twilight2000-digest Tuesday, August 31 1999 Volume 1999 : Number 067 The following topics are covered in this digest: Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: M16 Re: Rail Guns Re: M16 Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: M16 Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Re: Rail Guns Groups Re: Rail Guns M16 Re: M16 To Nike Re: M16 Re: M16 Re: Rail Guns ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 13:26:33 PDT From: "C Jones" Subject: Re: Rail Guns i didn't mean thoughs missles and who said anything about hitting the train! you can take out the tracks that much easier and a derailed train isn't going anywhere! it just depends on how big and how many people you put on the train...... but that is a good point it is really easy to ambush a train C JONES ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 17:16:01 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rail Guns At 11:42 AM 8/29/99 +0200, Javier Sesma wrote: > > I think that assault trains are no good idea, they where made for >transport, not for combat, and preparing a train for that is a high price for a >poor result. Regardless of what appearances may be, in the Polish-Soviet war of 1919-21 (where the fronts were huge and the number of troops involved was small by comparison), they were decisivie weapons, something akin to what the panzer division was a generation later--they could rush in faster than anythign else, disgorge a battalion of troops, and thereby seize a key town before the enemy could react. In other conflicts (I've heard some were even used in the Yugoslavian civil wars), they've been used more to guard rail lines behind friendly lines (hm...what was the movie with the good German armored train? King Solomon's Mines maybe?), or to transport important cargoes--and of course to transport railroad artillery. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 17:39:57 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rail Guns At 09:34 AM 8/29/99 PDT, C Jones wrote: > > > > >> I think that assault trains are no good idea, they where made for >>transport, not for combat, and preparing a train for that is a high price >>for a >>poor result. > >and how hard is it to hit a train with a rpg or something (it can't exactly >dodge the missle) > Well, harder than you might think: first off, the train carries its own infantry support (including machinegun nests). Therefore, it can do an awfully good job of suppressing the local area. Just as importantly, on RPG or ATG hit isn't going to destroy the train: it will probably kill a few people on one car (and not even the whole car), unless you happen to hit something like a wheel or a coupler (both rather difficult targets--and the wheels in particular can probably be armored to an extent; in fact, just a thin skirt on directly beneath the sides of the carriage would cause a premature explosion of a HEAT round and possibly slightly deflect an AP round to prevent it from hitting a bogey). The one vulnerable point is the engine itself, which is why you put it in the middle of the train (and no, these aren't typically long trains), which lets the front car suck up the first shots and hit any mines (heck, it doens't even have to be manned, except maybe for look-outs on top). I'm sure you can armor it enough to deflect MG bullets, but yes an ATG or RPG could do nasty things, especially to a steam engine (steam engines have a nasty tendency to explode if mishandled). If the country you're driving through doesn't have many hiding places, you should be safe, since the guys up front can take out any threats before the engine gets in range; you might have more trouble in more overgrown areas, though having the other cars upfront, and proceeding slowly, lets you scout out any ambushes (but yes, it could be risky over the long term, esp. if opponents are prepared for you). Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 17:54:34 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rail Guns At 12:31 PM 8/29/99 -0500, Steve Chymy wrote: > > I would think you would have a difficult time killing a train, assuming that >we were in open flat lands, and this type of train would be a moving armada >with many troops and support personal living on board. Complete with localized >radar, counter battery, etc. Note: in my campaign, we have progress quite far >after the war, and many times my players are riding horse back because their >vehicles have maintenance values of 8 or 9 and are about to break down. So I >would say it would depend on timing. Plus major populated centers remaining >(developing) would have to revert to steam due to the lack of petroleum >wouldn't you think? > Right. (Remember though that ethanol always works, providing you can build vehicle--and building internal cumbustion engines probably isn't that hard, provided you have steel available--and there's LOTS of steel available as scrap.) >> and how hard is it to hit a train with a rpg or something (it can't exactly >> dodge the missle) > > First, if you properly armored a train with sandbags old tank armor etc., I >do not think a RPG rocket would penetrate the armor, this is why: > A train car can carry over 90 tones of weight, correct me if I am wrong, >You could pile sandbags and weld armor into next week. Yes, that's how it's done, though I doubt you could make armor that's effectively as thick as laminate tank armor (remember that that has a manufacturing advantage of anything you can do in the field)--but you maybe be right, since trains can carry a LOT of weight (the main problem is finding armor that's thin enough that you still have useful room inside the train). However, with sandbags and such all over the place, the _effect_ of a penetrating hit is going to be very small, because a train is a _big_ thing, and the sandbags will cut down on flying shrapnel. As I said earlier though, hitting the engine is a different matter--plus it's harder to armor, since you can't just slap armor on from the inside (some of the later steam engines, though, especially European ones, actually have high, flat, metal plates on the sides (probably for aerodynamics), perfect for bolting on armor--they really don't look much like the ornate engines we're used to seeing in Westerns, or on the cover of _Going_Home_). Remember that, not only can train suspension suport a tremendous amount of weight, but a train engine can actually move all this weight, because rails have so little friction. And an armored train is probably going to be somewhat shorter than what that engine would normally pull. >As far as missiles are >concerned, there are not many tomahawk (type) missiles floating around out >there, and don't these type of missiles use satellites and sophisticated >electronics to guide them, which may not be all that functional in Y2K. And for >good measure you could have a antimissile Vulcan cannon onboard. >Although that would be hard to explain, but if your campaign has Tomahawk >missiles then this would not be far fetched. > Yeah, I wouldn't spend much time worrying about cruise missiles :), but anti-tank missiles might be a concern. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 18:08:29 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rail Guns At 08:11 PM 8/29/99 +0200, Javier Sesma wrote: >> > > Destroying the head of the train every think coming after if will get >out of the railway, or in the worst case it will stop it. That depends on how fast you're moving--if you're proceeding carefully, even a derailment of the first car need not kick the rest of the train off. Also, note that derailing a car with weapons fire is a LOT harder than merely hitting the carriage of the car. (Of course, derailing through a loose rail is a real possibility--you want to scout the tracks in front of you carefully.) I think that in real life, what made trains so effective in the Polish-Soviet War was the fact that your enemy didn't want to ruin the railroads for himself by doing things like tearing up rails--and since the lines often shifted quickly, you could never be sure that the track you're tearing up today won't be deep behind your own lines tomorrow. I think this situation is a lot like TW2K, given how sparsely populated the world has become. But of course, you also want to be sure that your enemy depends on the railways, and thus has an incentive to keep them in good condition. I think though that using small vehicles on the rails, even drawn by horse, will be _very_ common, since the energy requirements are so much lower, and the weights which can be carried so much high, on a rail than on the road, especially given the bad shape most roads will be in. >You can destroy a train with >artillery or simply with a fallen tree on the way. > Hm...it would take a direct hit, I think, to do much--shrapnel and blast pressure won't accomplish a lot. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 21:22:58 -0500 From: Steve Chymy Subject: Re: Rail Guns Javier Sesma wrote: > > > A train is the prefect target for an ambush, you always know where it will > go. In the other hand railways are built avoiding zones with bad terrain and > looking for facilities of building. You can enjoy making a surprise attack and > getting your train to the middle of a town, giving little time to their inhabitants > to get a gun. But in a place prepared for defence, with patrol and surveillance > point, as there are in many important places, you have no possibility. If you are assaulting a population with built in defense, you would not assault the location with the train!!! :o Instead you would use the Rail Guns on the train to batter the defense, some of the guns that could be mounted on a train have ranges over 50Kms I have just learned. While you were bombarding the defenses with the rail guns you would deploy all of the ordinance you were hauling on your train, I.E. armor, self propelled guns, troops, mortar teams, and perhaps a very rare aircraft. The train would then become command center, supply depot, M.A.S.H., and mess hall, all within a reasonable distance from the front line. Keep in mind there better be a dam good reason for this assault, perhaps this location has an active oil well with no refinery or something to that effect, otherwise it would be prudent to negotiate passage. Therefore there is a possibility of a successful assault, right? or wrong? Steve *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 21:23:06 -0500 From: Steve Chymy Subject: Re: Rail Guns Javier Sesma wrote: > > > Destroying the head of the train every think coming after if will get out of > the railway, or in the worst case it will stop it. You can destroy a train with > artillery or simply with a fallen tree on the way. > I will refer you to Scotts response on the above topic, but you have a point, artillery fire would be of great concern, this is why I am going to try this scenario out with my players and see how they respond, if anyone is interested, I could post the results as the campaign unfolds. I suspect they will use artillery, since it is available to them and avoids close combat on a large scale. I do need some help as too what and how such a train would be configured, and all suggestions would be helpful. As far as destroying the tracks, that would be a last desperate attempted to slow the progression of the train, as the tracks are currently used to move valuable goods between distant locations. I wonder how long it would take to repair track line with a couple hundred troops onboard the train plus support staff? Steve *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 21:43:09 -0500 From: Steve Chymy Subject: Re: M16 Randy Knight wrote: > > The Warsaw Pact had phased out the AK-47 in favour of the AK-74, (as > you > > all know, this being the T2K list.) The AK-74 fires a semi-jacketed round > > which has an enhanced expansion in the wound track at the expense of > > accuracy. > > Jim (Who'se speaking totally from memory as all his books are packed > > No, the bullets are not semi jacketed, that would contravene the Hague > convention regarding the laws of land warfare. Rather, the bullets are very > long for their caliber causing them to break into multiple pieces as they > travel through the body. Something they found to be very effective in > Afghanistan. > Randy > Just to add one thing, I have been told by a few Canadian troops that they were shot at with filled mercury bullets, I would guess these are not allowed by one convention or another, but a reliable sources told me they were abundant in the area, which was "dam scary" to him. Does anyone out there know what would be involved in casing this type of ammo? Would this become common in TW2K? *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 21:54:13 -0600 From: rogue09@sprynet.com Subject: Re: Rail Guns > > As far as destroying the tracks, that would be a last desperate attempted to slow the > progression of the train, as the tracks are currently used to move valuable goods > between distant locations. I wonder how long it would take to repair track line with a > couple hundred troops onboard the train plus support staff? You have to train them to be able to repair them, the art of repairing tracks (much less straightening them when they bend out of place) are known to a small group of people as it is out there... And besides-how hard is it once those soldiers depart the train to repair the tracks to have snipers harrass them with fire, or shell them with mortars, TOW'a, erc. T.R. - -- *************************************************************** "What about the truth? What about the public's right to know?!" "Oh, come on don't give me that... The public traded the right to know for the chance to watch a long time ago..." - --Len Kaminski (Writer) Ghost Rider: 2099 #6 *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 23:39:52 -0700 From: "Randy Knight" Subject: Re: M16 - ----- Original Message ----- From: Steve Chymy To: Sent: Sunday, August 29, 1999 7:43 PM Subject: Re: M16 > Just to add one thing, I have been told by a few Canadian troops that they > were shot at with filled mercury bullets, I would guess these are not allowed > by one convention or another, but a reliable sources told me they were abundant > in the area, which was "dam scary" to him. Does anyone out there know what > would be involved in casing this type of ammo? Would this become common in > TW2K? Most Likely, he was speaking of mercury fulminate (sp?). The idea here is to make a round which explodes on impact, they are kind of 'iffy' in their reliability though.as far as the T2K usefullness, as long as you have someone with chemestry and access to mercury, I would give them a chance (allong with a chance to blow their own hands off too). Oh, and yes, these rounds would also contravene the Hague convention, but then, I guess there wont exactly be a war crimes tribunal to be convened in the T2K world now, would there? }:] *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 22:22:11 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Rail Guns Scott David Orr wrote: > At 11:42 AM 8/29/99 +0200, Javier Sesma wrote: > > > > I think that assault trains are no good idea, they where made for > >transport, not for combat, and preparing a train for that is a high price > for a > >poor result. > > Regardless of what appearances may be, in the Polish-Soviet war of 1919-21 > (where the fronts were huge and the number of troops involved was small by > comparison), they were decisivie weapons, something akin to what the panzer > division was a generation later--they could rush in faster than anythign > else, disgorge a battalion of troops, and thereby seize a key town before > the enemy could react. > > In other conflicts (I've heard some were even used in the Yugoslavian civil > wars), they've been used more to guard rail lines behind friendly lines > (hm...what was the movie with the good German armored train? King > Solomon's Mines maybe?), or to transport important cargoes--and of course > to transport railroad artillery. > > Scott Orr There was an armored German train in King Solomon's Mines (at least in the .. ugh... remake I've never seen the beginning of the original). The movie Dark of the Sun had an armoured train too throughout most of the movie (the main characters were on it). I saw that movie on the local PBS channel about the same time I got the module Going Home so I found it useful. It's on internetmoviedatabase.com (http://us.imdb.com/Title?0062863) and good for an action movie in addition to being relevant. There's also that attack on a train in Lawrence of Arabia with Peter O'toole heh. - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 01:35:08 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rail Guns At 09:23 PM 8/29/99 -0500, Steve Chymy wrote: > > As far as destroying the tracks, that would be a last desperate attempted >to slow the progression of the train, as the tracks are currently used to >move valuable goods between distant locations. I wonder how long it would >take to repair track line with a couple hundred troops onboard the train >plus support staff? > I recall reading (in a fictional work, admittedly) that when they were laying track for the first transcontinental railroad in the U.S., in the prairie, they were able to manage a mile a day (this was unprepared land, so they had to do all the grading themselves, but you can do that and lay rails simultaneously, in an "assembly-line" fashion). Mind you, they had special equipment for it, but it was all low-tech--the problem you'd face with the armored train is that you couldn't stick a crane and a car holding rails on the front of the train, since that's a vulnerable spot (though if you can manage to armor it in such a way that you can remove the armor to get to it, that's the perfect sort of dead weight to put up front to catch shells and mines). How long it takes to repair torn-up track depends on how effective it's torn up. If you just knock the rails (and maybe crossties) out of place, it's pretty easy to fix--the further you can pull the ties away, the further someone else has to pull them back, though you have to do exactly as much work as he does. If you really want to mess up the track, though, you pick up the rails (and possibly the crossties) and take them with you--but you have to have some way to take them; if you don't have a way to carry them, what you do is heat up the rails and wrap them around trees (or something similar), making them useless (you can't really straighten them out I don't think), and you probably burn the crossties to make the fire to do this. If you do this, whoever wants to repair the track has to bring his own rails (and ideally crossties, though in a pinch you can make those from logs I guess). Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 22:58:09 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Rail Guns Steve Chymy wrote: > Javier Sesma wrote: > > > > > > > Destroying the head of the train every think coming after if will get out of > > the railway, or in the worst case it will stop it. You can destroy a train with > > artillery or simply with a fallen tree on the way. > > > > I will refer you to Scotts response on the above topic, but you have a point, > artillery fire would be of great concern, Doesn't the box of t2k say that most of the ammuntion for stuff like that is gone? should it be wasted trying to hit a moving target? - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 23:00:48 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: M16 Randy Knight wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Steve Chymy > To: > Sent: Sunday, August 29, 1999 7:43 PM > Subject: Re: M16 > > > Just to add one thing, I have been told by a few Canadian troops that > they > > were shot at with filled mercury bullets, I would guess these are not > allowed > > by one convention or another, but a reliable sources told me they were > abundant > > in the area, which was "dam scary" to him. Does anyone out there know what > > would be involved in casing this type of ammo? Would this become common in > > TW2K? > Most Likely, he was speaking of mercury fulminate (sp?). The idea here is to > make a round which explodes on impact, they are kind of 'iffy' in their > reliability though.as far as the T2K usefullness, as long as you have > someone with chemestry and access to mercury, I would give them a chance > (allong with a chance to blow their own hands off too). Oh, and yes, these > rounds would also contravene the Hague convention, but then, I guess there > wont exactly be a war crimes tribunal to be convened in the T2K world now, > would there? }:] Hehe you could make a campaign out of that event perhaps-- in some time after things have calmed down a bit, have whatever government has been established send the PCs to get the worst offenders... - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 23:01:19 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Rail Guns Scott David Orr wrote: > I think this situation is a lot like TW2K, given how sparsely populated the > world has become. But of course, you also want to be sure that your enemy > depends on the railways, and thus has an incentive to keep them in good > condition. I think though that using small vehicles on the rails, even > drawn by horse, will be _very_ common, since the energy requirements are so > much lower, and the weights which can be carried so much high, on a rail > than on the road, especially given the bad shape most roads will be in. During WWII the Japanese adapted a lot of their vehicles to go on rail in China. When they wanted to get them off they would switch the wheels. I could see this happening in t2k, and I remember one encounter the party had a while back where I had a car on rails being pulled by an ox (with the engine removed and used for storage). - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 29 Aug 1999 23:10:37 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Rail Guns Scott David Orr wrote: > How long it takes to repair torn-up track depends on how effective it's > torn up. If you just knock the rails (and maybe crossties) out of place, > it's pretty easy to fix--the further you can pull the ties away, the > further someone else has to pull them back, though you have to do exactly > as much work as he does. If you really want to mess up the track, though, > you pick up the rails (and possibly the crossties) and take them with > you--but you have to have some way to take them; if you don't have a way to > carry them, what you do is heat up the rails and wrap them around trees (or > something similar), making them useless (you can't really straighten them > out I don't think) I think straightening them and actually getting them hot while they are attached to a tree would be equally difficult. Maybe if you set the tree on fire. I remember reading somewhere that in some places the rails get warped so badly by the heat of the sun at times that people from the train will fix them as it goes along. - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 02:23:58 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rail Guns At 10:22 PM 8/29/99 -0700, Peter Vieth wrote: > >There was an armored German train in King Solomon's Mines (at least in the .. >ugh... remake I've never seen the beginning of the original). How dare you! That was the greatest movie ever made! At least, that was the greatest continuity in the history of adventure movies, and therefore very funny (e.g. Sharon Stone's shorts--but you have to watch carefully). :) Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 02:28:32 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rail Guns At 10:58 PM 8/29/99 -0700, Peter Vieth wrote: >Steve Chymy wrote: > >> Javier Sesma wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > Destroying the head of the train every think coming after if will get out of >> > the railway, or in the worst case it will stop it. You can destroy a train with >> > artillery or simply with a fallen tree on the way. >> > >> >> I will refer you to Scotts response on the above topic, but you have a point, >> artillery fire would be of great concern, > >Doesn't the box of t2k say that most of the ammuntion for stuff like that is gone? should >it be wasted trying to hit a moving target? > Reloading HE artillery shells should be a snap--possibly even easier than reloading bullets. HEAT may be a little harder to do, and might require some exotic metals, but it still might be doable. Reloading missiles would I think be essentially impossible. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 01:48:26 -0500 From: ^NikE^ Subject: Groups No one knows any online groups that play tw2000 ??? *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 02:51:53 -0400 From: Scott David Orr Subject: Re: Rail Guns At 11:10 PM 8/29/99 -0700, Peter Vieth wrote: >Scott David Orr wrote: > >> How long it takes to repair torn-up track depends on how effective it's >> torn up. If you just knock the rails (and maybe crossties) out of place, >> it's pretty easy to fix--the further you can pull the ties away, the >> further someone else has to pull them back, though you have to do exactly >> as much work as he does. If you really want to mess up the track, though, >> you pick up the rails (and possibly the crossties) and take them with >> you--but you have to have some way to take them; if you don't have a way to >> carry them, what you do is heat up the rails and wrap them around trees (or >> something similar), making them useless (you can't really straighten them >> out I don't think) > >I think straightening them and actually getting them hot while they are >attached to a tree would be equally difficult. Maybe if you set the tree >on fire. I remember reading somewhere that in some places the rails get >warped so badly by the heat of the sun at times that people from the train >will fix them as it goes along. > I've read about rails being destroyed by bending this way, I think during the U.S. Civil War--of course, the quality of steel back then may have been a lot lower, and so it might be harder to do nowadays, but I don't know for sure. Getting them hot enough would be the hard part--after that you just need big tongs or something of the sort to lift them without burning yourself--chains would probably do the trick as well. Scott Orr *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 06:06:38 -0300 From: "Melissa Clark" Subject: M16 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01BEF2AD.D251E900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don't forget Canada's version of the M16A2, the C7, is modified to fire = full automatic vice the 3 round burst of the standard U.S. issue M16A2. = The C7A1 is similar to the M16A3 with the flat top mounting platform for = the new ELCAN scope. Brad=20 - ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01BEF2AD.D251E900 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don't forget Canada's version of the M16A2, the C7, = is=20 modified to fire full automatic vice the 3 round burst of the standard = U.S.=20 issue M16A2. The C7A1 is similar to the M16A3 with the flat top mounting = platform for the new ELCAN scope. Brad - ------=_NextPart_000_0017_01BEF2AD.D251E900-- *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 09:09:15 EDT From: REBEL P ENGLISH Subject: Re: M16 On Sun, 29 Aug 1999 23:39:52 -0700 "Randy Knight" writes: > Oh, and yes, >these >rounds would also contravene the Hague convention, but then, I guess >there wont exactly be a war crimes tribunal to be convened in the T2K world >now, would there? }:] Why not. Anything can be tried at least once & in role playing games you can try it more then once. ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 15:17:58 +0200 From: Antti Henttu Subject: To Nike Welcome Nike You can check into my page at http://antenna.campus.luth.se/t2k/link.htm or Loonz page at http://t2k.findhere.com/ Antenna *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 13:25:04 PDT From: "matthew henley" Subject: Re: M16 could any one tell me what versens of the M16 have full auto thanks >From: rogue09@sprynet.com >Reply-To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com >To: twilight2000@lists.imagiconline.com >Subject: Re: M16 >Date: Sat, 28 Aug 1999 10:06:20 -0600 > > > > > > > You mean the improvement from the 16A1 to A2 made in the mid to late >60's > > or have they made additional improvements and not changed the model >name? > >The change from the M-16A1 to M-16A2 occurred in the 1980's, subsiquent >changes >have been minor ones which more to do with removing the carrying handle for >a >flat-top mounting platform for scopes (the M-16A3 I think). Only other >major >change was of course the burst limiter to fire three rounds instead of full >auto. > > >T.R. > > >*************************************************************** >"What about the truth? What about the public's right to know?!" >"Oh, come on don't give me that... The public traded the right to know for >the > >chance to watch a long time ago..." > >--Len Kaminski (Writer) >Ghost Rider: 2099 #6 > > >*************************************************************************** >To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com >with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 30 Aug 1999 14:46:13 -0600 From: rogue09@sprynet.com Subject: Re: M16 matthew henley wrote: > could any one tell me what versens of the M16 have full auto US produced is easy... M-16A1 is the only one I know of which was produced with a full-auto capability. After Viet-Nam the high brass were appaled at the ammount of ammunition expended to hit one NVA (something like 140,000 for 1 I think) so they put in the burst limiter on the M-16A2 to fire only 3 round bursts. Though Canada makes a full-auto variant copy of the M-16A2 which they call the C7 . On the subject of carbines, before someone asks the original CAR-15 (XM-177E2) and the current M-4A1 Carbine are capable of firing full-auto, would need to check on the Colt Model 733 Commando to see if it can. Don't have everything memorized... Hope This Helps T.R. *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1999 00:17:20 -0700 From: Peter Vieth Subject: Re: Rail Guns Scott David Orr wrote: > At 10:22 PM 8/29/99 -0700, Peter Vieth wrote: > > > >There was an armored German train in King Solomon's Mines (at least in the .. > >ugh... remake I've never seen the beginning of the original). > > How dare you! That was the greatest movie ever made! At least, that was > the greatest continuity in the history of adventure movies, and therefore > very funny (e.g. Sharon Stone's shorts--but you have to watch carefully). :) > > Scott Orr All right, all right-- I have to admit I have it on tape somewhere. As an action movie it is amusing, but it isn't a very good remake :) I suppose sharing 10% of the plot of the original made it worthy of the name (and we know just how high quality Golan-Globus productions are! heh). And who can't appreciate some good ol' German bashing, Hogan's Heroes style? - -- ([-[Peter Vieth]-) (-[fitek@ix.netcom.com]-) (-[http://sanitarium.computers-radio.com]-) *************************************************************************** To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com with the line 'unsubscribe twilight2000' as the body of the message. ------------------------------ End of twilight2000-digest V1999 #67 ************************************ To subscribe to Twilight2000-Digest, send the command: subscribe twilight2000-digest in the body of a message to "majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com". If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe "local-twlight2000": subscribe twlight2000-digest local-twilight2000@your.domain.net A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "twilight2000-digest" in the commands above with "twilight2000".