From: owner-deltagreen-digest@nocturne.org (deltagreen-digest) To: deltagreen-digest@nocturne.org Subject: deltagreen-digest V1 #51 Reply-To: Delta Green List Sender: owner-deltagreen-digest@nocturne.org Errors-To: owner-deltagreen-digest@nocturne.org Precedence: bulk deltagreen-digest Wednesday, June 24 1998 Volume 01 : Number 051 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 02:49:09 -0700 From: Joseph Camp Subject: Re: DG: RE: Silly Rulesmongering >Everyone seems to be forgetting Glazer "Safety" Slugs. I've been told that these were developed for the U.S. Sky Marshals, the folks responsible for transporting prisoners on airplanes. The Glazer rounds won't penetrate an aircraft's walls, owing to their dispersion/scatter design--they're like shooting someone at point-blank range with a .410 shotgun (aka a "varmint gun"). Quite nasty if they hit you, since fragments spiral throughout your body. The risk of passing through an airplane seat or a target and striking an innocent bystander is also much less since they scatter on impact rather than punching through, which likewise makes them handy for household use--much less of a chance to kill your child in the next room while firing wildly at a home-invasion specialist. be seeing you, Alphonse ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:42:28 +0100 From: Nick Subject: Re: DG: Organlegging in the Rocky Mountains The mib wrote;- >>>After having lost Amnesia Grrl the Extract to MJ agents, and picking up sigint from the bug I injected into her, I did some looking into similar cases. Don't know if it's entirely related, but before the recent UK warning, my contacts were telling me about amnesiacs turning up all around the green and Pleasant land - all suffering from extensive and extremely painful brain deformities. Something like your Amnesia Grrl, these deformities were leading to the significant over-production of various chemical elements. noone seemed to know why or how. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:26:40 -0000 From: "Crossingham, Adam" Subject: Re: DG: Query- The Legacy of Henry Armitage Aaron Litz wrote on Fri, 19 Jun 1998 <<< I seem to remember reading somewhere about something called the Armitage Foundation, run by Miskatonic University for the purpose of investigating paranormal phenomena. >>> The Armitage Foundation is described in one of Brian Lumley's Mythos stories (Curse of the Cthonians I think). The story was set at the end of the late 1960s. <<< [much snippage] Doesn't this sound like an organization that could get mixed up with DG? >>> Depends on how close you want to follow the original story - the Foundation, Miskatonic University and Arkham are destroyed in earthquake/tsunami/huge improbable destruction event orchestrated by Cthonians.... - -- Adam Crossingham home: tigger@the-wolery.demon.co.uk work: adam.crossingham.octavian@mktmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:44:49 +0900 From: ft203004@fsinet.or.jp (Jay and Mikiko Noyes) Subject: Re: DG: Silly Rulesmongering >> I usually take kicking and punching damage, as well as any concussion damage >> from anything smaller than a baseball bat as "knockout damage." After an >> hour or so, only a quarter of the damage is real damage. This way you can >> knock someone out without having to kill them. > >I do this for most, but allow the player to designate most of the time >(unless under direct threat, where all blows are full-force) whether they >are trying to kill or just maim. > >Martial arts kicks can be horrible damaging if need be; I can either knock >you out, push you down, or shatter your cheekbones - all with the same >technique. It's all a matter of how much of my body weight I put into it. >A solid kick can shatter bones and cause much internal damage. The hard >part is adding realism without weighing the game down with rules, but with >sound judgement and established guidelines, it can be done easily. Whoops. Forgot to mention that a successful martial arts roll in my rules gives you the option to do real damage. This is not as clunky as it sounds. No, really. Jay On retreat: Rincewind: "Come on, let's run away." Eric: "Where to?" Rincewind: "Don't you worry about _to_. In my experience that always takes care of itself. The important word is _away_." Terry Pratchett, "Eric" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:09:04 +0900 From: ft203004@fsinet.or.jp (Jay and Mikiko Noyes) Subject: Re: DG: RE: Silly Rulesmongering >On Tue, 23 Jun 1998, David Farnell wrote: > >> I had a player want to use Black Talon rounds recently. Are they still made >> (police only, I presume)? And can they really penetrate Kevlar vests, then >> act like a hollow-point round, only nastier? I heard a lot of rumors, but >> little in the way of hard facts. > >Only Black Talons, what a wuss. I recommend teflon coated, mercury tipped >hollowpoint hotloads with frangible crystal neurotoxin microflechettes >embedded in the mercury. For creatures with armor, I would go with >depleted uranium AV rounds or those British AV rounds that use plastique >explosive. Black Talons are glorified wadcutters, manufactured to better >tolerances than most amateur gunsmiths are capable of. Moral: get a >professional gunsmith as a contact for your cell. Say, has anyone used Glazer Safety Rounds in their game? Any rules made up for them? The real thing is a real damage doer against unarmored targets. The shell delivers a package comprising b-b pellets suspended in a teflon gel, all encased in a shell. When the shell hits a target, it explodes, causing damage similar to that of a shotgun at point-blank range. Even glancing hits have a tendency to blow off limbs, and the teflon gel is eventually lethal if it enters the bloodstream. Has the advantage of not punching through walls to kill someone three houses away. Any comments or suggestions? Jay On retreat: Rincewind: "Come on, let's run away." Eric: "Where to?" Rincewind: "Don't you worry about _to_. In my experience that always takes care of itself. The important word is _away_." Terry Pratchett, "Eric" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:10:56 +0900 From: ft203004@fsinet.or.jp (Jay and Mikiko Noyes) Subject: Re: DG: DG Survival Locker (c.f. C.Digest V26.3) >> In my regular internet survey, I discovered the post below. DG certainly has >> its fair share of paranoids. What kind of safe-houses, survival kits, etc. >> would our favorite conspiracy have esablished over the years? What would >> they maintain in their new, covert incarnation? > I doubt if DG has any safe-houses or materials of its own; it simply appropriates what it needs from other agencies. Jay On retreat: Rincewind: "Come on, let's run away." Eric: "Where to?" Rincewind: "Don't you worry about _to_. In my experience that always takes care of itself. The important word is _away_." Terry Pratchett, "Eric" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 11:40:27 -0400 From: graemep@immagene.mcg.edu (Graeme Price) Subject: Re: DG: RE: Silly Rulesmongering Jay wrote: >Say, has anyone used Glazer Safety Rounds in their game? Any rules made up >for them? The real thing is a real damage doer against unarmored targets. >The shell delivers a package comprising b-b pellets suspended in a teflon >gel, all encased in a shell. When the shell hits a target, it explodes, >causing damage similar to that of a shotgun at point-blank range. Even >glancing hits have a tendency to blow off limbs, and the teflon gel is >eventually lethal if it enters the bloodstream. Has the advantage of not >punching through walls to kill someone three houses away. > >Any comments or suggestions? Never actually used them in CoC (Cyberpunk is another matter....), but if I remember right, the 90's handbook suggests a basic +4 to damage against unarmoured targets, and halving damage against vests or armoured targets. Clunky but easy. I also agree that these would be the real deal for law enforcement and anti-terrorist types who need to stop richochets and put a target down first time. Not sure about the "liquid teflon entering the bloodstream being 99% fatal" thing. Although I guess it will screw up the bloodstream royally (embolism anyone?), I suppose it really depends on how much gets into circulation: bullets are small, but teflon goes a long way. Anyone with any better medical data? Not sure what this means in game terms - - it guess it could be handled via the usual CoC impale rules though. BTW, I recall that the restrictions on hollow points imposed by the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to law enforcement types. Can anyone confirm or deny this? Graeme graemep@immag.mcg,edu ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:01:45 -0700 From: "Bruce Baugh" Subject: DG: Re: Re: Cell Z and the like. Am I the only one who reads all this discussion of Cell Z and keeps thinking of the Mover cell of that name in OVER THE EDGE (which would cross over quite well with DELTA GREEN)? - -- brucebaugh@mindspring.com http://www.mindspring.com/~brucebaugh/ ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:22:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Bryant Durrell Subject: DG: San Francisco Ocean Doings Bad strangeness out here in San Francisco recently, fellow travellers. Two days ago, three people swimming off Ocean Beach (which is our Pacific Ocean beach, not at all far from my safehouse) were "swept out to sea" by a riptide. Two bodies were found -- one is missing. Then yesterday, a trawler was overturned a few miles down the coast. Two of the salmon fishermen aboard died, and two other bodies are again simply missing. My cell's guessing that someone is trying to cover up Deep One breeding. But that's a bit subtle for the Deep Ones themselves. So we're worried. This is Agent Garrett, signing off. - -- Bryant Durrell [] durrell@innocence.com [] http://www.innocence.com/~durrell [----------------------------------------------------------------------------] "Washington [D.C.] is a city of Southern efficiency and Northern charm." -- John F. Kennedy ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 09:36:09 -0700 From: John Michael Alldredge Subject: Re: DG: cell leaders At 11:57 PM 6/23/98 EDT, you wrote: > >On Tue, 23 Jun 1998 14:00:49 -0400 "R. Menzi" writes: >>>> If a cell leader is compromised, the cell and all friendlies >>attached to >>it are considered lost/compromised. . . . Needless to say, should a >>"cell >>leader" be compromised, all agents and friendlies under him are also >>considered lost or turned. << >> >>Christ, was that redundant! >>I guess I *really* wanted to make that point, eh. >> >Redundant and repetitious, repeating the same identical data and >information a couple of times, twice! But, then, most DG agents (and >many friendlies) are, or were, Government employees or Civil Servants... >:) > *****Obviously affiliated with the Department of Redundancy Department**** >Michael >theherald@juno.com > >_____________________________________________________________________ >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] > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:50:08 -0600 From: "R.J. Andron" Subject: RE: DG: RE: Silly Rulesmongering There was an article some time ago on wound ballistics, whioch showed ballistic tracks for several types of ammunition, including the Glaser Safety Slug. Based on that, I would suspect that Glasers are not as effective as their myths make them out to be. The GSS track showed a roughly tennis-ball sized temporary wound cavity with the microshot radiating out no further than 4 inches from the point of impact. Of course, this was in ballistic gelatin, so the performance against human targets, with bones, varying tissue density, and so forth can only be approximated. As far as I know, GSS have not been used in anger. However, comparing the wound track to that caused by a more traditional round, such as a 9mm FMJ, would suggest that GSS are actually LESS effective. Consider: 1. GSS will bounce off bones, while 9mm will bend or break bones. 2. The wound track of the 9mm reaches deeper and both temporary and permanent cavities are of a much greater volume than that of the GSS. While the GSS is shredding an area close to the skin, the 9mm is shredding areas deep inside, and reaching vital organs. 3. The myth of GSS dumping all its energy into the target does not bear up under close scrutiny. Bullets which lodge in the body also expend all their energy in the target. Arguably much more damage is caused by bullets which pass right through the body, creating a massive exit wound. On the other hand, I have seen photos of kevlar panels hit by GSS. These panels were completely shredded and ineffective for follow-on shots. There does not seem to have been any penetration beyond the kevlar by the GSS that initially shredded the panel. In game terms, I would give GSS much less damage capability than FMJ rounds in the same calibre. The selling point of these bullets is their low penetration, not their lethality--and that's why the Air Marshals are paying US $6 per bullet for them. Best, - -R.J. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-deltagreen@nocturne.org [mailto:owner-deltagreen@nocturne.org]On Behalf Of Graeme Price Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 9:40 AM ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 12:51:57 EDT From: theherald@juno.com (Michael Layne) Subject: DG: Re: Silly Rulesmongering On Thu, 25 Jun 1998 00:09:04 +0900 ft203004@fsinet.or.jp (Jay and Mikiko Noyes) writes: >Say, has anyone used Glazer Safety Rounds in their game? Any rules >made up >for them? The real thing is a real damage doer against unarmored >targets. >The shell delivers a package comprising b-b pellets suspended in a >teflon >gel, all encased in a shell. When the shell hits a target, it >explodes, >causing damage similar to that of a shotgun at point-blank range. >Even >glancing hits have a tendency to blow off limbs, and the teflon gel is >eventually lethal if it enters the bloodstream. Has the advantage of >not >punching through walls to kill someone three houses away. > >Any comments or suggestions? Well, looking in the back of my copy of "Compendium of Modern Firearms" (Kevin Dockery, Talasorian Games), I find a 2-page damage table listing damage from various calibers and varieties of rounds (in several systems, including CoC and Twilight 2000). However, the chart is only for ball ammo. Following the damage table, they give conversion data for other bullet types, including a couple of types of hollow-point and "Pre-fragmented (Glaser". If I'm reading this right, the Light Jacketed Hollowpoint and Jacketed Hydra-Shock rounds do 5x the damage of a FMJ round, with significantly reduced penetration, while the Glaser does 10x the damage, at something like half the penetration of the Light Jacketed Hollowpoint. If anybody else out there has a copy of the "Compendium", perhaps they can check me on this... I also recall that in many of Gardner's novels, James Bond seems to carry an ASP 9mm automatic, loaded with Glasers. The description Gardner gives of the construction and effectiveness of the Glaser round is very similar to those I've seen for it on the list here. Michael theherald@juno.com "Joe! You were right about Melville! This thing is absolutely gigan--" -- Final transmission received from Herr Klaus Miller, pilot of DSV "Lobster", during an encounter with a giant squid, at a depth of 500 fathoms in the Trinco Deep ("The Shining Ones", Arthur C. Clarke) _____________________________________________________________________ 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] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:18:13 +0000 From: "Taz" Subject: Re: DG: Re: Silly Rulesmongering > Well, looking in the back of my copy of "Compendium of Modern > Firearms" (Kevin Dockery, Talasorian Games), I find a 2-page > damage table listing damage from various calibers and varieties of > rounds (in several systems, including CoC and Twilight 2000). > However, the chart is only for ball ammo. Following the damage > table, they give conversion data for other bullet types, including > a couple of types of hollow-point and "Pre-fragmented (Glaser". If > I'm reading this right, the Light Jacketed Hollowpoint and Jacketed > Hydra-Shock rounds do 5x the damage of a FMJ round, with > significantly reduced penetration, while the Glaser does 10x the > damage, at something like half the penetration of the Light > Jacketed Hollowpoint. The Glaser system was developed specifically for use by counter-terrorist teams on-board aircraft. As has been previously stated in the thread, the round has virtually no penetration value but a VERY high hydro-shock value. The development was primarily in response to the wave of Islamic hijackings in the late 70's (IIRC). Many countries started putting teams of agents/troops armed with these weapons on 'high risk' flights - many times in co-operation with other countries. For some strange reason the incidence of hijackings dropped off dramatically after two hijackings were prematurely brought to a close. Glasers are hopeless against any sort of protection or cover - they won't penetrate an aircraft seat or two telephone directories - but in the hands of someone who can hit what he/she aims at... OUCH! Primarily, they were used in lightweight 'Airguard' revolvers. These were specially developed for this role (by a VERY reputable maker) and were 3 inch barrelled, 5 shot, smooth-bore, revolvers. The bullets were given a minimal charge (again, to limit 'collateral' damage) and so had a 'kill range' of 15-20 feet. As a true story, a friend of mine had a license to test his ammunition for 'the humane destruction of livestock'. He tried shooting a goat in the head from 10 yards with a 'stock' .38 FMJ round. The bullet bounced and the goat just shook it's head! He then tried again with a glaser round. Voila! Headless goat. Needless to say, the 'Airguard' is totally restricted and the Glaser round is banned (although a few specific military teams do still have both in the armoury... just in case). The gun and ammo feature (well, the start od Ch.2) in the Gardner-ised James Bond novel 'For Special Services'. Worth a view. Be seeing you Taz..... (taz2@ukonline.co.uk) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 21:18:13 +0000 From: "Taz" Subject: RE: DG: RE: Silly Rulesmongering Please see my earlier message on GSS. But I have to respond to this one. //Rant mode on// > There was an article some time ago on wound ballistics, whioch showed > ballistic tracks for several types of ammunition, including the Glaser > Safety Slug. Based on that, I would suspect that Glasers are not as > effective as their myths make them out to be. > > The GSS track showed a roughly tennis-ball sized temporary wound cavity with > the microshot radiating out no further than 4 inches from the point of > impact. Of course, this was in ballistic gelatin, so the performance against > human targets, with bones, varying tissue density, and so forth can only be > approximated. As far as I know, GSS have not been used in anger. Respectfully, yes they have. I can't remember the details, but an aircraft hijack was stopped virtually on instigation by a team of undercover SAS troops. IIRC the event was on a military flight and was just barely alluded to in some military journals. > However, comparing the wound track to that caused by a more > traditional round, such as a 9mm FMJ, would suggest that GSS are > actually LESS effective. Consider: > > 1. GSS will bounce off bones, while 9mm will bend or break bones. And potentially ricochet... > 2. The wound track of the 9mm reaches deeper and both temporary and > permanent cavities are of a much greater volume than that of the > GSS. While the GSS is shredding an area close to the skin, the 9mm > is shredding areas deep inside, and reaching vital organs. Agreed, but again, you suffer blow-through with 9mm FMJ. All FMJ, and in particular 9mm, is designed to penetrate armour at short range and to fly well over longer ranges. GSS was designed specifically for the opposite. > 3. The myth of GSS dumping all its energy into the target does not > bear up under close scrutiny. Bullets which lodge in the body also > expend all their energy in the target. Arguably much more damage is > caused by bullets which pass right through the body, creating a > massive exit wound. The problem is, at the ranges that GSS were designed to be used (sub-10m) a 'standard' FMJ will blow through most targets. GSS is specifically designed NOT to blow through targets at close range. > On the other hand, I have seen photos of kevlar panels hit by GSS. > These panels were completely shredded and ineffective for follow-on > shots. There does not seem to have been any penetration beyond the > kevlar by the GSS that initially shredded the panel. This is as expected. > In game terms, I would give GSS much less damage capability than > FMJ rounds in the same calibre. The selling point of these bullets > is their low penetration, not their lethality--and that's why the > Air Marshals are paying US $6 per bullet for them. NO! Against an unarmoured target, at very short ranges, GSS will do more damage that FMJ. Ask yourself this question... at 10ft range which would you rather be shot by; a) a 9mm FMJ; or b) a shotgun? My answer is the 9mm. At that range, the kinetic energy of the 9mm will take it straight thru' a body (unless it hits a major bone) without slowing down, whereas the shotgun would dissipate all of its (admittedly lesser) KE in the body. Having said all of that, I would obviously prefer not to be shot at all!! I think, when all is said and done, that you have to consider what the ammunition was made for. FMJ, Hollow-point, etc, were designed to penetrate armour and kill at ranges out to around 150ft and who cares about blow-through at short ranges. GSS were designed to counter a specific threat - aircraft hijacking. In this situation, blow-through is the major consideration - I mean, what's the point in having a round that can penetrate body armour and kill at 90ft when a) hijackers don't tend to wear body armour (I find it difficult to convince airport security staff that it's just for my own protection!); b) if I blow-through a target and penetrate the aircraft skin at 30K ft, it's more than likely to be good night vienna for all aboard; and c) combat on an aircraft tends to be at 10-20ft max. //Rant mode off// sorry about the rant... Be seeing you Taz..... (taz2@ukonline.co.uk) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:42:59 -0400 From: "John C. Detwiler" Subject: DG: Police investigative forms Who wanted the police paperwork? I've got a generic based on a text book form in Word 97 format available. May be able to convert to other formats but not sure what that would do to it. Let me know your address & I'll send it to you. John the Bastard jdetwiler@compuserve.com "Throw off those chains of reason and your prison disappears" ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 17:19:15 -0400 From: Viktor Haag Subject: [none] - ------ original message ------ Date: Tue, 23 Jun 1998 13:37:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Colonel Panic Subject: Re: DG: Silly Rulesmongering [snip] Martial arts kicks can be horrible damaging if need be; I can either knock you out, push you down, or shatter your cheekbones - all with the same technique. It's all a matter of how much of my body weight I put into it. A solid kick can shatter bones and cause much internal damage. The hard part is adding realism without weighing the game down with rules, but with sound judgement and established guidelines, it can be done easily. - ------------------------------ Kicks aside, martial strikes and grapples with bare hands, wrists and elbows can also be horribly damaging. In ways that gunshot wounds are not. I'm no gun expert, but the general consensus I've noticed on the net in the past from self-professed gun experts seems to classify gunshot wounds into four categories (in apparently descending order of statistical appearance): (a) miss. by far the most common. (b) incapacitating shots that put you down but don't kill you -- stay out of combat, see doctor real soon, or end up in category (c). (c) death. (d) flesh wound. In fights that don't involve guns, any decent offense oriented martial arts tends to remove the "miss" and "flesh wound" categories above and replace them with more occurences of the "incapacitating" category. Most well trained fighters in a martial art are trained to engage, strike till opponent is out, and retreat with as much speed and efficiency as possible. The movies presentation of martial artists as (a) one punch, one kill experts, or (b) guys who soak up blow after blow, just isn't accurate. Most combat fighters are trained to incapacitate (or kill) opponents as quickly as possible with as many strikes as required (i.e. hit him until he capitulates, or is 'out' -- what 'out' is usually 'can't get up', which may mean unconscious, in shock, dead, etc). Personally, I have no problem with the MA attacks in Basic Roleplaying Games being as nasty as they are. I control them by demanding solid character reasons for high Martial Arts skills. A few weeks in "kung fu class" doesn't count. Of course, I'm far from a Martial Arts Expert (tm) myself: those who are, feel free to rebutt! Agent Eduard ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 14:24:30 -0700 From: paposehn@juno.com (Phil A Posehn) Subject: DG: Re: Silly Rulesmongering On Wed, 24 Jun 1998 10:50:08 -0600 "R.J. Andron" writes: . The selling point of these bullets is their low >penetration, not their lethality--and that's why the Air Marshals are >paying >US $6 per bullet for them. > >Best, >-R.J. I was under the impression that the whole Sky Marshall program was killed after one of them accidentally shot long time Hollywood character actor Victor Sen Young during an attempted hijacking back in the '70s. When did they start it up again?? Phil _____________________________________________________________________ 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] ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 17:54:06 -0400 From: Daniel Harms Subject: Re: DG: Query- The Legacy of Henry Armitage At 02:26 PM 6/23/98 -0000, you wrote: >Aaron Litz wrote on Fri, 19 Jun 1998 > ><<< I seem to remember reading somewhere about something called the >Armitage Foundation, run by >Miskatonic University for the purpose of investigating paranormal >phenomena. >>> > >The Armitage Foundation is described in one of Brian Lumley's Mythos >stories (Curse of the Cthonians I think). The story was set at the end >of the late 1960s. I think what you're both thinking of is the Wilmarth Foundation. > <<< [much snippage] Doesn't this sound like an organization that could >get mixed up with DG? >>> > >Depends on how close you want to follow the original story - the >Foundation, Miskatonic University and Arkham are destroyed in >earthquake/tsunami/huge improbable destruction event orchestrated by >Cthonians.... Besides, it might be a little odd. According to Lumley, the Wilmarth Foundation is a state-of-the-art organization which has extensive knowledge of the Cthulhu Mythos. Thus, if you don't want your investigators to know much about the Mythos, it's probably not a good idea. Then again, I suppose it could be fun to set them up as a recurring antagonist of sorts... and I've always wondered where they got their funding... Yrs., Daniel Harms dmharms@acsu.buffalo.edu "Wool is wool. Wool is a pack of lies." -- Richard S. Shaver ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 16:40:19 -0500 From: Nightstar Subject: Re: DG: RE: Silly Rulesmongering >Hello All, > >Everyone seems to be forgetting Glazer "Safety" Slugs. IIRC No12 >shot suspended in liquid teflon, Won't penetrate a vest but get hit >anywhere unprotected and its a good bet you loose the limb or >whatever plus to add to the infecction debate liquid teflon is >deadly inside the human body IIRC 99% lethal. The bullet basically >puts all its kinetic energy into the target at one point (that's why >your arm isn't there anymore :-) >They were designed to prevent (I can't spell the word but its >soemthing like rico-shays. Just say it out loud!) by disintigrating >on impact. Pretty nasty and besides why not have 2 guns one with AP >rounds and one with Safety slugs ;-) > >Bye for now. > >Rob. > > >J.R.E.Thomas. >Science Library PC Room Advisor ext 6135 / 5128. >MScII City and Regional Planning Student. >ThomasR@cardiff.ac.uk > > I have never heard of these before. Are they shotgun shells or various calibers? Are they legal in the United States? This is a very interesting piece of ammunition. I would like to know more about it. If anyone can offer any more information, I would appreciate it. - ----------------------------------------------------------- Finally, a light at the end of the tunnel......heh heh heh. Nightstar ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 19:09:22 EDT From: Imandos@aol.com Subject: DG: Glaser Taz wrote: >Needless to say, the 'Airguard' is totally restricted and the Glaser >round is banned (although a few specific military teams do still have >both in the armoury... just in case). Are you saying that Glaser rounds are banned by law for private citizens? Glaser and the new Blue Dot [heavier rounds for some penetration of thicker clothing] are both legal to own and use. Local gunshops sell them at around $17 for eight rounds. Thomas Woodall Imandos@aol.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 19:24:59 EDT From: MgkellyMP5@aol.com Subject: Re: DG: Glaser In a message dated 98-06-24 19:20:29 EDT, you write: << Are you saying that Glaser rounds are banned by law for private citizens? Glaser and the new Blue Dot [heavier rounds for some penetration of thicker clothing] are both legal to own and use. Local gunshops sell them at around $17 for eight rounds. >> Damn, where do you live that you get Glasers so cheap? It cost me $22 for six .357 rounds and that was the least expensive that I could find. Concerning gaming and real life both, they're expensive, but you get what you pay for. I heard a figure once that they had something like a 96% kill ratio against torso shots in the .380 caliber (for those who don't know, .380's are small hold-out guns. Relatively speaking, they don't deposit their kinetic energy very well. Personal opinion, only good as a back-up for the back-up). But that's just my 2¢.... Mgkelly ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 Jun 1998 09:21:07 +0900 From: "David Farnell" Subject: RE: DG: RE: Silly Ammo-Mongering Thanks for all the lovely info on Black Talons folks. I'd heard reports that they'd drill through vests before, but I never believed it. After all, you don't get the "claws" until the round has expanded, and it doesn't expand until it's in soft tissue, right? So how could it use the claws to cut through the vest? Still, a pretty nasty hollow-point, especially if you hate trauma surgeons. Responding to Nightstar, Taz, RJ, Graeme, et al, re: Glazer Safety Slugs: >I have never heard of these before. Are they shotgun shells or various >calibers? Are they legal in the United States? Just a quick recap: Glazers are normal-sized rounds for pistols and rifles (the rifle rounds are rather less common), available in a variety of calibers. There are two main types, the most common being the "blue-tip" (the other one, the "silver-tip," may be law-enforcement only, and I have no experience with it). Technical stats aside, the "bullet" is a hollow shell packed with small shot, with liquid teflon filling the spaces between the shot. The blue tip is a plastic (rubber) cap holding it all in. When the shell hits the target, if the target is soft, it penetrates, shooting all those tiny balls out through the target (thet's why it's called "pre-fragmented"). If the target is hard, the shell just kind of splats, and nobody gets hurt (although I guess a ricocheting ball could put an eye out). > The GSS track showed a roughly tennis-ball sized temporary wound cavity with > the microshot radiating out no further than 4 inches from the point of > impact. Of course, this was in ballistic gelatin, so the performance against > human targets, with bones, varying tissue density, and so forth can only be > approximated. As far as I know, GSS have not been used in anger. Back in my NRA days, I remember reading a couple of articles about glazers being used by cops in actual shootouts. I seem to remember that, during a desperate fight, a heroic cop shot a monstrous perp (hey, it was an NRA magazine, OK?) in the torso. The coroner was pulling those little shot balls out of the guy's legs, about down to his knees. That's how far they'll travel under perfect circumstances. Another story said that a glazer went in but failed to break up, meaning that it was nothing but a rather lightweight bullet that didn't expand. The perp wasn't hurt all that badly. Keep in mind that ballistic gelatin is notorious for returning very different results than real-life shootings. >Arguably much more damage is > caused by bullets which pass right through the body, creating a > massive exit wound. Very controversial, that. Of course, if the bullet expands, causes massive internal damage, AND passes through to cause a massive exit wound, well, that would be a good thing (if you're not on the receiving end), but usually it either expands and stays in, or it fails to expand and passes through. >The selling point of these bullets > is their low penetration, not their lethality--and that's why the > Air Marshals are paying US $6 per bullet for them. Jeez, I only paid about $3 each for mine. >When the shell hits a target, it explodes, >causing damage similar to that of a shotgun at point-blank range. Even >glancing hits have a tendency to blow off limbs, and the teflon gel is >eventually lethal if it enters the bloodstream. Has the advantage of not >punching through walls to kill someone three houses away. Actually, it's more like it explodes INSIDE the target--worse than a shotgun at point-blank range, except you don't get the lovely gas expansion and powder-burn effects. Of course, a .357 round is a pretty tiny shotgun going off inside, but it's enough. I've never heard of limbs getting blown off, and I have no idea of the lethality of the teflon--I don't think it matters much. And the not-punching-though-walls characteristic is why I bought them in the first place. Didn't want to kill my neighbor accidentally (only on purpose). >The >bullets were given a minimal charge (again, to limit 'collateral' >damage) and so had a 'kill range' of 15-20 feet.... >Needless to say, the 'Airguard' is totally restricted and the Glaser >round is banned (although a few specific military teams do still have >both in the armoury... just in case). The glazers I had were VERY hot rounds--although they were very lightweight "bullets," the powder charge made them kick quite firmly in a .357 magnum. Certainly, they are available in the US to ordinary citizens (local restrictions may apply), unless there was a provision in the recent gun laws I didn't hear about (wouldn't be surprising). In any case, they were legal the last time I was in the USA (about 2 years ago). There's no sane reason to make them illegal (unless you mean making ALL ammo and guns illegal), as they are actually safer in the sense of less chance of bystanders getting killed. Of course, the same is true of hollowpoints, and some local laws restrict hollowpoints to law-enforcement only. The Air Marshal glazer was probably very different from the one available to the hoi polloi, though. Perhaps it was the silver-tip version? As far as I remember, glazers were available in most common pistol calibers, including magnums. They may not have been available in .25 caliber--I'm not sure on that. I also saw them in a few rifle calibers, mainly .308, .30-06, and .30-30. Why? For hunting, of course! ("Look, a duck-billed platypus. IT'S COMING RIGHT FOR US!" BLAM!) They are less reliable than more conventional ammo, but when they work, they work big-time. If they hit a kevlar vest, I would say reduce the damage to 0 or 1, or give maybe 1d3 of stun-only damage. If they get a good solid hit on an unprotected person, give pretty massive damage, maybe double or maximum or something like that. Flesh wounds might just be regular flesh wounds--if the shell doesn't penetrate, it can't do its special expansion. They may be less accurate than more standard ammo, and may have shorter range, but the blue-tips anyway have enough of a powder charge that they're not very-short-range-only. How about other exotic rounds? There was an armor-piercer that was commonly called the "cookie-cutter" because it was basically a flying tubular buzzsaw. I don't know if it actually pierced armor, but the idea was that it would slice a little tube through the target, killing through massive blood-loss. Never made much sense to me--folks can shoot back many times while dying of blood loss. Then there was a sort of hybrid--a glazer-like round with the cookie-cutter on top. I think it was supposed to get deeper penetration before exploding. Looked like it was guaranteed to fail 9 times out of 10. I mainly stuck with Silvertips (a rather nice-quality hollowpoint), mainly because they happened to be the most accurate thing in that particular pistol. I tried lots of other ammo, and I could hit more often with Silvertips, and if you don't hit... Anyway, that's enough on that. David Farnell ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 18:23:09 -0600 From: "R.J. Andron" Subject: RE: DG: RE: Silly Rulesmongering - -----Original Message----- From: owner-deltagreen@nocturne.org [mailto:owner-deltagreen@nocturne.org]On Behalf Of Taz Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 1998 3:18 PM To: deltagreen@nocturne.org Cc: twin@ukonline.co.uk Subject: RE: DG: RE: Silly Rulesmongering > In game terms, I would give GSS much less damage capability than > FMJ rounds in the same calibre. The selling point of these bullets > is their low penetration, not their lethality--and that's why the > Air Marshals are paying US $6 per bullet for them. NO! Against an unarmoured target, at very short ranges, GSS will do more damage that FMJ. Ask yourself this question... at 10ft range which would you rather be shot by; a) a 9mm FMJ; or b) a shotgun? My answer is the 9mm. At that range, the kinetic energy of the 9mm will take it straight thru' a body (unless it hits a major bone) without slowing down, whereas the shotgun would dissipate all of its (admittedly lesser) KE in the body. Having said all of that, I would obviously prefer not to be shot at all!! I think, when all is said and done, that you have to consider what the ammunition was made for. FMJ, Hollow-point, etc, were designed to penetrate armour and kill at ranges out to around 150ft and who cares about blow-through at short ranges. GSS were designed to counter a specific threat - aircraft hijacking. In this situation, blow-through is the major consideration - I mean, what's the point in having a round that can penetrate body armour and kill at 90ft when a) hijackers don't tend to wear body armour (I find it difficult to convince airport security staff that it's just for my own protection!); b) if I blow-through a target and penetrate the aircraft skin at 30K ft, it's more than likely to be good night vienna for all aboard; and c) combat on an aircraft tends to be at 10-20ft max. - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- With respect to the shotgun/9mm analogy--GSS are not shotgun projectiles. A shotgun at 15 feet (5 metres) has a pattern diameter of approx 150 mm (~6 inches)and is composed of nine "00" pellets. The sheer volume of flesh and blood that is torn apart in that particular case is frightening, to say the least. A GSS will come nowhere near to that volume of destruction at any point in its trajectory. Comparing GSS to shotguns is makin an analogy which can be misleading. With respect to the argument that the GSS is more damaging because it dissipates (transfers/dumps) all its Kinetic Energy in the body, I have to say that Energy Transfer is not a reliable predictor of human injury. Injury depends upon the volume of organs shredded, blood vessels ruptured, bones shattered, and most important of all--the location of the injury. There is no direct or linear correlation between energy transferred to the body by a bullet and the bullet's lethality or incapacitation of the target. This is why all guns are lethal--there are many serious injuries and fatalities each year from children shot by .22 rifles (or similar low-powered ammunition) while out "plinking." (The .22LR is rated as 1d6 damage in DG). With regards to relative lethality of GSS, the GSS does not have the penetration required to reach and damage/disrupt as many vital organs as a more conventional round does. Using the CoC system's concept of hit points as a quantifiable unit of injury, the GSS should be rated at much less "damage capacity" as an equivalent calibre conventional round simply because it can't sufficiently shred the organs to cause death. (Ideally, I'd like to move away from a hit-points based system and towards a location-based system to determine gunshot damage in RPGs--this would be much more representative of modern firearms. But CoC has had the same system for almost 20 years. Oh well.) With regards to the issue of overpenetration--it is a concern as stated where a shooter is concerned about injury to bystanders or damage to an aircraft. However, it is a leap (and IMO, an incorrect one) to presume that a bullet which does not overpenetrate causes more damage than one that does. It simply ain't so, for the reasons stated above. Best, - -R.J. ------------------------------ End of deltagreen-digest V1 #51 *******************************