Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Wed, 29 Jul 1998 22:19:33 -0500

Message no. 1 >>Does such a critter exist in the game? If not, someone might need to make
>>one.
>
>With natural thermo? Yeah, dwarves and trolls for starters. Most awakened
>(and mundane) creatures have other ways of detecting hidden people (scent,
>astral, etc).

I meant the thermal suit (the one I described from THE SAINT did not seem to
function as you described earlier). I know that there are all sorts of
living things with a variety of detection methods.

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Thu, 30 Jul 1998 12:22:20 +0100

Message no. 2 bryan.covington@****.COM said on 14:48/29 Jul 98,...

> That's the WHOLE POINT of RP!! That is why they made it!
> The US military has about 8 (more?) different camo patterns for various
> conditions (snow, woods, night, desert, grassland, topics, etc.).

They _used_ to have that. The old MERDC schemes of the 1970s
and early '80s consisted of a fixed pattern for the vehicle, which
should be painted in colors matching the terrain (something like
16 colors were available). One or two of the colors should be
mixed to match soil samples taken in the area, IIRC.

The newer green/brown/black scheme pioneered by the
Bundeswehr does away with all of that, although in desert
conditions the green apparently gets oversprayed by a sand color
(this is going by photos taken at the NTC in the late '80s; after
the Gulf War the US Army seems to have gone for overall sand in
desert conditions), and I've also seen the black replaced by a
hastily-applied white overpaint in winter.

> That
> crap gets expensive. This way they have a perfect sample of the color
> patches in the background (it's taken on the fly) as well as ONE suit
> that you can wear in ANY environment.
> Really even if the suit just snapped stills and painted
> the suit once you were in the new environment that would be better than
> producing a dozen different camo patterns and you would still have
> "appropriate" camo.

Seems like someone else came up with the same idea as I did...
This seems like a much better use of RP to me than trying to
actually match the background 100%.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Hanging on to letting go.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	bryan.covington@****.COM
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Thu, 30 Jul 1998 12:50:25 -0400

Message no. 3 > > That
> > crap gets expensive. This way they have a perfect sample of the
> color
> > patches in the background (it's taken on the fly) as well as ONE
> suit
> > that you can wear in ANY environment.
> > Really even if the suit just snapped stills and
> painted
> > the suit once you were in the new environment that would be better
> than
> > producing a dozen different camo patterns and you would still have
> > "appropriate" camo.
>
> Seems like someone else came up with the same idea as I did...
> This seems like a much better use of RP to me than trying to
> actually match the background 100%.
>
Is it possible we are mis-reading the RP section and
that this is what it does?
Since it doesn't give any more bonuses than the normal
camo of the appropriate type. Maybe?
Now that I think about it moving the image on the RP
would ENHANCE your movement. If you move a little and the camera shifts
it redraws the suit amplifying the appearance of motion.

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Thu, 30 Jul 1998 20:11:19 +0100

Message no. 4 bryan.covington@****.COM said on 12:50/30 Jul 98,...

[using RP for creating camouflage patterns rather than for being
invisible]
> Is it possible we are mis-reading the RP section and
> that this is what it does?

I don't think so... The text in Shadowtech says it creates an
image of the environment "minus the cloaked object." That leads
me to believe they see it as something like the suits worn by the
gang Molly hires in Neuromancer (to assist her and Case in
getting the Flatline-emulator). They become almost invisible, and
the way I read it that's what the RP "chameleon cloaking
technology" does according to Shadowtech.

> Since it doesn't give any more bonuses than the normal
> camo of the appropriate type. Maybe?

Probably not, because the rules for "normal" camouflage were
written a few years later, and don't seem to have much in
common with the rules for RP.

> Now that I think about it moving the image on the RP
> would ENHANCE your movement. If you move a little and the camera shifts
> it redraws the suit amplifying the appearance of motion.

Apparently, the RP color shifts are fast enough not to cause this
effect.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Hanging on to letting go.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	bryan.covington@****.COM
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Thu, 30 Jul 1998 15:00:49 -0400

Message no. 5 > > Is it possible we are mis-reading the RP section and
> > that this is what it does?
>
> I don't think so... The text in Shadowtech says it creates an
> image of the environment "minus the cloaked object." That leads
> me to believe they see it as something like the suits worn by the
> gang Molly hires in Neuromancer (to assist her and Case in
> getting the Flatline-emulator). They become almost invisible, and
> the way I read it that's what the RP "chameleon cloaking
> technology" does according to Shadowtech.
>
> > Since it doesn't give any more bonuses than the
> normal
> > camo of the appropriate type. Maybe?
>
> Probably not, because the rules for "normal" camouflage were
> written a few years later, and don't seem to have much in
> common with the rules for RP.
>
> > Now that I think about it moving the image on the RP
> > would ENHANCE your movement. If you move a little and the camera
> shifts
> > it redraws the suit amplifying the appearance of motion.
>
> Apparently, the RP color shifts are fast enough not to cause this
> effect.
>
Still, using all cannon rules it seems silly to pay for
an RP suit when a suit of appropriate camo is 30-80 nuyen. Granted you
won't have to buy it as often if you run in varied environments (which
is why it still makes sense for the UCAS army and such), but it really
seems to limit the practical value of it. Perhaps jacking up the mod for
RP or dropping the camo mod by a point might seem appropriate. I dunno.
I suppose it would depend on your game and how set your players had
their hearts on RP.

From:	"Droopy ." <mmanhardt@*****.NET>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Thu, 30 Jul 1998 16:54:27 -0400

Message no. 6 From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject: Re: Camo and Ruthenium

> The newer green/brown/black scheme pioneered by the
> Bundeswehr does away with all of that, although in desert
> conditions the green apparently gets oversprayed by a sand color
> (this is going by photos taken at the NTC in the late '80s; after
> the Gulf War the US Army seems to have gone for overall sand in
> desert conditions), and I've also seen the black replaced by a
> hastily-applied white overpaint in winter.

IIRC the overall sand color came about because the 3color pattern
is done in special facilities that are computer controlled. The
paints used in that pattern are designed to reduce the vehicle's
signature.

I'd think that the solid sand color is due to the difficulty of painting
an actual (working) camoflauge scheme. As well as the US army's
penchant for wanting things to look the same.

As a side note, most units in the Gulf War still used the normal
woodlands camo scheme on their vehicles. It is suprisingly
effective especially at night.

> > That
> > crap gets expensive. This way they have a perfect sample of the color
> > patches in the background (it's taken on the fly) as well as ONE suit
> > that you can wear in ANY environment.

Except that gets expensive. Figure the average soldier has 8-12
uniforms (prolly 2 or 3 in combat itself) and it adds up a lot faster
than just keeping extra patterns in storage would. (this is the way
its done, btw...they issue odd camo uniforms just before you ship
to the theater in question.)

Also, take into account wear and tear. Soldiers tend to really put a
beating on their uniforms. This would most likely reduce the
effectiveness of the RP or even make it counterproductive (what is
it's natural color?)

> Seems like someone else came up with the same idea as I did...
> This seems like a much better use of RP to me than trying to
> actually match the background 100%.

Actually, it makes a lot of sense to match the background for
certain things (specificly snipers) but a more general pattern should
be fine for most environments.

I'd see RP being effective for vehicles. They're visible when they
move no matter what, so theres no loss there.

--Droopy

From:	bryan.covington@****.COM
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Thu, 30 Jul 1998 17:36:39 -0400

Message no. 7 > > > That
> > > crap gets expensive. This way they have a perfect sample of the
> color
> > > patches in the background (it's taken on the fly) as well as ONE
> suit
> > > that you can wear in ANY environment.
>
> Except that gets expensive. Figure the average soldier has 8-12
> uniforms (prolly 2 or 3 in combat itself) and it adds up a lot faster
> than just keeping extra patterns in storage would. (this is the way
> its done, btw...they issue odd camo uniforms just before you ship
> to the theater in question.)
>
> Also, take into account wear and tear. Soldiers tend to really put a
> beating on their uniforms. This would most likely reduce the
> effectiveness of the RP or even make it counterproductive (what is
> it's natural color?)
>
We are arguing the same point here dude. I was saying
that it is more cost effective to issue one maybe two suits of RP as
opposed to a dozen uniforms in various camo patterns.
I imagine natural color would be a translucent white,
like a frosted window, since liquid crystals are being used and that is
their natural color.

From:	Shadowrunner <nocturnal@*******.NET>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Thu, 30 Jul 1998 22:57:05 +0000

Message no. 8 bryan.covington@****.COM wrote:
>
> > > > That
> > > > crap gets expensive. This way they have a perfect sample of the
> > color
> > > > patches in the background (it's taken on the fly) as well as ONE
> > suit
> > > > that you can wear in ANY environment.
> >
> > Except that gets expensive. Figure the average soldier has 8-12
> > uniforms (prolly 2 or 3 in combat itself) and it adds up a lot faster
> > than just keeping extra patterns in storage would. (this is the way
> > its done, btw...they issue odd camo uniforms just before you ship
> > to the theater in question.)
> >
> > Also, take into account wear and tear. Soldiers tend to really put a
> > beating on their uniforms. This would most likely reduce the
> > effectiveness of the RP or even make it counterproductive (what is
> > it's natural color?)
> >
> We are arguing the same point here dude. I was saying
> that it is more cost effective to issue one maybe two suits of RP as
> opposed to a dozen uniforms in various camo patterns.
> I imagine natural color would be a translucent white,
> like a frosted window, since liquid crystals are being used and that is
> their natural color.

That made me think of something as I read it over- the color of liquid crystals. I
probably
deserve a good carping for this, but did anyone ever watch the Batman: The Animated series
show? There was an episode once, when some guy stole some kind of plastic, and when he
applied an electrical charge, it turned him invisible. The setback was the suit made him
crazy...

Nocturnal

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 12:15:00 +0100

Message no. 9 Droopy . said on 16:54/30 Jul 98,...

> IIRC the overall sand color came about because the 3color pattern
> is done in special facilities that are computer controlled. The
> paints used in that pattern are designed to reduce the vehicle's
> signature.

The patterns are specially designed AFAIK, not the actual
application of them, which I believe is done by hand, although
often at the factory. If you look at enough photos of the same
vehicle type you'll quickly spot minor differences in the patterns.

> As a side note, most units in the Gulf War still used the normal
> woodlands camo scheme on their vehicles. It is suprisingly
> effective especially at night.

I believe combat units got priority when it came to sand-colored
paint, support units receiving little or none at all. Certainly most
photos of vehicles used by non-combat units showed European
camouflage in the desert.

> Except that gets expensive. Figure the average soldier has 8-12
> uniforms (prolly 2 or 3 in combat itself) and it adds up a lot faster
> than just keeping extra patterns in storage would. (this is the way
> its done, btw...they issue odd camo uniforms just before you ship
> to the theater in question.)

That's the reason why American troops wore the six-color desert
BDU instead of the three-color that was coming into use at the
time of the Gulf War.

At any rate, I agree that it would be way too expensive to give
every soldier a couple of RP suits, especially with the wear that
can be expected. Special forces and snipers, who have a much
larger budget and/or a much higher need for effective camouflage
would use RP when the situation warrants it, I think, but not your
average infantry soldier.

> I'd see RP being effective for vehicles. They're visible when they
> move no matter what, so theres no loss there.

The US Army adopted the three-color scheme because it was
found to make the vehicle more difficult to spot when it started to
move when compared to the four-color camouflage used before. if
RP can give a similar advantage, it could very well be adopted,
provided an easy and durable way exists of coating a vehicle in it.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
It's pretty scary.
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 13:18:34 -0400

Message no. 10 At 12:15 PM 7/31/98 +0100, you wrote:

>That's the reason why American troops wore the six-color desert
>BDU instead of the three-color that was coming into use at the
>time of the Gulf War.

Actually Gurth, I'm pretty sure that was a five color "chocolate chip"
pattern you refer to here (as you do later, and call is a four color scheme).

>At any rate, I agree that it would be way too expensive to give
>every soldier a couple of RP suits, especially with the wear that
>can be expected. Special forces and snipers, who have a much
>larger budget and/or a much higher need for effective camouflage
>would use RP when the situation warrants it, I think, but not your
>average infantry soldier.

Would snipers use RP? At first glance, you'd think so. But ghillie suits
are frighteningly effective as they are. A technological answer, RP,
depends on all the crystals working *and* most importantly, a power source.
Snipers can sometimes be in one spot for an extended length of time; would
RP's batteries hold out that long?

SpecOps could probably find a good use to RP though, since their operations
tend to cross several different kinds of backgrounds (woods to indoors for
example).

>RP can give a similar advantage, it could very well be adopted,
>provided an easy and durable way exists of coating a vehicle in it.

Possible the most effective application. But really, most weapons sight in
on heat or magnetics or some other non-visual targeting scheme, right?
What's going to help the survival rating of a vehicle better, thermal
baffles or RP? My money's on thermal.

Erik J.

BTW, Gurth, I saw *the* book today...

From:	bryan.covington@****.COM
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 13:41:01 -0400

Message no. 11 > Would snipers use RP? At first glance, you'd think so. But ghillie
> suits
> are frighteningly effective as they are. A technological answer, RP,
> depends on all the crystals working *and* most importantly, a power
> source.
> Snipers can sometimes be in one spot for an extended length of time;
> would
> RP's batteries hold out that long?
>
Here's a scary thought. This would be hideously
expensive but would be approaching the ultimate in camo. An RP ghillie
suit. Bear with me here.
You would have to have a small processor for each strip
of RP fabric. The processor mounts where the strip attaches to the suit
itself. This way there is less area for the processor to worry about
(thus smaller, weaker, CHEAPER processors are viable), and since each
one handles its own small area there is less distortion of the image and
more disruption of the human form. Plus it becomes usable in many
environments, and since ghillie suits are even more annoying to make
than normal camo it saves more by being useful in multiple theaters.
Whatcha think?

From:	Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 12:49:54 -0500

Message no. 12 >Here's a scary thought. This would be hideously expensive
>but would be approaching the ultimate in camo. An RP ghillie
>suit. Bear with me here.

<snip description of suit>

>Whatcha think?

I think I'll take two. I don't even wanna think about the expense, but
I like it.

The original question, though, still stands: Power requirements. Can
the suit's power reserves hold out for the lengths of time that a sniper
might be called upon to just sit there, waiting for the one shot he has
to take before he can (try to) go home?

---
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.

From:	"Eric M. Farmer" <efarmer@********.CC.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 12:51:05 -0500

Message no. 13 > An RP ghillie
> suit. Bear with me here.

For those of us non-mercs or military men, define a ghillie suit.

Thanks.

Eric Farmer
efarmer@********.cc.edu
http://www.cc.edu/~efarmer/

From:	bryan.covington@****.COM
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 14:02:32 -0400

Message no. 14 > For those of us non-mercs or military men, define a ghillie suit.
>
Its a suit of cloth strips that you wear over your
normal bdu's. Has IIRC burlap strips tied into a mesh material. If
everything is colored properly and the person in it is any good its damn
near invisible.
Rent "Sniper" with Tom Berrenger. He uses one in a field
of dead grass in the latter half of the movie. Or if you have ever seen
the clips where a group of marines vanishes into the brush and then
appears again, at least one of them usually has on a ghillie suit.

From:	bryan.covington@****.COM
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 14:04:41 -0400

Message no. 15 > I think I'll take two. I don't even wanna think about the expense,
> but
> I like it.
>
> The original question, though, still stands: Power requirements. Can
> the suit's power reserves hold out for the lengths of time that a
> sniper
> might be called upon to just sit there, waiting for the one shot he
> has
> to take before he can (try to) go home?
>
In this case particularly but I think maybe in general
RP suits might have what's equivalent to a powersave mode. They snap the
background every oh 30 seconds or so and hold it as a still image as
opposed to a dynamically updating one. If you are just laying there you
really don't need constantly updating camo since nothing is changing
outside of maybe a little wind movement.

From:	Paul Gettle <RunnerPaul@*****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 14:25:12 -0400

Message no. 16 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

At 01:18 PM 7/31/98 -0400, Erik wrote:
>At 12:15 PM 7/31/98 +0100, you wrote:
>
>>That's the reason why American troops wore the six-color desert
>>BDU instead of the three-color that was coming into use at the
>>time of the Gulf War.
>
>Actually Gurth, I'm pretty sure that was a five color "chocolate
chip"
>pattern you refer to here (as you do later, and call is a four color
scheme).

I'm going to have to side with Gurth here, I believe the offical name
for the pattern commonly used during Desert Shield/Desert Storm was
offically titled Six Color Daytime Desert. There was black, white,
tan, olive drab, medium brown, and a darker brown. The pattern the US
was in the process of switching over to at the time of the war, and is
still currently in use is titled Three Color Daytime Desert.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.5.3

iQCVAwUBNcIL9qPbvUVI86rNAQG4+QQAlyi23QnVJ00+Q6Ry3XTFP+/aYh5uaAWx
uv+HmdVRdcR8G/18balZvOz7l+5psltdQhx8oDI9zlWaUmNp/2r+tCo44GW0/GaU
ELXqk7mB6MGk1YBRX9emz5Blm94x4dICaN5cvCdowaomw+FWen4FkuuT1VU+rWXt
/c8Hk83garw=
=Z0jJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
-- Paul Gettle (RunnerPaul@*****.com)
PGP Fingerprint, Key ID:0x48F3AACD (RSA 1024, created 98/06/26)
C260 94B3 6722 6A25 63F8 0690 9EA2 3344

You dare defy my whims?!?
I am the game master; you are my pawns!
I created the world you see before you!
I control your fate!"
-- Dexter, Dexter's Laboratory.

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 20:36:41 +0100

Message no. 17 Erik Jameson said on 13:18/31 Jul 98,...

> >That's the reason why American troops wore the six-color desert
> >BDU instead of the three-color that was coming into use at the
> >time of the Gulf War.
>
> Actually Gurth, I'm pretty sure that was a five color "chocolate chip"
> pattern you refer to here (as you do later, and call is a four color scheme).

It is most definitely a six-color camouflage, but especially in
photographs it's very hard to make out that there are two red-
brown and two light sand colors in the pattern, in addition to off-
white and black. (This data was gathered from a Cover Field Pack
Camouflage Desert, BTW.)

The four-color scheme I referred to was for vehicles, not clothing,
being the MERDC schemes used by the US Army and Marines in
the 1970s and '80s. (I'm not quite sure what the abbreviation
stands for, though.) This system was replaced by a
green/brown/black scheme developed by the (West-)Germans in
the mid-1980s.

> Would snipers use RP? At first glance, you'd think so. But ghillie suits
> are frighteningly effective as they are. A technological answer, RP,
> depends on all the crystals working *and* most importantly, a power source.
> Snipers can sometimes be in one spot for an extended length of time; would
> RP's batteries hold out that long?

Not likely. Per Shadowtech, they're good for about half an hour.
But I can see it having a use for them in missions and/or terrain
where ghilly-suits can't be used. It would have to be for short
periods of time, though.

> >RP can give a similar advantage, it could very well be adopted,
> >provided an easy and durable way exists of coating a vehicle in it.
>
> Possible the most effective application. But really, most weapons sight in
> on heat or magnetics or some other non-visual targeting scheme, right?
> What's going to help the survival rating of a vehicle better, thermal
> baffles or RP? My money's on thermal.

Both would be still better, but on a limited budget I have a
feeling thermal baffling would help more than RP in most cases.
However, with ground vehicles it's not necessarily the exhaust
you're looking for, so the whole vehicle's heat signature needs to
be reduced. Today that's done with paint that has camouflaging
properties in the IR spectrum; perhaps a variant of RP can be
constructed that does the same?

> BTW, Gurth, I saw *the* book today...

I still haven't...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Money, tickets, passports! Money, tickets, passports!
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 14:38:29 -0400

Message no. 18 At 01:41 PM 7/31/98 -0400, you wrote:

> Here's a scary thought. This would be hideously
>expensive but would be approaching the ultimate in camo. An RP ghillie
>suit. Bear with me here.

Hmmm...problematic in that they are all still drawing from the same set of
cameras. So you'd have to figure out how to make sure each individual
strip display the correct image. If that could be done, well, the
inmprovement in texture would be probably a camouflage improvement, but
part of what makes ghillie suits so good is their texture. Sure you can
match colors, but can you match the roughness of a ghillie suit? The fact
that there are almost always stray threads and fabric sticking everywhich
way, which further disrupts the human outline?

BTW, that same place that I gave URLs for regarding camo, Warpig
(warpig.com), also has a page or link to a description of not only ghillie
suits, but how to make one. It's almost trivia, since a ghillie suit is
either illegal or pointless at most PB fields.

And if I recall correctly, you don't want a nice neat suit, you want
something a bit straggly because it actually helps break up any patterns or
outlines the human eye might see.

But it's a solid idea actually, just needs a bit more work I think. Would
be better than just an RP cloak though.

Erik J.

http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World

From:	bryan.covington@****.COM
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 14:55:15 -0400

Message no. 19 > > Here's a scary thought. This would be hideously
> >expensive but would be approaching the ultimate in camo. An RP
> ghillie
> >suit. Bear with me here.
>
> Hmmm...problematic in that they are all still drawing from the same
> set of
> cameras. So you'd have to figure out how to make sure each individual
>
Read the whole post dink.

"You would have to have a small processor for each strip of RP
fabric. The processor mounts where the strip attaches to the suit
itself."

> strip display the correct image. If that could be done, well, the
> inmprovement in texture would be probably a camouflage improvement,
> but
> part of what makes ghillie suits so good is their texture. Sure you
> can
> match colors, but can you match the roughness of a ghillie suit? The
> fact
> that there are almost always stray threads and fabric sticking
> everywhich
> way, which further disrupts the human outline?
>
Texture would have to be a trade off. But it wouldn't matter
nearly as much as it does now as the camo pattern on each strip would
perfectly match the surroundings.

> But it's a solid idea actually, just needs a bit more work I think.
> Would
> be better than just an RP cloak though.
>
Texture is the only issue you raised and I really don't think it
would be one considering the improved pattern and coloring.

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 17:01:23 -0400

Message no. 20 At 08:36 PM 7/31/98 +0100, you wrote:

>It is most definitely a six-color camouflage, but especially in

Guess maybe my source was wrong. No big.

>> BTW, Gurth, I saw *the* book today...
>
>I still haven't...

Heh. It's not got the most attractive of covers to be honest, but I had to
parade it around to the folks there and say "Hey! I know this guy!" Not
that they really cared...

I doubt I'll pick it up myself, since I've really little need for it, but
it appears to be quite good. Could become an authoritative source...

Erik J.

http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 17:01:46 -0400

Message no. 21 At 02:55 PM 7/31/98 -0400, you wrote:

> Read the whole post dink.

Dude, why'd you have to go there? Uncool.

> "You would have to have a small processor for each strip of RP
>fabric. The processor mounts where the strip attaches to the suit
>itself."

Okay, I missed the apparent significance of this part. But I *still* see
problems that I guess I didn't elaborate upon properly. You've got dozens
of processors drawing from several cameras and they've all got to make sure
not only to extract their own proper portion of the larger image, but make
sure that they match up well enough with all their neighbors. I'm not sold
that a single processor per strip would be adequate; I think you'd have to
have a master processor that would at the minimum coordinate all the other
processors. Otherwise you'd have *each* strip attempting to mimic the
*entire* pattern it picks up from the cameras/imaging scanners.

> Texture would have to be a trade off. But it wouldn't matter
>nearly as much as it does now as the camo pattern on each strip would
>perfectly match the surroundings.

Potentially. I think at a distance, it might be superior because there
texture is lost, but up close, I'd probably have to give it to the ghillie
suit, because it'll look more natural to the eye. We're talking minor
edges on each side though, probably not enough to be worth arguing about.

Erik J.

http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World

From:	bryan.covington@****.COM
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 17:30:11 -0400

Message no. 22 > > Read the whole post dink.
>
> Dude, why'd you have to go there? Uncool.
>
Sorry, but you ignored my entire post. Even after I said
"Bear with me".

> > "You would have to have a small processor for each strip of
> RP
> >fabric. The processor mounts where the strip attaches to the suit
> >itself."
>
> Okay, I missed the apparent significance of this part. But I *still*
> see
> problems that I guess I didn't elaborate upon properly. You've got
> dozens
> of processors drawing from several cameras and they've all got to make
> sure
> not only to extract their own proper portion of the larger image, but
> make
> sure that they match up well enough with all their neighbors. I'm not
> sold
> that a single processor per strip would be adequate; I think you'd
> have to
> have a master processor that would at the minimum coordinate all the
> other
> processors. Otherwise you'd have *each* strip attempting to mimic the
> *entire* pattern it picks up from the cameras/imaging scanners.
>
Not quite what I meant. All the processors are
independent. Each strip has a camera and a processor to control that
strip only. There is no "greater image" the whole thing becomes lost in
the varying hues and shades of the surroundings. The whole point of
ghillie is to create varying levels of shade and color and create a 3d
effect to disguise the body outline. This does the latter just as well
and the former even more precisely than burlap ever could.

> > Texture would have to be a trade off. But it wouldn't matter
> >nearly as much as it does now as the camo pattern on each strip would
> >perfectly match the surroundings.
>
> Potentially. I think at a distance, it might be superior because
> there
> texture is lost, but up close, I'd probably have to give it to the
> ghillie
> suit, because it'll look more natural to the eye. We're talking minor
> edges on each side though, probably not enough to be worth arguing
> about.
>
Do keep in mind that this could potentially be augmented
with natural materials from the field. Grass and such placed in the suit
to add to the deception, just like a real ghillie suit. That would add
some of your texture.

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 17:50:55 -0400

Message no. 23 At 05:30 PM 7/31/98 -0400, you wrote:
>> > Read the whole post dink.
>>
>> Dude, why'd you have to go there? Uncool.
>>
> Sorry, but you ignored my entire post. Even after I said
>"Bear with me".

If I had ignored it, how could I have replied to it?

> Not quite what I meant. All the processors are
>independent. Each strip has a camera and a processor to control that
>strip only. There is no "greater image" the whole thing becomes lost in
>the varying hues and shades of the surroundings. The whole point of
>ghillie is to create varying levels of shade and color and create a 3d
>effect to disguise the body outline. This does the latter just as well
>and the former even more precisely than burlap ever could.

Okay, I don't recall you saying anything about a camera per strip, just a
processor. Now that would change things a great deal, since you're talking
about dozens of cameras/image scanners. This would create more of a
layered sort of affect that would still do a better job of matching the
background than plain RP or a ghillie suit. The big problem of power
consumption still remains, but until the batteries run out, yes, as I said
all along, it would likly be rather effective.

Erik J.

http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World

From:	Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 19:10:48 EDT

Message no. 24 In a message dated 7/31/98 12:42:00 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
bryan.covington@****.COM writes:

> You would have to have a small processor for each strip
> of RP fabric. The processor mounts where the strip attaches to the suit
> itself. This way there is less area for the processor to worry about
> (thus smaller, weaker, CHEAPER processors are viable), and since each
> one handles its own small area there is less distortion of the image and
> more disruption of the human form. Plus it becomes usable in many
> environments, and since ghillie suits are even more annoying to make
> than normal camo it saves more by being useful in multiple theaters.
> Whatcha think?

For some people worried about power, the suit could have Suncell Power added
on, or perhaps a connecter cord to a Suncell Power net of sorts. And as for
battery space, that could be worked into the fabric of the clothing itself, or
perhaps into a utility belt of sorts for the suit. And, if you consider the
suit to be kind of like a vehicle, then it would still weigh in the 6 to 26 kg
range, which is comparable to a Body 1 vehicle.

-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

From:	Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 19:14:27 EDT

Message no. 25 In a message dated 7/31/98 12:59:22 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
efarmer@********.CC.EDU writes:

> > An RP ghillie
> > suit. Bear with me here.
>
> For those of us non-mercs or military men, define a ghillie suit.

Ever see any military movies where a guy goes walking around as if he/she had
been tarred and then rolled around in broken off tree branches, tall grasses,
leaves, and the like.

For an example ... go to http://www.angelfire.com/ma/sniper312/ghillie2.html

-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

From:	Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 16:34:51 -0700

Message no. 26 Hooking the suit up to a Suncell power system would negate its purpose, as
it would be completely visible and easily detectable.

Solar cells are predicated on the idea of a particular frequency being able
to knock electons loose in the material; current and voltages then being
generated to do work. This means (to be efficient, thus viable as a power
source) that you want your solar wafer to be able to absorb as much light
in the peak frequency as possible. As our sun is yellow, your solar cell
would be really good at absorbing this frequency. "Really good" might mean
15 - 20 %. The rest is reflected, backscattered, etc.

>In a message dated 7/31/98 12:42:00 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
>bryan.covington@****.COM writes:
>
>> You would have to have a small processor for each strip
>> of RP fabric. The processor mounts where the strip attaches to the suit
>> itself. This way there is less area for the processor to worry about
>> (thus smaller, weaker, CHEAPER processors are viable), and since each
>> one handles its own small area there is less distortion of the image and
>> more disruption of the human form. Plus it becomes usable in many
>> environments, and since ghillie suits are even more annoying to make
>> than normal camo it saves more by being useful in multiple theaters.
>> Whatcha think?
>
>For some people worried about power, the suit could have Suncell Power added
>on, or perhaps a connecter cord to a Suncell Power net of sorts. And as for
>battery space, that could be worked into the fabric of the clothing itself, or
>perhaps into a utility belt of sorts for the suit. And, if you consider the
>suit to be kind of like a vehicle, then it would still weigh in the 6 to 26 kg
>range, which is comparable to a Body 1 vehicle.
>
>-Herc
>------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

From:	"Eric M. Farmer" <efarmer@********.CC.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Fri, 31 Jul 1998 19:05:55 -0500

Message no. 27 >
> For some people worried about power, the suit could have Suncell Power added
> on, or perhaps a connecter cord to a Suncell Power net of sorts.

The problem with a solar cell is that they reflect light, making an easy,
flashing target.

Eric Farmer
efarmer@********.cc.edu
http://www.cc.edu/~efarmer/

From:	K is the Symbol <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sat, 1 Aug 1998 02:47:47 EDT

Message no. 28 In a message dated 7/31/1998 6:35:03 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> Hooking the suit up to a Suncell power system would negate its purpose, as
> it would be completely visible and easily detectable.
>
> Solar cells are predicated on the idea of a particular frequency being able
> to knock electons loose in the material; current and voltages then being
> generated to do work. This means (to be efficient, thus viable as a power
> source) that you want your solar wafer to be able to absorb as much light
> in the peak frequency as possible. As our sun is yellow, your solar cell
> would be really good at absorbing this frequency. "Really good" might mean
> 15 - 20 %. The rest is reflected, backscattered, etc.

Adam, two things....

First, please reply your stuff AFTER the section you quote (it's in the
FAQ's... ;)

Second, Mike is stating the Suncell from the POV of when the RP is NOT in use,
as a means of recharging the batteries "in the field", without a need to carry
things like extra batteries all over the place.

Also, we've used "Suncell" all over the place in the games here. Sure, the
pollution is nuts in many places, but NOT everywhere. And when you put up a
tent, the tent itself is lined with Suncell Receptor Materials.

Give that radio an extra flux point or two for range, and everyone will be
happy :)

-K

From:	Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sat, 1 Aug 1998 09:22:49 EDT

Message no. 29 In a message dated 7/31/98 7:11:39 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
efarmer@********.CC.EDU writes:

> > For some people worried about power, the suit could have Suncell Power
> added
> > on, or perhaps a connecter cord to a Suncell Power net of sorts.
>
>
> The problem with a solar cell is that they reflect light, making an easy,
> flashing target.

You can always spend more cred so that it does not shine in return ... or ...
the Suncell is of the covered sort which means that it does not generate as
many PF per hour as it could.

The only other problem that Suncell could have is that it can be detected by a
very sensitive MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detector) ... am I right in saying this?

-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

From:	Waffelmaisters <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sat, 1 Aug 1998 14:00:40 -0500

Message no. 30 > Re: Camo and Ruthenium (bryan.covington@****.COM, Fri 13:55)
>
> > > Here's a scary thought. This would be hideously
> > >expensive but would be approaching the ultimate in camo. An RP
> > ghillie
> > >suit. Bear with me here.
> >
> > Hmmm...problematic in that they are all still drawing from the same
> > set of cameras.

Actually, you could use strips of something cheaper thnRP that just
switchedbetween afewcolors(andmaybestayedthat way)- something alongthe
lines of"hypercolor"clothing, orthe stuf the Rashersuits in "SnowcrasH'
used to go from neon to matte black. Then a few imagers would just
provide "color sample"-the image would be unimportant, only the color
mix of nearby grounmd features. The suit would then aproximate those.

> > strip display the correct image. If that could be done, well, the
> > inmprovement in texture would be probably a camouflage improvement,
> > but
> > part of what makes ghillie suits so good is their texture. Sure you
> > can
> > match colors, but can you match the roughness of a ghillie suit? The
> > fact
> > that there are almost always stray threads and fabric sticking
> > everywhich
> > way, which further disrupts the human outline?
> >
> Texture would have to be a trade off. But it wouldn't matter
> nearly as much as it does now as the camo pattern on each strip would
> perfectly match the surroundings.

I think texture is pretty important- slick plastic reflects light in
very difrent ways than dirt and brush. A painting made with half matte
paint and half glossy tends to look quite "wrong". You might have the
same problem withRP in general. An advantage of just making a suit with
simple color changing material is it might have a structure more like a
normal suit.

A similar idea would be nice for cammo- say you use dyes that change
color when exposed to a particular enzyme. To change your cammo, all
you have to do is toss some powder in with the laundry when you wash
your BDU's. Like changing the pallet on a color image. I'm not sure
cammo patterns are universally aplicable, but they could be developed
with this in mind.

Mongoose

P.S.- bryan, your attitude is overiding the list ettiqutte. Please
check your ego field for automatic "dink" settings.

From:	Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sat, 1 Aug 1998 22:24:45 -0700

Message no. 31 Hey look, spare me the comments about how I want to reply. I was on this
list before it was on the current listproc, and if it's to the point where
you must stylistically reply a certain way, I'm happy to sign off again.

And I think you totally missed my point.

It is a silly idea to attempt to recharge a stealth suit using any sort of
solar cell system. The point about being a sniper in a ghilly suit is that
you may have to wait there for days, stealthy and silent, for your target
to emerge, which could happen at any time. You cannot be stuck trying to
recharge your batteries by unfolding some sort of high signature solar
grid. And trying to incorporate it into the suit is worse.

At 2:47 AM -0400 8/1/98, K is the Symbol wrote:
>Adam, two things....
>
>First, please reply your stuff AFTER the section you quote (it's in the
>FAQ's... ;)
>
>Second, Mike is stating the Suncell from the POV of when the RP is NOT in use,
>as a means of recharging the batteries "in the field", without a need to
carry
>things like extra batteries all over the place.
>
>Also, we've used "Suncell" all over the place in the games here. Sure, the
>pollution is nuts in many places, but NOT everywhere. And when you put up a
>tent, the tent itself is lined with Suncell Receptor Materials.
>
>Give that radio an extra flux point or two for range, and everyone will be
>happy :)
>
>-K

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

From:	Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 01:34:42 EDT

Message no. 32 In a message dated 8/2/98 12:24:53 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> Hey look, spare me the comments about how I want to reply. I was on this
> list before it was on the current listproc, and if it's to the point where
> you must stylistically reply a certain way, I'm happy to sign off again.

Sorry, but K is correct ... and if the rules change then we -ALL- must adapt
...

> And I think you totally missed my point.

No, we did not ...

> It is a silly idea to attempt to recharge a stealth suit using any sort of
> solar cell system. The point about being a sniper in a ghilly suit is that
> you may have to wait there for days, stealthy and silent, for your target
> to emerge, which could happen at any time. You cannot be stuck trying to
> recharge your batteries by unfolding some sort of high signature solar
> grid. And trying to incorporate it into the suit is worse.

Okay, what happens then when the sniper's comm pack and other electronics
begin to run out of power, what then?!? Does he carry extra batteries?!?
Carrying extra batteries means carrying more weight, which means potentially
less ammo being carried.

Suncell as per the R2 has no CF or Load Reduction ... it also produces in the
range of 25 PF for just a single hour out in perfect conditions.

The sniper would not have to have the Suncell out at all times ... and having
the Suncell incorporated into the ghillie suit means that the ghillie suit
accomplishes two tasks rather than camoflaguing the sniper, in that it now
also collects power, and could provide additional flux points towards
communications and the like. It could also recharge a Mp-Laser III or other
laser type weapon.

It all takes some looking at Adam ... that's all ...

Take another look at R2 and see how you can use some of the options and
customizations on things other than vehicles ...

-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

From:	Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sat, 1 Aug 1998 22:36:19 -0700

Message no. 33 No ... a MAD detects primarily ferromagnetic materials.

A suncell would be absurdly easy to detect by simply using light
intensification in the yellow band of the EM spectrum ... there is no such
thing as a 100% absorptive material, and the suncell is going to reflect
light all over the place.

>In a message dated 7/31/98 7:11:39 PM US Eastern Standard Time,

>The only other problem that Suncell could have is that it can be detected by a
>very sensitive MAD (Magnetic Anomaly Detector) ... am I right in saying this?
>
>-Herc
>------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

From:	Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sat, 1 Aug 1998 22:58:38 -0700

Message no. 34 My perspective is based on real life and physics ...

>Okay, what happens then when the sniper's comm pack and other electronics
>begin to run out of power, what then?!? Does he carry extra batteries?!?

No ... he does not need to. A military radio with batteries can last
several weeks on one charge. The com is not in constant use ... at most
there are specified "check in" times every couple of hours or days.

Snipers in the field do NOT want to compromise their position. This means
they use the radio as little as possible.

>The sniper would not have to have the Suncell out at all times ... and having
>the Suncell incorporated into the ghillie suit means that the ghillie suit
>accomplishes two tasks rather than camoflaguing the sniper, in that it now

Again ... if you put a "sun cell" system into a suit, you eliminate its
camouflage potential. A nice diffuse low power laser will cause you to
light up like a flare. All I have to do is look for a reflectance curve
that peaks around 650 nanometers ... that will stand out nicely against the
chlorophyll curve of the surrounding vegetation.

If this physics doesn't make sense to you, check out a good college
textbook on physics. This is not meant to be condescending ... just a
reference to real life if my arguments aren't clear.

>also collects power, and could provide additional flux points towards

Flux is an abstract game mechanic that tries to approximately model
electromagnetic flux in the radio frequency band for things like radar,
radio, etc. "Higher flux points" means there is more signal being put out;
thus, easier to detect, easier to isolate the source, even if it cannot be
unencrytped. A sniper putting out a lot of radio signal is announcing their
presence.

>It all takes some looking at Adam ... that's all ...

Sure ... in real life its not practical.

>-Herc

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

From:	K is the Symbol <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 02:44:14 EDT

Message no. 35 In a message dated 8/2/1998 12:24:53 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

>
> It is a silly idea to attempt to recharge a stealth suit using any sort of
> solar cell system. The point about being a sniper in a ghilly suit is that
> you may have to wait there for days, stealthy and silent, for your target
> to emerge, which could happen at any time. You cannot be stuck trying to
> recharge your batteries by unfolding some sort of high signature solar
> grid. And trying to incorporate it into the suit is worse.
>
Adam, I would advise doing something right now.

Correct the attitude, as I snipped your little "I was here before you were and
this list was on this listserv bit." There are people here that have been
around FAR longer than yourself, and they do there little tidbits here and
there to help the list continue to move along.

As for why it's such a bad idea?

Why don't you explain why it really and truly is a bad idea. And please
remember, use SR timeline stuff, and NOT any heavily relational material to
the current, real world, science. Use it as a comparison, sure, as a direct
measure, doesn't work really well.

I've had talked with people about "Solar Tents" (NOT Nets, the term
"Net" is a
slang here), and it works fine in many part of the world, especially in higher
mountain regions, deserts, and open bodies of water (great lakes, oceans,
etc.).

-K

From:	K is the Symbol <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 02:46:51 EDT

Message no. 36 In a message dated 8/2/1998 12:36:34 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> No ... a MAD detects primarily ferromagnetic materials.

No, it has the possibility of detecting such, not a guarantee...

> A suncell would be absurdly easy to detect by simply using light
> intensification in the yellow band of the EM spectrum ... there is no such
> thing as a 100% absorptive material, and the suncell is going to reflect
> light all over the place.

Not in the current science realm, you are correct. In SR's days, maybe, maybe
not. BUT, regardless of this, the tech exists in SR and it functions well.

-K

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 11:57:16 +0100

Message no. 37 Erik Jameson said on 17:01/31 Jul 98,...

> >It is most definitely a six-color camouflage, but especially in
>
> Guess maybe my source was wrong. No big.

Nope. It's easy to get confused about these things, especially if
you don't have more than a passing interest :)

> Heh. It's not got the most attractive of covers to be honest, but I had to
> parade it around to the folks there and say "Hey! I know this guy!" Not
> that they really cared...

I was at GenCon Benelux yesterday and nobody was selling it,
and the people I asked hadn't even _heard_ of it :(

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Money, tickets, passports! Money, tickets, passports!
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 11:57:15 +0100

Message no. 38 Eric M. Farmer said on 12:51/31 Jul 98,...

> For those of us non-mercs or military men, define a ghillie suit.

A camouflage suit with strips of clothing and pieces of camouflage
netting sewn on. Local vegetation is added onto (into) the suit so
that if done well, the sniper wearing it becomes just about
invisible from very close by. (A Dutch magazine did an article on
Dutch Army snipers a few months ago. There was one "spot the
sniper" picture in the article, with a comment from the author
that he'd had to ask the sniper to stand up a few times so he
knew where to point his camera. This was at a distance of maybe
3 meters, judging from the photo.)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Money, tickets, passports! Money, tickets, passports!
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

From:	Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 05:09:04 -0700

Message no. 39 >As for why it's such a bad idea?

I've explained it before. If you have a solar collection system, it has to
be reflective. Got that?

Therefore, it goes completely against the purpose of camouflage.

Consult a basic physics text on materials or solar cells ...

It works fine as long as you only want a power source.

Spare me the attitude talk.

>-K

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

From:	Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 05:12:27 -0700

Message no. 40 >Not in the current science realm, you are correct. In SR's days, maybe, maybe
>not. BUT, regardless of this, the tech exists in SR and it functions well.

No, it doesn't matter what "science realm" you use. It is a basic physical
property. A solar cell will absorb 650 nanometer light, that is its
function. Therefore, you can characterize this reflectance curve using
spectrophotometry, quite easily. Therefore you will always be able to
detect such materials.

As I said, if this is unclear, consult a physics text.
>
>-K

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

From:	Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 08:58:22 EDT

Message no. 41 In a message dated 8/2/98 12:58:52 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> My perspective is based on real life and physics ...

I'm sorry ... I was using the rules of the game ... although I do like to
throw in RL information when it does not cause serious conflicts with the game
rules ... we all do this to some extent or another.

> >Okay, what happens then when the sniper's comm pack and other electronics
> >begin to run out of power, what then?!? Does he carry extra batteries?!?
>
> No ... he does not need to. A military radio with batteries can last
> several weeks on one charge. The com is not in constant use ... at most
> there are specified "check in" times every couple of hours or days.

Yeah ... I know this part ... all of my scoutmasters in Europe were all
military personnel (a NIS agent, a SeaBee, a Supply Officer) and other people
I met, all mentioned things about the batteries being really long lasting ...
just that sometimes you want to make sure you are well-prepared in case the
batteries do get run down (which can happen with time).

> Snipers in the field do NOT want to compromise their position. This means
> they use the radio as little as possible.

There is another possibility here ... the sniper team could drop the Suncell
power pack off at some location far from them, which would minimize it's
detectability ... this would still allow them to have access to it's radio-
boosting effect when they are on their way out.

> >The sniper would not have to have the Suncell out at all times ... and
> having
> >the Suncell incorporated into the ghillie suit means that the ghillie suit
> >accomplishes two tasks rather than camoflaguing the sniper, in that it now
>
> Again ... if you put a "sun cell" system into a suit, you eliminate its
> camouflage potential. A nice diffuse low power laser will cause you to
> light up like a flare. All I have to do is look for a reflectance curve
> that peaks around 650 nanometers ... that will stand out nicely against the
> chlorophyll curve of the surrounding vegetation.

Cool .. I'll have to use this against the players in the home game then ...

> If this physics doesn't make sense to you, check out a good college
> textbook on physics. This is not meant to be condescending ... just a
> reference to real life if my arguments aren't clear.

The only problem I would have with checking out a physics textbook is that
sometimes the information does not jump out at you and say "Here ... this is
the information you wanted to know ... only one thing ... you have to
understand what you are reading to get the hint."

> >also collects power, and could provide additional flux points towards
>
> Flux is an abstract game mechanic that tries to approximately model
> electromagnetic flux in the radio frequency band for things like radar,
> radio, etc. "Higher flux points" means there is more signal being put out;
> thus, easier to detect, easier to isolate the source, even if it cannot be
> unencrytped. A sniper putting out a lot of radio signal is announcing their
> presence.

Ah ... that is very true ... but when it comes to getting your transportation
to the LZ ... you'd still do it anyway ... there are lots of possibilities ...

> >It all takes some looking at Adam ... that's all ...
>
> Sure ... in real life its not practical.

I know ... oh, btw, thanks for responding this way ...

-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

From:	Spike <u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 14:22:25 +0100

Message no. 42 And verily, did Mike Bobroff hastily scribble thusly...
|
|In a message dated 8/2/98 12:24:53 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
|acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:
|
|> Hey look, spare me the comments about how I want to reply. I was on this
|> list before it was on the current listproc, and if it's to the point where
|> you must stylistically reply a certain way, I'm happy to sign off again.
|
|Sorry, but K is correct ... and if the rules change then we -ALL- must adapt

Why? I still use 1stEd...

:)

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |

From:	K is the Symbol <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 11:05:50 EDT

Message no. 43 In a message dated 8/2/1998 7:09:08 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> >As for why it's such a bad idea?
>
> I've explained it before. If you have a solar collection system, it has to
> be reflective. Got that?

I understand what you are saying, but I am wondering why it has to be so
drastically reflective. For some reason you are NOT taking into account the
newer solar collecting abilities that -obviously- exist within SR. The
designer of the new R2 is not a stupid person, and he may have readily taken
some of what you are saying into consideration (maybe not all, but some).

> Therefore, it goes completely against the purpose of camouflage.
> Consult a basic physics text on materials or solar cells ...
> It works fine as long as you only want a power source.

You refuse to go the fictional distance on this one. SR Game Mechanics are
not meant to replicate a "Physics Text" or any other major type of textual
material used as an educational or relational piece of literature for that
matter. They may draw upon the concepts of science as we know them today, but
they are NOT stuck in the limitations of today.

Yes, there are limitations that probably do exist.

I have been getting your little tirade of argument for "this won't work" since
the beginning. As have the majority of those that are also paying attention.
We already knew about the EM reflectivity involved in Solar Collection as it
stands today. But we also know that you are talking about "Yellow Light
Orientated" collection methods. Those are NOT the only ones that exist today,
and I seriously doubt they will be the only one's in the future either.

We are also talking about possibilities within a game mechanics that stretch
the imagination, but do NOT snap it entirely out of believability. THAT is
the obstacle you have with this, and you are probably not alone.

What is one man's dream is another man's science and yet a third man's
folly...

> Spare me the attitude talk.

You will be spared no such thing, as none of us when we made our mistakes
and/or goof-ups were.

-K

From:	K is the Symbol <Ereskanti@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 11:09:52 EDT

Message no. 44 In a message dated 8/2/1998 8:22:43 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK writes:

> |Sorry, but K is correct ... and if the rules change then we -ALL- must
adapt
>
> Why? I still use 1stEd...
>
(*THWAP*)

Wrong rules Spike...
-K

From:	Adam Getchell <acgetchell@*******.EDU>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 08:20:14 -0700

Message no. 45 >In a message dated 8/2/1998 7:09:08 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
>acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

>I understand what you are saying, but I am wondering why it has to be so
>drastically reflective. For some reason you are NOT taking into account the
>newer solar collecting abilities that -obviously- exist within SR. The
>designer of the new R2 is not a stupid person, and he may have readily taken
>some of what you are saying into consideration (maybe not all, but some).

Some thought and understanding of physics would explain this ...

>You refuse to go the fictional distance on this one. SR Game Mechanics are

That is correct: it won't work. You're free to make up whatever fantasy you
desire, just admit that it is fantasy and not remotely based on real life.
If you want to pretend something is plausible, then you have to submit it
to the realm of the possible.

>I have been getting your little tirade of argument for "this won't work"
since
>the beginning. As have the majority of those that are also paying attention.

You're free to ignore reality if you wish ... if you don't like my input,
I'm not forcing you to read it.

>Orientated" collection methods. Those are NOT the only ones that exist today,
>and I seriously doubt they will be the only one's in the future either.

Um ... that statement indicates a lack of understanding of the science and
technology behind solar cells and the photoelectric process. "Yellow light"
is the peak energy output of the sun ... you know, the "solar" part of
solar cell? You can try if you want to collect IR or UV, but you'll cut
your yield by a factor of 10-100. Again, some basic understanding of
physics would yield this insight.

>We are also talking about possibilities within a game mechanics that stretch
>the imagination, but do NOT snap it entirely out of believability. THAT is

What you propose is unrealistic. To my mind, it snaps it out of reality.

>What is one man's dream is another man's science and yet a third man's
>folly...

Seen any "moon cannons" yet? That was Jules Verne's idea on getting to the
moon. Why do you suppose we didn't use it?

>You will be spared no such thing, as none of us when we made our mistakes
>and/or goof-ups were.

Whatever. Feel free to appoint yourself self-righteous whatever; I'll feel
free to ignore you.

>-K

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

From:	Iridios <iridios@*********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 11:42:03 -0400

Message no. 46 Adam Getchell wrote:
Sun, 2 Aug 1998 05:12:27 -0700

> No, it doesn't matter what "science realm" you use. It is a basic physical
> property. A solar cell will absorb 650 nanometer light, that is its
> function.

Unless someone chooses to use a solar cell that utilizes other
wavelengths, yes it might be less efficient but still may serve a
purpose. Sometimes you need to trade off efficiency for certain other
benefits. And as far as using "science realms". Science in 20xx is
still the same as we use today, but at the rate of technological
growth, great advances can/could have been made in the field of solar
energy collection, especially if the pro-ecology folks manage to push
it hard.

<snip sig>

--"Any science, sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from
magic."
--Arthur C. Clarke

Iridios
iridios@*********.com
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9489
http://members.theglobe.com/Iridios

-------Begin Geek Code Block------
GS d-(++) s+: a- C++ U?@>++ P L E?
W++ N o-- K- w(---) O? M-- V? PS+@
PE Y+ !PGP>++ t++@ 5+ X++@ R++@ tv
b+ DI++ !D G e+@>++++ h--- r+++ y+++
-------End Geek Code Block--------

From:	Iridios <iridios@*********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 11:46:34 -0400

Message no. 47 Adam Getchell wrote:
Sun, 2 Aug 1998 08:20:14 -0700

> >What is one man's dream is another man's science and yet a third man's
> >folly...
>
> Seen any "moon cannons" yet? That was Jules Verne's idea on getting to the
> moon. Why do you suppose we didn't use it?

Ummm... Jules Verne's idea and what we accomplished aren't that far
apart. Verne used a cannon to propel the vehicle while leaving the
propellant on earth, NASA put the propellant in the vehicle and did
away with the cannon. According to Physics it was easier.

<snip sig>

--"Any science, sufficiently advanced is indistinguishable from
magic."
--Arthur C. Clarke

Iridios
iridios@*********.com
http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Shadowlands/9489
http://members.theglobe.com/Iridios

-------Begin Geek Code Block------
GS d-(++) s+: a- C++ U?@>++ P L E?
W++ N o-- K- w(---) O? M-- V? PS+@
PE Y+ !PGP>++ t++@ 5+ X++@ R++@ tv
b+ DI++ !D G e+@>++++ h--- r+++ y+++
-------End Geek Code Block--------

From:	Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 11:49:46 EDT

Message no. 48 In a message dated 8/2/98 8:22:34 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK writes:

> |> Hey look, spare me the comments about how I want to reply. I was on this
> |> list before it was on the current listproc, and if it's to the point
> where
> |> you must stylistically reply a certain way, I'm happy to sign off
again.
> |
> |Sorry, but K is correct ... and if the rules change then we -ALL- must
> adapt
>
> Why? I still use 1stEd...

*** Looking somewhat strangely at the screen **

*** Resisting the urge to thwap ***

I suggest you reread what I was responding to ... in reference to the FAQ ...
not what edition of SR you happen to be playing ...

And no, I will not thwap you ...

-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

From:	Patrick Goodman <remo@***.NET>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 10:50:49 -0500

Message no. 49 >> Seen any "moon cannons" yet? That was Jules Verne's idea on getting
>> to the moon. Why do you suppose we didn't use it?
>
>Ummm... Jules Verne's idea and what we accomplished aren't that far
>apart. Verne used a cannon to propel the vehicle while leaving the
>propellant on earth, NASA put the propellant in the vehicle and did
>away with the cannon. According to Physics it was easier.

Roger that. My father worked for NASA on various space shuttle contracts
for nearly 20 years before he retired; I grew up with the space program
almost as a pacifier. On balance, Verne got a helluva lot more right than
he got wrong in FROM THE EARTH TO THE MOON, and his ratio in TWENTY THOUSAND
LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA is even more impressive.

---
(>) Texas 2-Step
El Paso: Never surrender. Never forget. Never forgive.

From:	Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Subject:	Re: Camo and Ruthenium
Date:	Sun, 2 Aug 1998 12:15:04 EDT

Message no. 50 In a message dated 8/2/98 10:23:32 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
acgetchell@*******.EDU writes:

> Seen any "moon cannons" yet? That was Jules Verne's idea on getting to the
> moon. Why do you suppose we didn't use it?
>
> >You will be spared no such thing, as none of us when we made our mistakes
> >and/or goof-ups were.
>
> Whatever. Feel free to appoint yourself self-righteous whatever; I'll feel
> free to ignore you.

**** Glaring ****

Get a clue Adam ... a lot of us are tired when someone says something is not
good because of RL ... I am tried of having K described as Self-righteous ...
take a step away from yourself and reread your posting ...

As for Moon Cannons ... Peter Gun had something in mind to launch things into
orbit ... given several more decades and perhaps reaching the moon would be
possible ...

Adam ... chill out some ... you are getting me angry by calling the game
system unrealistic ... *duh* .... the game is a game ... it is not even real
...

Wake up ...

-Mike
-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

Message no. 51 Adam Getchell wrote:
>Again ... if you put a "sun cell" system into a suit, you eliminate its
>camouflage potential. A nice diffuse low power laser will cause you to
>light up like a flare. All I have to do is look for a reflectance curve
>that peaks around 650 nanometers ... that will stand out nicely against the
>chlorophyll curve of the surrounding vegetation.
>
If I get the gist of the original idea i.e. using a 100% absorptive
material. You would not get a peak on the reflectance curve at 650 nm .The
peak exist because at that wavelength the light is not absorb but reflected
it is the same reason why grass is green, the light in the green range of
the EM spectrum is reflected and not absorbed.

Just to add another coal to the fire that has become this discussion is it
feasable to produce a less effiecient solar cell. Which would absorb energy
in the 650 nm range but reflect it at about 720 ish nm which I think is
somewhere about the green range.

>If this physics doesn't make sense to you, check out a good college
>textbook on physics. This is not meant to be condescending ... just a
>reference to real life if my arguments aren't clear.

Can I also make another suggestion ;->

There are a lot of people on this list who have been on here a long time, I
could count myself as one of these having been on here in various
incarnations for 5 years. Not all of us know the new protocols and
netiquette but we try to abide by them.

Question: if there is the technology to produce a coating which can absorb
EM energy released at sub 400 nm which is the range that IR is emmitted
could you make an aborbative material which would absorb at 650 nm?

Message no. 53 And verily, did Mike Bobroff hastily scribble thusly...
|I suggest you reread what I was responding to ... in reference to the FAQ ...
|not what edition of SR you happen to be playing ...

Oh, I just picked up on the first few lines....

|And no, I will not thwap you ...

Performed by -K a few minutes ago...
I'll need a shower now...

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |

Message no. 54 Adam Getchell wrote:
>
> >Not in the current science realm, you are correct. In SR's days, maybe, maybe
> >not. BUT, regardless of this, the tech exists in SR and it functions well.
>
> No, it doesn't matter what "science realm" you use. It is a basic physical
> property. A solar cell will absorb 650 nanometer light, that is its
> function. Therefore, you can characterize this reflectance curve using
> spectrophotometry, quite easily. Therefore you will always be able to
> detect such materials.
>
> As I said, if this is unclear, consult a physics text.
> >
> >-K

Thats how photovoltaic cells work nowadays.. Remember, technology can come a long way
in 60 years.

Nocturnal

Message no. 55 And verily, did Shadowrunner hastily scribble thusly...
|Thats how photovoltaic cells work nowadays.. Remember, technology can come
a long way in 60 years.

Errrm.. Solar Cells *ARE* Photovoltaic cells.

P.S. Please adjust you margins to around 75. Anything more looks incredibly
untidy in e-mails. (Max column width should be 80)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |

Message no. 56 In a message dated 98-08-02 05:57:50 EDT, you write:

> > For those of us non-mercs or military men, define a ghillie suit.
>
> A camouflage suit with strips of clothing and pieces of camouflage
> netting sewn on. Local vegetation is added onto (into) the suit so
> that if done well, the sniper wearing it becomes just about
> invisible from very close by. (A Dutch magazine did an article on
> Dutch Army snipers a few months ago. There was one "spot the
> sniper" picture in the article, with a comment from the author
> that he'd had to ask the sniper to stand up a few times so he
> knew where to point his camera. This was at a distance of maybe
> 3 meters, judging from the photo.)

You know, given that level of effectiveness with plain old cloth, IMO trying
to improve a ghillie suit with RP is sorta worthless... what would be
worthwhile, though, is to improve it against other forms of detection,
especially thermo and lowlight, which likely more than a few soldiers are
going to have naturally... after all, what good does it do to disappear into
the background of normal vision if a troll or dwarf can pick you out because
your heat signature looks like a goddamned beacon.

Hey, I just had a thought. If someone with thermographic vision (be it
through natural eyes or cyberware) looks through an optical image magnifier
(not electronic), will they still be able to see in the thermo spectrum?

Nexx

Message no. 57 In a message dated 98-08-02 11:23:08 EDT, you write:

> >You will be spared no such thing, as none of us when we made our mistakes
> >and/or goof-ups were.
>
> Whatever. Feel free to appoint yourself self-righteous whatever; I'll feel
> free to ignore you.

You know, I find it really ironic that you're making snide comments about him
being self-righteous, especially in that tone. Its like saying feel free to
mess up your life with alcohol, then drinking down a bottle of Jack Daniels.

Now, I'll admit I know jack shit about physics (a course I am rigorously
avoiding if at all possible), camoflauge, and solar power, but let me remind
you of something. From what I've read (which is again, not that much... I
can't seem to find R2), SR canon makes it possible to use more than just
yellow-light collection, and to keep solar collection panels concealed while
they're in use. You argue that its impossible. Ok, if you want it that way
in your games, fine, but remember that the only thing most of us have in
common here is _the_rules_as_they_are_laid_out_. We don't paly in the same
games. Quite a few of us don't have enough of a physics background to argue
with what is printed in FASA about solar collectors, just as many people also
don't have the metaphysics background to argue with what is printed in FASA
about astral space.

In short, don't quote house rules (IOW: anythnig that goes against FASA
canon), unless they are identified as such (e.g. in our games here, our house
rule is) in an arguement, it makes you look stupid. Not because the modern
world says you're wrong, but because the only thing we are sure to have in
common, FASA's game world, says you are.

Nexx

Message no. 58 Nexx Many-Scars wrote:
/
/ Hey, I just had a thought. If someone with thermographic vision (be it
/ through natural eyes or cyberware) looks through an optical image magnifier
/ (not electronic), will they still be able to see in the thermo spectrum?

AFAIK optics refract the light spectrum into the infrared and ultraviolet.
So, IMO, yes a basic optic device (binoculars) would work for someone with
thermographic vision. Of course, I'm not 100% certain about that :)

-David
--
"Earn what you have been given."
--
email: dbuehrer@******.carl.org
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/1068/homepage.htm

Message no. 59 David Buehrer writes:
> AFAIK optics refract the light spectrum into the infrared and ultraviolet.
> So, IMO, yes a basic optic device (binoculars) would work for someone with
> thermographic vision. Of course, I'm not 100% certain about that :)

Different wavelengths get refracted differently by an optical device. As
such, standard optical devices may not work for thermo (especially when it
comes to refocusing the light afterwards). But certainly a set of lenses
optimised for different wavelengths could be made.

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com

Message no. 60 In article <199808022341.RAA13702@******.carl.org>, David Buehrer
<dbuehrer@******.CARL.ORG> writes
>Nexx Many-Scars wrote:
>/
>/ Hey, I just had a thought. If someone with thermographic vision (be it
>/ through natural eyes or cyberware) looks through an optical image magnifier
>/ (not electronic), will they still be able to see in the thermo spectrum?
>
>AFAIK optics refract the light spectrum into the infrared and ultraviolet.
>So, IMO, yes a basic optic device (binoculars) would work for someone with
>thermographic vision. Of course, I'm not 100% certain about that :)

I don't see why not, provided the optical device in use was using clear
optics with no enhancements. For instance if the character wore glasses
in order to read, then their thermo/low light vision would still work,
the same IMO applies to binoculars and telescopes. However, I do not
believe that natural vision enhancement would apply through something
like a starlight scope or thermo binoculars for the simple reason they
already provide what the characters eyes normally do, thereby overriding
the natural abilities.

--
Avenger
http://www.shalako.demon.co.uk/index.htm
(Newbies Survival Guide to Stk & SR stuff)
http://freespace.virgin.net/p.siems/index.htm
(UK Survival Guide, SR Guide to the Oceans.)

Message no. 61 -----Original Message-----
From: Mike Bobroff <Airwasp@***.COM>
Date: Sunday, August 02, 1998 5:58 AM
Subject: Re: Camo and Ruthenium

>> Again ... if you put a "sun cell" system into a suit, you eliminate
its
>> camouflage potential. A nice diffuse low power laser will cause you to
>> light up like a flare. All I have to do is look for a reflectance curve
>> that peaks around 650 nanometers ... that will stand out nicely against
the
>> chlorophyll curve of the surrounding vegetation.

If that "suncell" is a typical (selenium based?) solar cell array. Funny
you mention Chlophyll- why not base a electricity producing solar collector
technology around it? With SR tech, it should not be to hard to engineer. At
least in some conditions, it would quite useful to the military, and, as it
would likely be largely "self growing", with some mechanical / electrical
integration, it would be cheap to boot.

Mongoose

Message no. 62 In a message dated 8/2/1998 11:30:26 AM US Eastern Standard Time,
u5a77@*****.CS.KEELE.AC.UK writes:

> |> |Sorry, but K is correct ... and if the rules change then we -ALL- must
> |adapt
> |> Why? I still use 1stEd...
> |(*THWAP*)
> |Wrong rules Spike...
> Not for me they're not...
>
Spike, I was referring to the "FAQ/Listserv" rules/guidelines, NOT the game
guidelines. THAT is what we are referring to. I am NOT saying that SR First
Ed are wrong rules, they are just older ones :)

-K

Message no. 63 > array. Funny
> you mention Chlophyll- why not base a electricity producing solar
> collector
> technology around it? With SR tech, it should not be to hard to
> engineer.

If SR tech could use photosynthesis-like reactions to produce electricity,
they would be using it. It wouldn't be a cute little utility with little
applicable use. It would certainly nudge out standard solar panels.

--
Duct tape is like the Force: There's a Light side, a Dark side, and it
binds the Universe together.
Robert Watkins -- robert.watkins@******.com

Message no. 64 > Adam ... chill out some ... you are getting me angry by calling the game
> system unrealistic ... *duh* .... the game is a game ... it is not even real

Yeah, go Herc! The tension in this list was getting too high. Remember,
just because we don't agree with doesn't mean you can't ignore us.

Later,
Eric Farmer
efarmer@********.cc.edu
http://www.cc.edu/~efarmer/

Message no. 65 Nexx Many-Scars said on 17:17/2 Aug 98,...

> Hey, I just had a thought. If someone with thermographic vision (be it
> through natural eyes or cyberware) looks through an optical image magnifier
> (not electronic), will they still be able to see in the thermo spectrum?

That's the same quesiton as we had a little while ago about
whether or not windows block thermographic vision. We never did
get a conclusive answer to that one, so this one is just as open
IMHO. (I would love to get my hands on a thermal imager to play
with for just a little while, to test a couple of these things...)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Money, tickets, passports! Money, tickets, passports!
-> NERPS Project Leader * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Plastic Warriors Page: http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/plastic.html <-
-> The New Character Mortuary: http://www.electricferret.com/mortuary/ <-

GC3.1: GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+
PE Y PGP- t(+) 5++ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
Incubated into the First Church of the Sqooshy Ball, 21-05-1998

Message no. 66 At 10:24 PM 8/1/98 -0700, you wrote:
>Hey look, spare me the comments about how I want to reply. I was on this
>list before it was on the current listproc, and if it's to the point where
>you must stylistically reply a certain way, I'm happy to sign off again.

I knew I remembered the name from the old days. Welcome back. And don't
let Keith and Mike and whoever else drive you out. Their style of gaming
is just different from yours (and mine.

>And I think you totally missed my point.

What's going on here, as I see it, is a difference in philosophy. Adam is
looking at things from a real world and current perspective. Which I agree
with. Mike and Keith tend to say "Well, yeah, but look at 2060 tech and it
probably can be done by then."

Which isn't necessarily true, but it works for their style of gaming. I
doubt that solar cells will ever become good enough to integrate into a
ghillie suit, especially since there is no real strong reason for anyone to
research this subject or put any effort into it. But it's their game and
they can do it if they want.

Welcome back Adam.

Erik J.

http://www.fortunecity.com/rivendell/dungeon/480/index.html
The Reality Check for a Fictional World

Message no. 67 On Mon, 3 Aug 1998, Gurth wrote:

> Nexx Many-Scars said on 17:17/2 Aug 98,...
>
> > Hey, I just had a thought. If someone with thermographic vision (be it
> > through natural eyes or cyberware) looks through an optical image magnifier
> > (not electronic), will they still be able to see in the thermo spectrum?
>
> That's the same quesiton as we had a little while ago about
> whether or not windows block thermographic vision. We never did
> get a conclusive answer to that one, so this one is just as open
> IMHO. (I would love to get my hands on a thermal imager to play
> with for just a little while, to test a couple of these things...)
>
A window would greatly obscure a thermographic image but not entirely
block it. I had a chance to play around with a therographic camera back
in college, we actually tried it. The window has its own temperature, and
therefore it's own "light". Things brighter in infrared than the window
would shine through.

I wouldn't see why that extra glare couldn't be corrected for with imaging
software, because the brightness of the window would be a set amount and
therefore be predictable enough to filter out.

So basically you can see through but your equipment might suck and prevent
you from getting good detail. I'd say +4 partial cover perception
modifier grin.

Message no. 68 In a message dated 8/3/98 12:01:44 PM US Eastern Standard Time, erikj@****.COM
writes:

> >Hey look, spare me the comments about how I want to reply. I was on this
> >list before it was on the current listproc, and if it's to the point where
> >you must stylistically reply a certain way, I'm happy to sign off again.
>
> I knew I remembered the name from the old days. Welcome back. And don't
> let Keith and Mike and whoever else drive you out. Their style of gaming
> is just different from yours (and mine.

K and -I- are not intending on driving Adam out ... all we are asking is that
something not be shot down as -STUPID- like Adam said ... and as for
responding in a certain way ... that is not a choice on our parts ... this is
sanctioned in the FAQ as canon for the list ...

> >And I think you totally missed my point.
>
> What's going on here, as I see it, is a difference in philosophy. Adam is
> looking at things from a real world and current perspective. Which I agree
> with. Mike and Keith tend to say "Well, yeah, but look at 2060 tech and it
> probably can be done by then."

Correct ... and we also tend not to weight future tech with the constraints of
today's knowledge either ...

> Which isn't necessarily true, but it works for their style of gaming. I
> doubt that solar cells will ever become good enough to integrate into a
> ghillie suit, especially since there is no real strong reason for anyone to
> research this subject or put any effort into it. But it's their game and
> they can do it if they want.

You are right, there is no strong reason for doing something like this to a
ghillie suit, but trust me, someone in the military beaurocracy might think
that having this as part of the ghillie suit be a good idea ... and being a
military brat for 20 years has taught me that some of the things the military
does is outright stupid to anyone without their mentality.

-Herc
------- The Best Mechanic you can ever have.

Message no. 69 > > For some people worried about power, the suit could have Suncell
> Power added
> > on, or perhaps a connecter cord to a Suncell Power net of sorts.
>
>
> The problem with a solar cell is that they reflect light, making an
> easy,
> flashing target.
>
There is actually a coating that the military puts on
damn near everything now which kills reflections. They started on
binocular lenses but it's spreading IRC.

Message no. 70 > Again ... if you put a "sun cell" system into a suit, you eliminate
> its
> camouflage potential. A nice diffuse low power laser will cause you to
> light up like a flare. All I have to do is look for a reflectance
> curve
> that peaks around 650 nanometers ... that will stand out nicely
> against the
> chlorophyll curve of the surrounding vegetation.
>
Don't people reflect differently also? Does
burlap(normal ghillie material) = grass on these things? If they are
doing this you are screwed, camo is irrelevant.

Message no. 71 > Which isn't necessarily true, but it works for their style of gaming.
> I
> doubt that solar cells will ever become good enough to integrate into
> a
> ghillie suit, especially since there is no real strong reason for
> anyone to
> research this subject or put any effort into it. But it's their game
> and
> they can do it if they want.
>
I just thought it was kinda neat.

Message no. 72 At 02:45 PM 8/3/98 EDT, you wrote:

>K and -I- are not intending on driving Adam out ... all we are asking is that
>something not be shot down as -STUPID- like Adam said ... and as for
>responding in a certain way ... that is not a choice on our parts ... this is
>sanctioned in the FAQ as canon for the list ...

And it looks like GridSec did it's job and asked him *politely* to simply
follow the current posting conventions.

I didn't get the impression he said the idea was stupid, he just called it
into question and rejected it based on his knowledge of current technology.
It's a bit harsh, but I saw it as a reality check, not a slam.

>> What's going on here, as I see it, is a difference in philosophy. Adam is
>> looking at things from a real world and current perspective. Which I
agree
>> with. Mike and Keith tend to say "Well, yeah, but look at 2060 tech
and it
>> probably can be done by then."
>
>Correct ... and we also tend not to weight future tech with the
constraints of
>today's knowledge either ...

Actually, without knowing much about the topic at hand, it would appear
that you are ignoring key elements of current knowledge and technology.
You've latched onto a few key points, glossed over the others, and launched
headfirst into a concept that seems highly unlikely. In addition, while
Adam brought up some apparently very valid scientific facts, your defense
seemed to be primarily variations on "this is a game, not real life" and
"tech will have advanced by 2060." Both of which are indeed valid points,
but not something upon which an entire arguement can rest.

Adam, as near as I can tell, is correct in his analysis. You and Keith
however, are also right in that it *may* be possible in 2060 for at least
some of those problems he brought up to be solved, through any number of
various technological means, none of which are currently known.

But as someone else brought up (Nexx?) a ghillie suit won't hide heat very
well, nor will is hide an astral aura. And to relate it to a great
recent/current thread, it probably won't hide your smell either (great,
great thread, even if I don't know much about it, not even enough to fake
it; very informative and helpful!).

So let's instead refocus our discussion of the 2060 ghillie suit. The
current version of 1998 works on the pure visual side of things perfectly
well. Done right, people looking for you will actually walk right on top
of you without ever noticing you; Durty Dan (his articles are on the
Warpig) was a sniper once and claimed that experience. So that bit
probably won't be improved, even with RP.

Can't really do much about the astral signature, though if you make sure to
hide in areas with lots of plants, you might be able to obscure your aura
just enough that glances might not catch you.

Heat? Probably would be best to not contain body heat. Probably far
better to let if difuse, but in a far different pattern than is normal for
a human body. Bring down the overall heat signature and let it radiate in
a dimmer, non-human form. You'd also have to give the snipers extra
training in heat signatures and how to use them to their utmost; don't lay
out in the sun and then stand up next to a cool building, that sort of thing.

Smell? I don't see why a ghillie suit can't have odors built into it.
Wouldn't have to be powerful smells, but just enough to mask normal human
odor with something else. Or perhaps a "perfume" that would bond with
human odors to alter it's smell into something non-human? We are talking
about chemicals after all.

Message no. 73 Mike Bobroff writes:
> Okay, what happens then when the sniper's comm pack and other electronics
> begin to run out of power, what then?!? Does he carry extra batteries?!?
> Carrying extra batteries means carrying more weight, which means
> potentially
> less ammo being carried.

He's out of touch... shit happens. If he expected to be out that long, odds
are he took a few extra batteries (AA batteries aren't big), or he rationed
his use of the electronics.

As for ammo... a sniper wouldn't need to carry much ammo anyway. If he gets
into a long, drawn-out fire-fight, then he's already likely to be screwed.

> Suncell as per the R2 has no CF or Load Reduction ... it also
> produces in the
> range of 25 PF for just a single hour out in perfect conditions.

That's cause it sits on the roof, as a coating. Also, I can't see a person
carrying around the sort of batteries a car has...

--
Duct tape is like the Force: There's a Light side, a Dark side, and it
binds the Universe together.
Robert Watkins -- robert.watkins@******.com

Message no. 74 Nexx writes:
> you of something. From what I've read (which is again, not that much... I
> can't seem to find R2), SR canon makes it possible to use more than just
> yellow-light collection, and to keep solar collection panels
> concealed while
> they're in use.

Where in SR canon does it say it's possible to keep solar collection panels
concealed while they're in use? If you mean concealed like "Okay, I build a
tube around it so that the light only reflects off that-away", then fine,
but give page and book references here.

Otherwise, there's nothing written about how well you can conceal solar
cells in use, and anything saying you can is a house rule, while anything
saying you can't is referring to modern physics (sort of like it doesn't
actually say anywhere in the rules that if you jump up, you come down...
it's sort of assumed).

--
.sig deleted to conserve electrons. robert.watkins@******.com

Message no. 75 From: Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Organization: Plastic Warriors
Subject: Re: Camo and Ruthenium

> That's the same quesiton as we had a little while ago about
> whether or not windows block thermographic vision. We never did
> get a conclusive answer to that one, so this one is just as open
> IMHO. (I would love to get my hands on a thermal imager to play
> with for just a little while, to test a couple of these things...)

Well, they use thermal imagers to see through walls (not very well,
but it is done.)

--Droopy

Message no. 76 In a message dated 03/08/98 19:18:58 Central Daylight Time,
robert.watkins@******.COM writes:

> Where in SR canon does it say it's possible to keep solar collection panels
> concealed while they're in use? If you mean concealed like "Okay, I build a
> tube around it so that the light only reflects off that-away", then fine,
> but give page and book references here.

I'm gonna have to beg for time on this one, Robert. I've got a shitload to
search through (and a couple lines in the water), and have other stuff to do.

Nexx

Message no. 77 In a message dated 8/3/1998 7:19:03 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
robert.watkins@******.COM writes:

> Nexx writes:
> > you of something. From what I've read (which is again, not that much...
I
> > can't seem to find R2), SR canon makes it possible to use more than just
> > yellow-light collection, and to keep solar collection panels
> > concealed while
> > they're in use.
>
> Where in SR canon does it say it's possible to keep solar collection panels
> concealed while they're in use? If you mean concealed like "Okay, I build a
> tube around it so that the light only reflects off that-away", then fine,
> but give page and book references here.
>
> Otherwise, there's nothing written about how well you can conceal solar
> cells in use, and anything saying you can is a house rule, while anything
> saying you can't is referring to modern physics (sort of like it doesn't
> actually say anywhere in the rules that if you jump up, you come down...
> it's sort of assumed).
>
The point that is being made here is that there is NO rules saying you are
unable to hide anything while using something that *might* generate or do
something else.

RAM and Suncell are able to be utilized in tandem in the R2, as no such
clarification or restriction was place. Yes, it is within the aspects of FASA
to change or clarify this as an errate (as has been promised once SR3 is out
and standing on it's own).

Also, it is VERY evidant that elecrtrically oriented power types are vastly
improved within the age of SR over the current, RL, time. Gridlink for
massive cities, Suncell for cars that provides enough power to work in full
daylight, Improved Economy Options for various power plants, including
electric ones.

I would have to say that "Suncell" is a vast improvement over the bandwidths
currently in use today.

As for quoting specific material, I think I might start doing that soon...but
not until I have a talk with the people at FASA directly, face to face, in a
few days.

-K

Message no. 78 K writes:
> Suncell for cars that provides enough power to work in full daylight

You can convert a car to run solely on solar power (in full daylight) now.
The trick lies in getting the density/effiency of the cells improved to the
point where you can get enough cells, on a rounded roof, so that you can get
sufficent powers from multiple angles (otherwise you need the panels on some
sort of flat surface, with an actuator, so you can move it to track the
sun).

Ob-SR: various groups are saying they'll have commercial quality solar
systems for cars (in full-daylight) within the next 10 years. A Gridlink
system can be done now, it merely needs a massive rework of the roads (to
put the conductors down). None of this would indicate that solar systems
would not reflect.

Active masking systems would either not hide reflective systems (most
masking systems are more concerned about either radar signature, heat
signature, or aural signature... very few care about visual signatures), or
would prevent the solar systems being used while engaged (by covering them,
probably...)

--
Duct tape is like the Force: There's a Light side, a Dark side, and it
binds the Universe together.
Robert Watkins -- robert.watkins@******.com

Message no. 79 >In a message dated 98-08-02 05:57:50 EDT, you write:
>Hey, I just had a thought. If someone with thermographic vision (be it
>through natural eyes or cyberware) looks through an optical image magnifier
>(not electronic), will they still be able to see in the thermo spectrum?

Nope. Glass is opaque to IR radiation.

Gallium-Arsenide (fragile stuff) is not opaque to IR, but is opaque to the
frequencies which the human eye is accustomed to using. Someone could have
an image magnifier purpose-built for IR; that's what is typically meant by
"thermographics".

>Nexx

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 80 >In a message dated 98-08-02 11:23:08 EDT, you write:

>In short, don't quote house rules (IOW: anythnig that goes against FASA
>canon), unless they are identified as such (e.g. in our games here, our house
>rule is) in an arguement, it makes you look stupid. Not because the modern

It's not a house rule; it's reality. Sorry.

The only thing I find "stupid" (and I use the word advisedly, as it means
different things to different people) is that some cannot have a
disagreement of opinions without resorting to emotion and ad hominem
attacks.

It's a fantasy game. Ignore as much reality as you want. I just commented
on the facts.

>Nexx

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 81 > Nope. Glass is opaque to IR radiation.

Okay, given that heat is a form of IR radiation - why can you get hot
when the sun shines through glass on you then?

(Not trying to be 'smart' here, just genuinely wondering.)

Lady Jestyr

- It's not pretty being easy -
| Elle Holmes | jestyr@**********.com | http://jestyr.home.ml.org |
| Shadowrun Webring Ringmaster | GeoCities Leader | RPGA Reviewer |

Message no. 82 > If that "suncell" is a typical (selenium based?) solar cell array.
Funny
>you mention Chlophyll- why not base a electricity producing solar collector
>technology around it? With SR tech, it should not be to hard to engineer. At

Sure, provided you could accomplish the reverse osmosis that chloroplasts
accomplish with low concentrations of sugar ... and you can utilize
fructose. Throw in the ATP cycle and you could attempt transforms of
glycogen to glucose.

I don't think it's real likely, nor efficient. We like to use electricity
for power because we know how to handle it efficiently. Using another
medium involves converters/transducers, and that means power loss. You
might be able to engineer a chlorophyll system, but I would bet that it
would have low power density and low wattage per square meter.

Nice thought, though ...

>Mongoose

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 83 >Nexx Many-Scars said on 17:17/2 Aug 98,...
>That's the same quesiton as we had a little while ago about
>whether or not windows block thermographic vision. We never did
>get a conclusive answer to that one, so this one is just as open
>IMHO. (I would love to get my hands on a thermal imager to play
>with for just a little while, to test a couple of these things...)

Been there, did that.

Laser images on thermographics is still classified by the U.S. Gov't.

>Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 84 On Sun, 9 Aug 1998 11:54:11 +1000 Lady Jestyr
<jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU> writes:
>> Nope. Glass is opaque to IR radiation.

>Okay, given that heat is a form of IR radiation - why can you get hot
>when the sun shines through glass on you then?
>
>(Not trying to be 'smart' here, just genuinely wondering.)
>
>Lady Jestyr
<SNIP>

Not sure. It may be a result of other radiation emitted by the sun. If,
on a cold day, someone stands out side and holds their hand against the
glass and you stand inside with your hand where their hand is, you feel
cold glass not the heat from hand. When you feel the heat from the
sunlight, it might be the UV radiation cooking your skin.

I'm just guessing though ...

There was a thread about this earlier and I don't quite remember the
outcome ...

D. Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, RuPixel)
o/` Trideo killed the Video Star ... o/`

_____________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com
Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

Message no. 85 >> Nope. Glass is opaque to IR radiation.
>
>Okay, given that heat is a form of IR radiation - why can you get hot
>when the sun shines through glass on you then?
>
>(Not trying to be 'smart' here, just genuinely wondering.)

Good question. The answer is that your skin absorbs the energy from the
sun's visible light photons. [That is, the photon impinges upon the
electron shell of one of your skin's atoms/molecules, is absorbed and
thereby increases the energy of the system.]

The real greenhouse effect (as opposed to the mis-named one referred to by
environmentalists) occurs in the following fashion:

Visible light streams into the greenhouse (glass walls) and deposits energy
there, thereby heating up the interior. The heated interior radiates away
part of this radiation as IR. Since IR does not pass through the glass, the
IR photons deposit their energy on the walls. The overall effect is that
energy is very efficiently retained, as the radiation mechanism is
effectively removed from the thermal balance.

If you were not in the greenhouse, you would be able to eject some of the
heat by IR emission.

>Lady Jestyr

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 86 >Adam Getchell wrote:

>Thats how photovoltaic cells work nowadays.. Remember, technology can come
>a long way
>in 60 years.

Material band gaps are the same regardless of technology. It is this
principle that is responsible for the feasibility of photovoltaic cells. In
general, only UV spectrum radiation and shorter has sufficient energy to
eject electrons from materials, as per quantum mechanics.

>Nocturnal

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 87 >**** Glaring ****

Perhaps you could learn to disagree without being so heated, eh?

>Get a clue Adam ... a lot of us are tired when someone says something is not
>good because of RL ...

Why?

> I am tried of having K described as Self-righteous ...

If the shoe fits ... I am not conducting ad hominem attacks or getting
angry when someone disagrees with my point of view. As I've said in a
private posting, to my mind intelligent debate is carried out without
resort to expostulation and emotion.

>take a step away from yourself and reread your posting ...

I have no factual disagreements with anything I've said ...

>As for Moon Cannons ... Peter Gun had something in mind to launch things into
>orbit ... given several more decades and perhaps reaching the moon would be
>possible ...

Sure ... just not for living passengers. The required inertial forces for
launch would kill organic cargo ... The escape velocity of the earth is 11
km/second, if you want to do some ballistics calculations on the required
initial velocity. An energy calculation would be easier, however. The
required mission velocity (approximate delta-vee) for a moon mission is 14
km/second, assuming minimum energy Lagrangian orbits. Perhaps if you could
make the barrel of the cannon a few tens of miles long you could reduce the
g-forces to tens of g's rather than thousands... propellant then becomes an
issue (the shockwave front will not propagate efficiently these distances).
The best chance of making this work is a magnetic rail system. Of course,
then energy input goes as the length of the barrel squared ...

There is a reason why rockets are successfully used, and cannons are not.
Not to say we might not have some future mag-lev launching system at the
equator, just that it is likely to be used only for sturdy, inorganic cargo.

>Adam ... chill out some ... you are getting me angry by calling the game

Again, why the anger? Perhaps you should take a step away from yourself and
consider why you invest so much emotion in the issue.

>system unrealistic ... *duh* .... the game is a game ... it is not even real

You're free to play the game any way you like. It seems to me, however,
that the rule system is intended to model reality. The magic system is a
big "what if", but it was still written by someone (Paul Hume) who believed
that magic would work in that fashion (Mr. Hume was a hermetic mage). The
Shadowrun Magic system has strong echoes of ideas expostulated by P.E.I.
Bonewitz, who obtained a Degree in Magic from UC Berkeley, as well as
classic Alestair Crowely and John Dee ideas. These sources are as "real" as
magic can be. I prefer to remain absent from any further diatribes about
the reality of magic, however.

To what degree you ignore realism is your choice. For me, "Willing
Suspension of Disbelief" requires as much reality as possible without
slowing down the game. Since these issues are ones of physics, rather than
of rules (which the rules are based upon to some degree) then it does not
seem to complicate things. Indeed, reality can and is a source of
inspiration for gaming.

>-Mike
>-Herc

************************
* Adam Getchell
* Human Resources Information Systems
* acgetchell@*******.edu
* http://hr.ucdavis.edu/
* (530)752-1584 FAX (530)752-1289
***********************
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 88 And verily, did Lady Jestyr hastily scribble thusly...
|
|> Nope. Glass is opaque to IR radiation.
|
|Okay, given that heat is a form of IR radiation - why can you get hot
|when the sun shines through glass on you then?
|
|(Not trying to be 'smart' here, just genuinely wondering.)

Weeeelllll....
There are many different types of glass.
I think he's failing to take into account all the variants in use these
days, and the fact that a lot of "glass" in the 2060s won't actually BE
glass, but will be some form of plastic.

Also, there are many different levels of opacity.
If you shine a bright torch through your hand, you can see the bone
structure, for example, so it's got a lot to do with intensity.

Sunlight is a very intense source of IR, while semiconductors used to
produce active IR emitters are bery low powered...

I think the same could be said for emitted heat from the human body.
Low powered compared to solar fusion....

:)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |

Message no. 89 And verily, did Alfredo B Alves hastily scribble thusly...
|Not sure. It may be a result of other radiation emitted by the sun. If,
|on a cold day, someone stands out side and holds their hand against the
|glass and you stand inside with your hand where their hand is, you feel
|cold glass not the heat from hand. When you feel the heat from the
|sunlight, it might be the UV radiation cooking your skin.

Nahhhh. UV might damage your skin, but it's a "cold" radiation.
You don't feel it.

(Although you do feel the effects a few hours later.... *OUCH*)
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |

Message no. 90 And verily, did Adam Getchell hastily scribble thusly...
|
|>Adam Getchell wrote:
|
|>Thats how photovoltaic cells work nowadays.. Remember, technology can come
|>a long way
|>in 60 years.
|
|Material band gaps are the same regardless of technology. It is this
|principle that is responsible for the feasibility of photovoltaic cells. In
|general, only UV spectrum radiation and shorter has sufficient energy to
|eject electrons from materials, as per quantum mechanics.

But who can say what new semiconductors will be discovered in the next 60
years. They might even discover a source of some of the stable elements
thought to be possible after the extremely short half-life ones.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |

Message no. 91 >But who can say what new semiconductors will be discovered in the next 60
>years. They might even discover a source of some of the stable elements
>thought to be possible after the extremely short half-life ones.

Semiconductors such as silicon generally arise from a specific area of the
periodic table. Band gaps have to do with crystalline structure (typically
octahedral structures) and do not vary wildly: certainly by no more than a
factor of 10 (and probably less than a factor of 2). There are a finite set
of crystal structures.

"Stable superheavy" elements do not appear to be possible. They're up to
element 108 (uniloctium or some name like that) and there's no sign of
increasing half-life; rather the reverse.

>|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 92 And verily, did Adam Getchell hastily scribble thusly...
|
|>But who can say what new semiconductors will be discovered in the next 60
|>years. They might even discover a source of some of the stable elements
|>thought to be possible after the extremely short half-life ones.
|
|Semiconductors such as silicon generally arise from a specific area of the
|periodic table. Band gaps have to do with crystalline structure (typically
|octahedral structures) and do not vary wildly: certainly by no more than a
|factor of 10 (and probably less than a factor of 2). There are a finite set
|of crystal structures.

True, but even some simple compounds can be used as semiconductors.
Copper oxide was used by some people as the crystal in the crystalset when
they couldn't get their hands on germanium...

Who knows what advances they'll make in semiconductors in the next 60 years.
40 years ago, a computer that would've fitted on your fingernail was beyond
even the realms of Science Fiction. (In Sci-fi back then, all the computers
had flashy lights and lightning arcing everywhere).

|"Stable superheavy" elements do not appear to be possible. They're up to
|element 108 (uniloctium or some name like that) and there's no sign of
|increasing half-life; rather the reverse.

I can't remember what number they said, but stable superheavy elements were
predicted after a certain number.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
| | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
| Andrew Halliwell | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
| Finalist in:- |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
| Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|GCv3.1 GCS/EL>$ d---(dpu) s+/- a- C++ U N++ o+ K- w-- M+/++ PS+++ PE- Y t+ |
|5++ X+/++ R+ tv+ b+ D G e>PhD h/h+ !r! !y-|I can't say F**K either now! :( |

Message no. 93 >True, but even some simple compounds can be used as semiconductors.
>Copper oxide was used by some people as the crystal in the crystalset when
>they couldn't get their hands on germanium...

Sure ... check the band gap energy ... you won't find it remarkably
different from silicon.

In fact, only a narrow range of compounds can be used with band gaps that
fit within the visible light spectrum.

Speaking of other ways to use sunlight: there's a reason for red or green
chlorophyll ...

>Who knows what advances they'll make in semiconductors in the next 60 years.
>40 years ago, a computer that would've fitted on your fingernail was beyond

As has been said earlier regarding the subject line, a ghillie suit is
already pretty efficient normal vision camouflage. It is other spectrums
(IR, UV), smell, sound, etc that need to be covered.

>I can't remember what number they said, but stable superheavy elements were
>predicted after a certain number.

That would be 106...

>|u5a77@*****.cs.keele.ac.uk| Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |

--Adam

acgetchell@*******.edu
"Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability in the opponent." --Sun Tzu

Message no. 94 > Sure ... just not for living passengers. The required inertial forces
> for
> launch would kill organic cargo ... The escape velocity of the earth
> is 11
> km/second, if you want to do some ballistics calculations on the
> required
> initial velocity. An energy calculation would be easier, however. The
> required mission velocity (approximate delta-vee) for a moon mission
> is 14
> km/second, assuming minimum energy Lagrangian orbits. Perhaps if you
> could
> make the barrel of the cannon a few tens of miles long you could
> reduce the
> g-forces to tens of g's rather than thousands... propellant then
> becomes an
> issue (the shockwave front will not propagate efficiently these
> distances).
> The best chance of making this work is a magnetic rail system. Of
> course,
> then energy input goes as the length of the barrel squared ...
>
Actually this would be fine for people (not comfortable
mind you), recent discoveries have determined that people can survive
30+ g's with no serious damage.

Message no. 95 At 21:06 -0500 on 8/8/98, Alfredo B Alves wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Aug 1998 11:54:11 +1000 Lady Jestyr
> <jestyr@*******.DIALIX.COM.AU> writes:
> >> Nope. Glass is opaque to IR radiation.
>
> >Okay, given that heat is a form of IR radiation - why can you get hot
> >when the sun shines through glass on you then?
> >
> >(Not trying to be 'smart' here, just genuinely wondering.)
> >
> >Lady Jestyr
> <SNIP>

<snip>

> There was a thread about this earlier and I don't quite remember the
> outcome ...

Let me begin with some background information. As a grad student, I study
the phenomena relating to energy transfer as heat. All objects emit and
absorb energy, and that these rates of emission and absorbtion generally
vary with temperature. Some materials have the additional property of
allowing energy to pass through them, in addition to absorbing it. We use
three terms to talk about how heat radiation intereacts with surfaces and
materials: absortivity, transmissivity, and emissivity. Absorbtivity is
proportional to the fraction of energy incident on an object that is
absorbed. Transmissivity or transmittance is proportional to the fraction
of energy incident on an object that is transmitted through it. Emissivity
or emmittance is proportional to the fraction of maximum abount of energy
that can be emitted by an object at a some temperature. Spectral refers to
wavelength dependent properties.

Well, after checking in my thermal radiation text[1], I found that in a
wide range of wavelengths spanning from near IR to far UV (about 170 to
2500 nm) the spectral transmittance for common plate glass is an average of
about 0.85, including surface reflections. Similarly, I found that for
wavelengths below 2500 nm, the spectral emittance is below 0.2 (for glass
that is less than 1 cm thick). We can say that in the range 170-2500 nm,
the intensity of the radiation from the glass would need to be at least
twice as much as the radiation through the glass for there to be
significant distortion of the image. For the sake of discussion, let's
call this the transmission dominant range, since the glass transmits easily
in this range. In the range from 2500 nm to infinity, the transmittance is
near zero, and the emissivity is near 1.0, so we can say that above the
wavelength of 2500 nm, the only radiation you will likely to see will be
due to the temperature of the glass. Let's call this the emission
dominant range, since most of the radiation incident on the glass surface
is absorbed and most of the radiation detects is emitted from the glass
itself.

This certainly sounds impressive, but what good is it to us? Consider a
body at 310 K (normal human body temperature). The peak wavelength that
this body will emit radiation at is about 9350 nm, well into the emission
dominant range, and the bulk of the thermal radiation emitted by a body at
310 K will be above the 2500 nm cutoff[2]. We can then say that this body
will probably not be seen with thermal vision, even if the window were
cooled to cryogenic temperatures. However, even a hot stove (near 500 K)
wouldn't be discrenable through a common plate glass window, and any heat
source warm enough to be radiate significantly in the transmission dominant
range (around 880 K) would likely warm up the glass so that the signal
would be lost in the emission from the window surface. As a comparison
(for those unfamiliar with Kelvin temperatures) water boils at 373K, tin
melts at 500K, lead melts at 600K, and glass softens at 800K. Moving the
800K object closer to the glass would at least raise the temperature of the
glass, if not softening it, further distorting the image.

Heading back to why sunlight warms us through a window, we again rely on
the Planck distribution. The sun radiates energy like a perfect blackbody
source at 5300K (well, not exactly, but close enough). The peak of the
energy distribution for a source at this temperature is, strangely enough,
in the middle of what we call visible light. Given the spectal
transmittance characteristics of common glass, we can see that a bit more
than 92% of the solar energy incident on a window passes though it.
Afterwards, it can be absorbed (by skin, clothing, walls, etc.) or
reflected back at the window. So, while the solar energy passing through
the window is not, strictly speaking, in the IR region -- absorption of the
energy by skin or other materials will likely be percieved as a temperature
rise.

[1] Siegel, R., and Howell, J. R., _Thermal Radiation Heat Transfer_,
Hemisphere Publishing, 1992, ISBN 0-89116-271-2, p 172-175.

[2] Calculated via Wien's Displacement Law and the Planck Distribution,
found in most heat transfer texts.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
George H. Ayers | EMAIL: GHAYERS@****.EDU
Mechanical Engineering | PHONE: (409)845-9598
Texas A&M University | WWW: http://acs.tamu.edu/~gha5538/
College Station, TX 77843-3123 | Scholar, Scientist, Coffee Achiever

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer