Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Christopher Church <cchurch@*******.SCRI.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Enhanced vision
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 23:24:49 18000
What's everybody's fave enhanced vision (lowlight, thermo, opmag,
etc.)? Reason I'm wondering is that with all this thermovision talk,
I wonder which vision is the truest vision? Has there been any
expansions on the ultrasound units? They sounded really keen but
limited in the SSC.

Also, how do you handle OpMags (or ElectroMags) when it comes to
gunsighting? I think I remember seeing a reference to treating them
like mag sights, but we ruled that out in our scenarios because Op
Mags don't give you crosshairs, and we couldn't see how it would help
you with traditional gunsights.

I have thought about how they (OpMags) might help with a
smartlink arrangement, but we weren't in a nitpicking mood, and we
refrain from skimping on gun skill dice ("where DID a street urchin
like you learn to shoot like a SEAL? Ahem.") when that's the nature of
the character.

Needless to say, I never fail to dole out the flarecomps with any set
of cybereyes purchased, and the same with the enhanced hearing.

P.S. Does anyone have the poop on ShadowTK? I tried to subscribe to
the cast-distribution and got a mail bounceback. Is the whole thing
down or is it undergoing a refit? Feel free to respond to my private
email address: cchurch@*******.tlh.fl.us. Thanks!

-- "In the immortal words of Socrates-- 'I drank what?'"
-Chris Knight (Real Genius)
Message no. 2
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Enhanced vision
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 16:32:19 +1000
> What's everybody's fave enhanced vision (lowlight, thermo, opmag,
> etc.)? Reason I'm wondering is that with all this thermovision talk,
> I wonder which vision is the truest vision? Has there been any
> expansions on the ultrasound units? They sounded really keen but
> limited in the SSC.

I personally like LL vision. It has the most capacity in almost all
situations. Compared to thermo, which allows roughly equal vision in bad,
worse and no lighting (even thoguh the vision is not too great), LL allwos
near perfect vision in bad and worse lighting, even though it allows no
vision in no lighting. Most activity occurs in the full-bad-worse lighting
band, you very rarely have no light. However, with the recent discovery (for
me), then thermo allows you to see through walls like robocop, then thermo
is becoming much more appealing.

As for ultrasounds, the book seems to indicate that it is possible to link a
sight to your eyes, but doesn't say how. The ultrasound would theoretically
work if you could house it in your body somehow, you just gotta find the
space, this would be better than having to link up to a sight to get the
ultrasound vision. Theres soemthing an Paolos WWW page about ultrasounds
housed in ones ears, and a SPU dedicated to interpreting the data, linked to
a retinal display. This sounds feasable enough, as if there is a detector in
each ear, then the spacing between them would be suficient to get a clear
enough result. (I assume, perhaps the O Great Physics Guru could clarify).

> Also, how do you handle OpMags (or ElectroMags) when it comes to
> gunsighting? I think I remember seeing a reference to treating them
> like mag sights, but we ruled that out in our scenarios because Op
> Mags don't give you crosshairs, and we couldn't see how it would help
> you with traditional gunsights.

I can see that they would be handy if your target was a mile away, and you
could hardly see them normally. But yeah, I never thought of it along the
lines of needing a crosshair to be effective. It's possible to assume that
they have one in them (ElectroMags could easily do this anyhow).

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 3
From: Christopher Church <cchurch@*******.SCRI.FSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Enhanced vision
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 18:59:20 18000
>
> > What's everybody's fave enhanced vision (lowlight, thermo, opmag,
> > etc.)? Reason I'm wondering is that with all this thermovision talk,
> > I wonder which vision is the truest vision? Has there been any
> > expansions on the ultrasound units? They sounded really keen but
> > limited in the SSC.
>
> I personally like LL vision. It has the most capacity in almost all
> situations. Compared to thermo, which allows roughly equal vision in bad,
> worse and no lighting (even thoguh the vision is not too great), LL allwos
> near perfect vision in bad and worse lighting, even though it allows no
> vision in no lighting. Most activity occurs in the full-bad-worse lighting
> band, you very rarely have no light. However, with the recent discovery (for
> me), then thermo allows you to see through walls like robocop, then thermo
> is becoming much more appealing.

Isn't there a problem with thermal signatures being difficult
to identify? Not that it is not there, but exactly what is it?
Especially when there might be interference (nonhomogenous material
betweeen the walls, water pipes, plenum cables, etc.)?
>
> As for ultrasounds, the book seems to indicate that it is possible to link a
> sight to your eyes, but doesn't say how. The ultrasound would theoretically
> work if you could house it in your body somehow, you just gotta find the
> space, this would be better than having to link up to a sight to get the
> ultrasound vision. Theres soemthing an Paolos WWW page about ultrasounds
> housed in ones ears, and a SPU dedicated to interpreting the data, linked to
> a retinal display. This sounds feasable enough, as if there is a detector in
> each ear, then the spacing between them would be suficient to get a clear
> enough result. (I assume, perhaps the O Great Physics Guru could clarify).
From what I remember of taking a class in Sensation/Perception
(aka Trivia Tidbits for Psychology Majors), the ultrasound system
linked between the ears would be very feasible. We use rudimentary
forms of sound location everyday with our ears. There would be blind
spots, per se, but the true difficulty seems to be in the translation
of that data into usable information. You might have to bypass your
optical nerves for a while and pipe the Ultrasound info in that way.
Otherwise, potential info overload. Even so, ultrasound 'vision'
would probably require focal points, where I think hearing is more of
a three dimensional experience. Interesting though...

>
> > Also, how do you handle OpMags (or ElectroMags) when it comes to
> > gunsighting? I think I remember seeing a reference to treating them
> > like mag sights, but we ruled that out in our scenarios because Op
> > Mags don't give you crosshairs, and we couldn't see how it would help
> > you with traditional gunsights.
>
> I can see that they would be handy if your target was a mile away, and you
> could hardly see them normally. But yeah, I never thought of it along the
> lines of needing a crosshair to be effective. It's possible to assume that
> they have one in them (ElectroMags could easily do this anyhow).
>
Of course, there is always that distinction between being able
to see your target, and being able to hit your target, which is
limited by your skill and the weapon's accuracy, amongst other
things. My Ultra-Power Browning wouldn't hold a torch to the keen
sniper rifles listed in the SSC, for instance.

--
"In the immortal words of Socrates-- 'I drank what?'"
-Chris Knight (Real Genius)
Message no. 4
From: MILLIKEN DAMION A <u9467882@***.EDU.AU>
Subject: Re: Enhanced vision
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 16:38:19 +1000
Chris writes:

> Isn't there a problem with thermal signatures being difficult
> to identify? Not that it is not there, but exactly what is it?
> Especially when there might be interference (nonhomogenous material
> betweeen the walls, water pipes, plenum cables, etc.)?

This is a good point, perhaps soembody who knows might answer it for us.

> From what I remember of taking a class in Sensation/Perception
> (aka Trivia Tidbits for Psychology Majors), the ultrasound system
> linked between the ears would be very feasible. We use rudimentary
> forms of sound location everyday with our ears. There would be blind
> spots, per se, but the true difficulty seems to be in the translation
> of that data into usable information. You might have to bypass your
> optical nerves for a while and pipe the Ultrasound info in that way.
> Otherwise, potential info overload. Even so, ultrasound 'vision'
> would probably require focal points, where I think hearing is more of
> a three dimensional experience. Interesting though...

Yeah, I see what you mean. One could assume that the SPU was programmed to
only present the "forward" view. That way the person would "see" what
was in
front of them, and this woudln't be too alien a sense to comprehend.

--
Damion Milliken University of Wollongong e-mail: u9467882@***.edu.au

(GEEK CODE 2.1) GE -d+(d) H s++:-- !g p? !au a18 w+ v(?) C+(++) US++ P? L !3 E?
N K- W+ M@ !V po@ Y(+) t+ !5 !j R+(++) G(+) !tv(--)@ b++ D+ B?
e+ u@ h* f(+) !r n--(----) !y+
Message no. 5
From: "Scott D. Peterson" <scpeters@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Enhanced vision
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 01:19:39 -0600
On Sat, 10 Sep 1994, MILLIKEN DAMION A wrote:

> I personally like LL vision. It has the most capacity in almost all
> situations. Compared to thermo, which allows roughly equal vision in bad,
> worse and no lighting (even thoguh the vision is not too great), LL allwos
> near perfect vision in bad and worse lighting, even though it allows no
> vision in no lighting. Most activity occurs in the full-bad-worse lighting
> band, you very rarely have no light. However, with the recent discovery (for
> me), then thermo allows you to see through walls like robocop, then thermo
> is becoming much more appealing.

Got to watch the shadows the the optical scanning tube can sometimes
create in good LL situations. Had problems with the sights we used in
Korea. Unless we presume that the sights and eyes in SR have managed to
work that into the way they project the image it is displaying.
>
> As for ultrasounds, the book seems to indicate that it is possible to link a
> sight to your eyes, but doesn't say how. The ultrasound would theoretically
> work if you could house it in your body somehow, you just gotta find the
> space, this would be better than having to link up to a sight to get the
> ultrasound vision. Theres soemthing an Paolos WWW page about ultrasounds
> housed in ones ears, and a SPU dedicated to interpreting the data, linked to
> a retinal display. This sounds feasable enough, as if there is a detector in
> each ear, then the spacing between them would be suficient to get a clear
> enough result. (I assume, perhaps the O Great Physics Guru could clarify).

Isnt the return signal a REAL L O N G signal and not musch of a way to
speed it up. Take you forever to interpretate the data. Guess thats why
they work so well on the invisable and eterial types.

> > Also, how do you handle OpMags (or ElectroMags) when it comes to
> > gunsighting? I think I remember seeing a reference to treating them
> > like mag sights, but we ruled that out in our scenarios because Op
> > Mags don't give you crosshairs, and we couldn't see how it would help
> > you with traditional gunsights.

Real good question. Ive got a Phys major telling me that if hes got a 5
power sight and opmag 3 eyes hes running a 150X sight picture. Great for
pulling the trigger on that hair follical down range. But if I recall
isnt the power of the sight shift the range collumn down proportionatly?

Doing my part to piss off the religious right.

Edge!

______________________________________________________________________________
CURR AHEE
Keep Up the Fire You Manchu Mother

Scott Peterson EMT-B (Candidate) US ARMY INFANTRY (Light) Ret.
<scpeters@****.edu>

....Watch your fire and check your targets.....
.....God is dead!....If there's a Hell I'll see you there.....
.....After this life every kid in America will want to be me.....

^
.....Flatline!..D-Fib...200 Joules.. /| ....Clear!!!!!!!!!
___________________________________ .__/ | ___________________________________
` |/
"
Message no. 6
From: "Scott D. Peterson" <scpeters@****.EDU>
Subject: Re: Enhanced vision
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 01:35:43 -0600
On Sat, 10 Sep 1994, Christopher Church wrote:

> Isn't there a problem with thermal signatures being difficult
> to identify? Not that it is not there, but exactly what is it?
> Especially when there might be interference (nonhomogenous material
> betweeen the walls, water pipes, plenum cables, etc.)?

Usualy one is taught to recognise and interpret the signals coming in from
the sighting instrument. Otherwise a interrogator/translator is used.
Had lots of fun with a Glvd and a rigged computer. Also the bleed over
tends to (in my experience) translate into one of two things: 1)solid
material-usualy a barrier or 2) something i dont want to screw with!

Edge

______________________________________________________________________________
CURR AHEE
Keep Up the Fire You Manchu Mother

Scott Peterson EMT-B (Candidate) US ARMY INFANTRY (Light) Ret.
<scpeters@****.edu>

....Watch your fire and check your targets.....
.....God is dead!....If there's a Hell I'll see you there.....
.....After this life every kid in America will want to be me.....

^
.....Flatline!..D-Fib...200 Joules.. /| ....Clear!!!!!!!!!
___________________________________ .__/ | ___________________________________
` |/
"
Message no. 7
From: King of Pain <mcgowan@*****.BUCKNELL.EDU>
Subject: Re: Enhanced vision
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 08:46:38 -0400
Well, according to the Fields of Fire, in my opinion the thermographic
would have to be better for basicly two reasons. 1)It has low light
already built in to the goggles(i swear, look it up).
2)Thermographic(natural, not sure about goggles)superimposes the thermo
vision over the actual view(as augmented by the low light when needed),
allowing it to be effective sight. This also prevents the guard in the
heat insulated suit from being completely invisible to you when you are
thermographic vision(cause in normal light he is still very visible). I
also have to like thermo over low light because it is much more you can
use in times like rain, or smoke with a smaller modifier than with low light.


RDM
Message no. 8
From: Nightfox <DJWA@******.UCC.NAU.EDU>
Subject: Re: Enhanced vision
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 15:43:42 -0700
>Well, according to the Fields of Fire, in my opinion the thermographic
>would have to be better for basicly two reasons. 1)It has low light
>already built in to the goggles(i swear, look it up).

yes it does say that - sort of. What it really says is that
"...thermo systems actually superimpose the thermographic dislplay over a
basic, amplified low-light display for better detail."
^^^^^

Basic, by common definition usually would mean minimal.
So that the low-light capabilities of a dedicated low-light system would
be better than the low-light capabilities of a thermographic system

Nightfox

BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!
Daniel Waisley + SCA - March of Ered Sul - Flagstaff AZ
DJWA@******.UCC.NAU.EDU + Nau fencing club.
"Nightfox" + Brotherhood of the Cryptic Demesne -household
BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!
Geek code V2.1 GE d-? H++ s+:->++: g+ p? !au(-) a21! w++ v+* C++$(++++)
U(-) p? L !3 E? N K- W M+ V+ -po+(---) Y+ t+ 5+++! j-x R+(++) G' tv
b+(+++) D(+) B--- e+ u+*(++)(**) h(*) f+(*) r-->+++ !n- y+*>++
BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!BOINGEE!!!
Message no. 9
From: Gareth Owen <glowen1@*****.NHS.GOV.UK>
Subject: Re: Enhanced vision
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 1994 14:01:32 +0100
>
> > Also, how do you handle OpMags (or ElectroMags) when it comes to
> > gunsighting? I think I remember seeing a reference to treating them
> > like mag sights, but we ruled that out in our scenarios because Op
> > Mags don't give you crosshairs, and we couldn't see how it would help
> > you with traditional gunsights.
>
> I can see that they would be handy if your target was a mile away, and you
> could hardly see them normally. But yeah, I never thought of it along the
> lines of needing a crosshair to be effective. It's possible to assume that
> they have one in them (ElectroMags could easily do this anyhow).
>
If you also have a smartgun link there's no problem, the crosshairs are
there, if not I'd say you get the Mag bonus only if taking time to aim,
i.e. using the eyes magnification through a rifles iron sights. It's an
overly simplistic approach to targeting anyhow.

GLO

--
Gareth Owen | Mail: glowen1@*****.nhs.gov.uk

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Enhanced vision, you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!