Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Bruce gyro@********.co.za
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 10:06:37 +0200
<vast snippage>

>Good question. I for one certainly can't answer it. But the rule
stuffs
>me up pretty good. :) Now, I think I'm going to have to take some
>"artistic license" and ignore the armour-reduction of the polymer -
or
>I'll have them wearing standard armour, with a ruthenium "suit" over
>the top of that. Is that allowed in the rules?
>==>Doc'

Have you considered giving them those "spetznaz" style fragmentation
cloaks?
You could layer those in rethenium fiber and still use light armour
underneath at
no penalty. The cloaks are cool for camoflauge and break up the shape
of the body.
Problems ... they're heavy and tend to get tangled in stuff....

- + - BRUCE <gyro@********.co.za> -

MiX it UP!
Message no. 2
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 00:29:01 -0700 (PDT)
> Have you considered giving them those "spetznaz" style fragmentation
cloaks? You could layer those in rethenium fiber and still use light
armour underneath at no penalty. The cloaks are cool for camoflauge and
break up the shape of the body. Problems ... they're heavy and tend to
get tangled in stuff....
> - + - BRUCE <gyro@********.co.za> -

Never seen them. Are they like armoured ponchos?

The weight would be a problem, though.

Doc'

==Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow)

.sig Sauer
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
Message no. 3
From: Bruce gyro@********.co.za
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 12:40:23 +0200
From: Rand Ratinac <docwagon101@*****.com>
Date: 07 September 1999 09:34
Subject: Re: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)


>> Have you considered giving them those "spetznaz" style
fragmentation
>cloaks? You could layer those in rethenium fiber and still use light
>armour underneath at no penalty. The cloaks are cool for camoflauge
and
>break up the shape of the body. Problems ... they're heavy and tend
to
>get tangled in stuff....
>> - + - BRUCE <gyro@********.co.za> -
>
>Never seen them. Are they like armoured ponchos?
>
>The weight would be a problem, though.
>
>Doc'

You'll have to ask Kevin about this one. I believe the Afghani
resistance
fighters used them to hide from the "occupying" Russian troops.

I saw them described as SR gear on a web page, but for the life of me,
I dunno where. Anyway, on this page they were called "Spetsnaz"
fragmentation capes.

- + - BRUCE <gyro@********.co.za> -

MiX it UP!
Message no. 4
From: Arclight arclight@*********.de
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 14:06:28 +0200
And finally, Bruce expressed himself by writing:

> You'll have to ask Kevin about this one. I believe the Afghani
> resistance
> fighters used them to hide from the "occupying" Russian troops.
>
> I saw them described as SR gear on a web page, but for the life of me,
> I dunno where. Anyway, on this page they were called "Spetsnaz"
> fragmentation capes.

I have said file on my HD:

--- Begin of text ---

Spetztechnika Fragmentation Capes
As used by elite Russian Empire troops in Finland and Afghanistan,
these capes offer extensive ballistic protection combined with
efficient concealment! Four plies of advanced Spectron ballistic
weave, reinforced with a unique Vympel energy-absorbent matrix,
offer superb protection inside a hard-wearing camouflage cover.
Just what you need when your stroll in the country gets interrupted!

Concealability Ballistic Impact Weight Cost Avail. Index
6 +2 +2 2.5 250 5/24hr 1

Concealability is to notice the armour: the cape is obvious if worn.
In normal use armour is considered 'layered': when lying down and
covered, the armour is a bonus to any worn. The cape may not have
gel-packs added. Use the camouflage rules in Fields of Fire, or
improvise a roleplaying effect, as necessary.
It adds +2 to signature when lying prone and covered.

--- End of text ---

The source given within the file is

Paul Jonathan Adam
paul@********.demon.co.uk

(I wonder who that is ;)

but no info who put into .html, I suppose
it's not PJA, or am I wrong?

--
[arclight@*********.de]<><><><><><>[ICQ14322211]
Vorsicht Ritchie, ein Hochhäus!! - Wer?
<><><><[http://www.datahaven.de/arclight]><><><>;
Message no. 5
From: IronRaven cyberraven@********.net
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 1999 08:52:12 -0400
At 12.40 09-07-99 +0200, you wrote:
>>> Have you considered giving them those "spetznaz" style
>You'll have to ask Kevin about this one. I believe the Afghani

Never heard of them. I'm suspecting that is probably a form of
camoflauge, possibly a form of ghille (it can be spelled with a "y" if you
are French, but that is the only place I've seen it spelled that way)
equipment.
I doubt it would be body armour, simply becuase even things like Tawaron
(fairly new stuff, much stronger than Kevlar) are heavy. I own a cape with
light weights (4x5g) at the hem, and it may be fine for around town (in the
middle ages or at Halloween), it would get hung up too easy in brush or
operationally. I would wan't one that weighed a couple kilos hanging off
of me and being loose, no thanks. I'll take a poncho with conventional
body armour.



Kevin Dole, aka CyberRaven, aka IronRaven, aka Steel Tengu
http://members.xoom.com/iron_raven/
"Once again, we have spat in the face of Death and his second cousin,
Dismemberment."
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in
your philosophy."
Message no. 6
From: Bruce gyro@********.co.za
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 16:40:27 +0200
From: IronRaven <cyberraven@********.net>
Date: 07 September 1999 04:28
Subject: Re: Ruthenium Cloaks

>>>> Have you considered giving them those "spetznaz" style
>>You'll have to ask Kevin about this one. I believe the Afghani
>
> Never heard of them. I'm suspecting that is probably a form of
>camoflauge, possibly a form of ghille (it can be spelled with a "y"
if you
>are French, but that is the only place I've seen it spelled that way)
>equipment.

Arclight posted the stats I mentioned earlier today... Thanks mate :)

> I doubt it would be body armour, simply becuase even things like
Tawaron
>(fairly new stuff, much stronger than Kevlar) are heavy. I own a
cape with
>light weights (4x5g) at the hem, and it may be fine for around town
(in the
>middle ages or at Halloween), it would get hung up too easy in brush
or
>operationally. I would wan't one that weighed a couple kilos hanging
off
>of me and being loose, no thanks. I'll take a poncho with
conventional
>body armour.

In the conditions we are talking about ('raku's arc) they might work
quite well.
I would go for +1 Impact +1 Ballsitic with the cloaking effect being
more
effective the less the cloaked individual moves...

Doc, I'm sure you can work on something there...

- + - BRUCE <gyro@********.co.za> -

MiX it UP!
Message no. 7
From: Paul J. Adam Paul@********.demon.co.uk
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 16:55:50 +0100
In article <3.0.3.32.19990907085212.0098d194@***.softhome.net>,
IronRaven <cyberraven@********.net> writes
>At 12.40 09-07-99 +0200, you wrote:
>>>> Have you considered giving them those "spetznaz" style
>>You'll have to ask Kevin about this one. I believe the Afghani
>
> Never heard of them. I'm suspecting that is probably a form of
>camoflauge, possibly a form of ghille (it can be spelled with a "y" if you
>are French, but that is the only place I've seen it spelled that way)
>equipment.

Yep. Unarmoured as used, but a simple way to hide from helicopters: lie
under a khaki blanket. From a helicopter, using mark 1 eyeballs, that can
be enough to vanish.

> I doubt it would be body armour, simply becuase even things like Tawaron
>(fairly new stuff, much stronger than Kevlar) are heavy.

I figured a couple of plies of some of SR's superarmours, at most, to stop
smaller airburst shrapnel not bullets.

You would wear it in a hasty defensive position if you didn't have overhead
cover, not out patrolling (it would be _horrible_ to wear on the move in
woodland, for instance)

--
Paul J. Adam
Message no. 8
From: Arclight arclight@*********.de
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 19:35:17 +0200
And finally, Bruce expressed himself by writing:

> >>>> Have you considered giving them those "spetznaz" style
> >>You'll have to ask Kevin about this one. I believe the Afghani
> >
> > Never heard of them. I'm suspecting that is probably a form of
> >camoflauge, possibly a form of ghille (it can be spelled with a "y"
> if you
> >are French, but that is the only place I've seen it spelled that way)
> >equipment.
>
> Arclight posted the stats I mentioned earlier today... Thanks mate :)

No problem. Just a short addition on the use of these
"cloaks":

The afghan rebels had heavy problems with the russian
helicopters during the conflict there. From what I have been
told, the rotor configuration the MI-24 and others use makes
them more silent; I don't know if this is just a hype, so
feel free to correct me.
Anyway, when rebel troops encountered soviet helis,
they just laid down and put the cloak over them. They
blended in with the ground, and the pilots couldn't see
them anymore.

--
[arclight@*********.de]<><><><><><>[ICQ14322211]
Vorsicht Ritchie, ein Hochhäus!! - Wer?
<><><><[http://www.datahaven.de/arclight]><><><>;
Message no. 9
From: Rand Ratinac docwagon101@*****.com
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 1999 19:36:08 -0700 (PDT)
> In the conditions we are talking about ('raku's arc)they might work
quite well. I would go for +1 Impact +1 Ballsitic with the cloaking
effect being more effective the less the cloaked individual moves...
>
> Doc, I'm sure you can work on something there...
> - + - BRUCE <gyro@********.co.za> -

Possibly, but it strikes me that, along with hard armour, they'd be too
restrictive for guys who have to move fast and quietly...

Anyway, something to think about. And thanks, guys.
==Doc'
(aka Mr. Freaky Big, Super-Dynamic Troll of Tomorrow)

.sig Sauer
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com
Message no. 10
From: Barbie LeVile barbie@********.de
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 16:30:00 +0200
Bruce wrote:
>

>
> I saw them described as SR gear on a web page, but for the life of me,
> I dunno where. Anyway, on this page they were called "Spetsnaz"
> fragmentation capes.
>
Running Gear Net Book IIRC

--
Barbie

"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - Adolf Hitler

barbie@********.de
http://www.amigaworld.com/barbie/index.html

SRGC 0.22: SR1 SR2+++ SR3--- h++++ b++ b--- UB++ IE- RN+ SR_D+++ W++
dk sh++++ ri++++ sa+++ ad+++ m+++(x+++) gm++ m+++ P+++(P*)
Message no. 11
From: Gurth gurth@******.nl
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 1999 20:32:51 +0200
According to Barbie LeVile, at 16:30 on 11 Sep 99, the word on
the street was...

> > I saw them described as SR gear on a web page, but for the life of me,
> > I dunno where. Anyway, on this page they were called "Spetsnaz"
> > fragmentation capes.
> >
> Running Gear Net Book IIRC

Nope, they're not in there. I think it was mentioned that this was a file
Paul Adam put together, but I have no URL for it.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Send BIOS authors and hard drive manufacturers back to school!
-> NAGEE Editor * ShadowRN GridSec * Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
->The Plastic Warriors Page: http://shadowrun.html.com/plasticwarriors/<-
-> 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. 12
From: Arclight arclight@*********.de
Subject: Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance)
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 1999 18:14:07 +0200
And finally, Gurth expressed himself by writing:

<snip>

> Nope, they're not in there. I think it was mentioned that this
> was a file
> Paul Adam put together, but I have no URL for it.

I think I got it through the TSA, in
the gear-section specifically. The filename
is "SRII_GEA.htm"(l?), so take a look if
you want.
Anyway, I might send it to those
interested... :)

--
[arclight@*********.de]<><><><><><>[ICQ14322211]
"It may not be war, but it sure as hell ain't peace"
Major General Steven Arnold - On Somalia
<><><><[http://www.datahaven.de/arclight]><><><>;

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Ruthenium Cloaks (Re: Questions of great importance), 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!