EP7 (H&K P7M8), Colt M1911A1 EMP-5 (H&K MP-5), Steyr MPi69 M-16A1, H&K 33, FN-FAL, H&K G3 M60 GPMG, H&K 11A1, FN-MAG Browning M2 HB M79 GL, M203 GL M2 60mm, M1/M29 81mm, M30 107mm M67 90mm RCL, M40 106mm RCL, TOW ATGW, MILAN ATGW CANADA-MACHINEGUNS: C9 (M249 SAW), C-9 PARA (M-249 Minimi Para), FN-MAG, C-1 Browning (M1919A4 Brownings converted to 7.62mm NATO), Browning M2HB Hope This Helps T.R. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 14:18:00 -0700 From: Rogue09 Subject: Re: Small Arms Questions Slight correction on my part, for some reason some paranthesis were left out, which can really lead you astray on some parts...here's the corrected bits and sorry for the mistake. FINLAND: Lahti M35, FN HP-35, S&W Model 19 Used by some Special Operations Units Jati-Matic, Suomi M31, Sumoi M44,(H&K MP-5 & Uzi Used by some Special Operations Units) NORWAY: Glock Model 17/19, Walther P1, H&K P7M8, M1912 45 ACP, (Sphinx AT-2000S for paramilitary forces, S&W Model 19 used by some Special Operations units) MP-40, H&K MP5, (Sterling L2A3 used by some Special Operations units) T.R. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 17:56:26 -0500 From: negril@mindspring.com (C. Webb) Subject: Re: Small Arms Questions >>Hey does anyone have info on what small arms these armies use: >>Denmark, Sweeden, Finland, Norway, Greece >>What is the GPMG for Canada in Twilight would it be the MAG or M60? V1.0 >>>>lists the MAG and V2.0 lists the M60. In order to prevent the start of a nightmare thread in the "I'm right your wrong" vein I will start by indicating my source for the following information. The answers to your questions were taken from "Small Arms Today, 2nd Edition", 1988 by Edward C. Ezell who was the Supervisor of the Armed Forces History Division and Curator of the National Firearms Collection at the Smithsonian Institution. The date of this book somewhat jibes with the era of the TW2000 Game System so that while there have been changes to arsonels in recent years this info seems to typify the period in which the game was written. DENMARK: Pistols: Swedish Model 40 Lahti. 9X19mm Parabellum FN Mle. 9X19mm Parabellum SIG 47/8 (SIG Model P-210/2). 9X19mm Parabellum SMGs: Mp M49 Hovea. 9X19mm Parabellum HK MP-5A2 and A3. 9X19mm Parabellum Rifles: G M/66 (HK G3). 7.62mm NATO. Used Home Guard Semi-auto only. G M/75 (HK G3). 7.62mm NATO. Standard front-line battle rifle. G M/50 (M1 converted to 7.62mm NATO). 7.62mm NATO. Used in limited quantities by artillary troops. GPMG: Mg M/42/59 (MG42/59). 7.62mm NATO. Also called the MG 62. Mg M/50 (.50 M2HB HMG). .50 Cal (12.7X99mm). Used on ground, vehicles and M55 quad AA mounts. Automatic Cannon: 20mm automatic cannon. Unknown 20mm guns mounted on large coastal patrol craft. SWEDEN: Pistols: Swedish Model 40 Lahti. 9X19mm Parabellum SMGs: Model 1945 M/45. 9X19mm Parabellum. Rifles: Automatkarbin 4 or ak4 (HK G3). 7.62 NATO. Automatkarbin 5 or ak5 (FN FNC). 5.56X45mm. No three shot burst option. Automatgevar m/42B or Ag m/42B (Ljungman rifle). 6.55X55mm. Gevar m/96 (Model 1896 Swedish Mauser rifle). 6.5X55mm. Still used by some Home Gaurd forces. GPMGs: Kulspruta 58 or Ksp 58 (FN MAG). 7.62 NATO. Kulspruta M42B (M1919A6). 7.62 NATO. Rework of the 6.5mm Browning LMG. Automatic Cannons: HS804. 20X110mm. M40 Bofors. 20X145mm. FINLAND: I'll send you this another time since there is so much info. NORWAY: Pistols: Glock P80. 9X19mm Parabellum. P7 M8 (HK P7). 9X19mm Parabellum. SMGs: Maskin M40 (German MP40). 9X19mm Parabellum. Issued to armor crews. British Sten Gun. 9X19mm Parabellum. Still issued to armor crews. MP5A2 and A3. 9X19mm Parabellum. Suomi-37/39. 9X19mm Parabellum. Used by Norwegian Naval Commandos. Rifles: Gevaer Automatisk AG3 (HK G3). 7.62 NATO. .30 M1. 7.62X63mm. Still in Norway's inventory due to shortage of G3s through 1987. GPMGs: MG3. 7.62 NATO. MG34 LMG. 7.62 NATO. .50 M2HB HMG. .50 Cal (12.7X99mm). Mostly FN made. Still employ M55 quad mounts for air defense. Automatic Cannon: Rh202. 20X139mm. Grenade Launcher: HK79. 40X46mmSR. GREECE: Pistols: P7. 9X19mm Parabellum. Greek Air Force aquisition. .45 M1911A1. .45cal (11.43X23mm). .38 S&W revolver. .38cal (9X29mmR). SMGs: MPi69. 9X19mm Parabellum. Steyr SMG. UZI. 9X19mm Parabellum. EMP5 (HK MP5A3). 9X19mm Parabellum. Liscenced for manufacture by Helenic Arms Industry of Athens from HK GmbH. Ingram M10. 9X19mm Parabellum. Used by Airport Police. Rifles: Model 701 (M16A2). 5.56X45mm. Purchased for use by Greek Special Forces. Model 723 (M16A2 Carbine). 5.56X45mm. Purchased for use by Greek Special Forces. FN FAL. 7.62NATO. Also purchased PARA model in early seventies. G3. 7.62NATO.Liscenced for manufacture by Helenic Arms Industry of Athens from HK GmbH. .30 M1. 7.62X63mm. 185,800 of these delivered in early 1970's. .30 M1C and M1D Sniper rifles. 7.62X63mm. Shotgun: Model 12 Winchester. 12 gauge (18.5X63mm). GPMG's: MG3. 7.62NATO. HK11A1. 7.62NATO. FN MAG. 7.62NATO. M60. 7.62NATO. .50 M2HB HMG. .50cal (12.7X99mm). Automatic Cannon: M39A3RH. 20X102mm. M61 Cannon. 20X102mm. US MK4 Oerlikon (Type S). 20X110mmRB. On naval craft. M693. 20X139mm. French Origin. Rh202. 20X139mm. Used in twin AA configuration. Grenade Launchers: M79. 40X46mmSR. M203. 40X46mmSR. As for Canada's GPMG this source lists the MAG but not the M60. -Chris *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 16:40:53 -0500 From: "Loonz" Subject: Re: Setting Problems Well put good Sir, Well put Cheers Loonz - -----Original Message----- From: C. Webb To: twilight2000@MPGN.COM Date: Sunday, November 29, 1998 2:31 PM Subject: Re: Setting Problems > >>>I think this entire thread is part of an almost uniquely American faith in >>>the power of technology to win wars. After WWII, the propaganda line was >>>that "Air Power Won the War" - patently false in both Europe (where the air >>>campaign destroyed neither German production nor civil morale) and Japan >>>(where the US submarine campaign essentially won the economic war). The >>>current faith in the Cruise Missile and the Stealth Bomber are, culturally, >>>descendants of that line of propaganda. >>> >>>Air power and standoff weapons have NEVER won a significant war. I don't >>>care if it's cruise missiles or any other wonder weapon - at the end of the >>>day, it's still the dogface grunt who (in the words of BH Liddell-Hart) >>>"has to winkle the other bastard out of the foxhole and make him sign the >>>peace treaty". >>> >>>Any indication that the US could have won the Gulf War (with our without >>>bases in Saudi Arabia) using strictly cruise missiles is - um - ludicrous. > >Settle down Beavis...Since when does the word technology mean air warfare? >You've jumbled a bunch of topics under the subject of the technology >thread. I can speak from experience that the U.S. Air Force has no >illusions concerning the effects of strategic bombing in both campaigns >during World War II. The U.S. Army Air Corps and the RAF dropped millions >of bombs on Germany in hopes to pound them into submission. Strategic >bombing did not win the war in Europe. The effort failed to destroy >Germany's resolve to fight and in the end the war was decided on the >ground. This simple fact is what we were taught. Period. > >With regard to the Gulf War let us never discount the fact that the >Coalition Forces were the best trained, most professional soldiers on earth >backed with tremendous logistical support. As for technology, no matter >how you cut it, Iraq did not have equally advanced equipment both in the >air or on the ground and that played a huge role in determining the outcome >of that war. Forget about the airpower and the missles for a moment and >consider the armor engagements in the early hours of the ground offensive. >It was brutally decisive due to the crew, due to the equipment and the >strategy born out of their combined capabilities. Iraq's strategy, based on >outdated equipment and their outdated capabilities, proved to be quite >simply the losing combination. > >Now, about those wonder weapons. If you care to discount their effect on >the Iraqi's then so be it, but I suspect the Iraqi's have a much different >opinion. > >By the way, why is this an "American" thing? Someone's always cryin'... > > -Chris > > >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line >'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@mpgn.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1998 #56 ************************************