Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Rockets and Attack Helicoptors
Date:	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 13:36:46 +0100

Message no. 1 Alfredo B Alves said on 15:40/19 Jun 98,...

> What does a MMS look like? I was under the impression that it was this
> giant ball that sits on top of the rotor system, but I tried to track
> down a pic of it and couldn't find one ... I did find a pic of the
> Longbow mast-mounted radar ... Kind of looks like a tire sitting on top
> of the rotors ...

On the OH-58D the MMS looks like a large ball sitting on a cone,
yes. The Longbow radar is smaller and flatter, while some other
MMS systems are more cylindrical. It just depends on the
designers what the thing looks like, I guess.

> Second Question: Do SR sensors include target designator?

Yes. Even rating 0 sensors have rangefinder. (See Rigger 2, page
27.)

> Third: How would SR tech advancement affect MMS?

Except that they could be made a bit smaller than today for a
given array of sighting systems, not much would change, I
imagine. There's a physical limit to the size to which you can
shrink optics and still have them work the way they're supposed
to, AFAIK.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
An intelligent computer would be one that doesn't work most of the time.
-> 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:	Alfredo B Alves <dghost@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: Rockets and Attack Helicoptors
Date:	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:42:14 -0500

Message no. 2 On Sat, 20 Jun 1998 13:36:46 +0100 Gurth <gurth@******.NL> writes:
>Alfredo B Alves said on 15:40/19 Jun 98,...
<SNIP MMS appearance, thanks Gurth :) >

>> Second Question: Do SR sensors include target designator?

>Yes. Even rating 0 sensors have rangefinder. (See Rigger 2, page 27.)

A rangefinder isn't a Target Designator ... *Grabs R2 (should have done
this in the first place :)* hmmmm.... doesn't look like it *Grabs FoF*
Okay, for any target designator out of FoF would cost 10 design
points/1,000¥. Then add after all the other vehicle markups, the prices
for the for the FoF gear and reduce load by its weight. For external
designators (such as MMS) there is no CF reduction, for others reduce as
per Electronics Port (page 138 R2). Query are the range (5, 8, & 10 km)
enough for military use?

<SNIP>
>--
>Gurth@******.nl -
<SNIP Sig>

D.Ghost
(aka Pixel, Tantrum, and RuPixel)
"Let he who is without SIN cast the first stone"

_____________________________________________________________________
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]

From:	Iridios <iridios@*********.COM>
Subject:	Re: Rockets and Attack Helicoptors
Date:	Sat, 20 Jun 1998 23:16:59 -0400

Message no. 3 Alfredo B Alves wrote:
Sat, 20 Jun 1998 14:42:14 -0500

> Query are the range (5, 8, & 10 km) enough for military use?

IIRC, 1km equals about .6 miles that would make those ranges 3, 4.8 & 6
miles respectively. When used by helicopters either as direct fire
targeting or indirect fire targeting, these should suffice in 95% of the
situations.

Of course these would be completely useless in fighter combat due to the
speeds.

<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

From:	Gurth <gurth@******.NL>
Subject:	Re: Rockets and Attack Helicoptors
Date:	Sun, 21 Jun 1998 11:15:10 +0100

Message no. 4 Alfredo B Alves said on 14:42/20 Jun 98,...

> >> Second Question: Do SR sensors include target designator?
>
> >Yes. Even rating 0 sensors have rangefinder. (See Rigger 2, page 27.)
>
> A rangefinder isn't a Target Designator ... *Grabs R2 (should have done
> this in the first place :)*

Dammit, there I go again! I grabbed R2 to look up the sensors to
see if they included a target designator, read the blurb on page
27 and somehow must have thought I was looking for a
rangefinder...

> hmmmm.... doesn't look like it *Grabs FoF*
> Okay, for any target designator out of FoF would cost 10 design
> points/1,000¥. Then add after all the other vehicle markups, the pric=
es
> for the for the FoF gear and reduce load by its weight.

Sounds good to me.

> For external
> designators (such as MMS) there is no CF reduction, for others reduce as
> per Electronics Port (page 138 R2). Query are the range (5, 8, & 10 km)
> enough for military use?

I'd say so. As long as the target designator's range equals the
maximum range of the weapon you're firing you should be safe.
Firing a weapon with a range of 10 km while using a 5 km range
designator isn't all that handy...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
An intelligent computer would be one that doesn't work most of the time.
-> 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

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer