Improvised Armor in T2K

[Olefin]

The company that markets the GDW twilight 2000 product that they bought the rights to markets the challenge magazine material as part of what they bought the rights to as part of the official Twilight 2000 material. To me that shows that the material is official and thus canon. The way it is presented is that this material was part of GDW's continuing support of the game and that it is considered "official" in the same way that other material on Twilight 2000 from Loren and other authors was official and thus canon. Which is why they have the rights to it.

As compared to things like the East African, Polish, Czech and Mexican sourcebooks or the fan magazine which was published here and are definitely fan canon works that are not "officially" recognized in any way as part of the actual T2K universe.

[Schone23666]

Originally Posted by Targan

I've posted this before, my great-grandfather's "tank": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Semple_tank


My father's father's father, "Fighting Bob" Semple, was New Zealand's Minister of Public Works during WWII. The rest of the Empire couldn't spare New Zealand any armour, so great-granddad sat down with the heads of the Department of Works and designed and had built a "tank" based on a tractor chassis.

True respect to your ancestor, Targan. It just shows how creative people can be when times are desperate. Wonder what the stats would look like for this vehicle?

If you were to mount a decent cannon on it, it would probably have some decent success against the Japanese tanks, which were relatively light compared to the majority of other tanks fielded by the Germans and Soviets. Heck, one American tanker that served aboard a Sherman essentially called the M4 a "hodgepodge" (besides the not-so-affectionate name of Ronson) of various weapons and gears derived from different branches of the military. One could argue we eventually got it right with the M1 Abrams tank...though it only took us several decades and conflicts to do so.

[Olefin]

I have always treated the Challenge Magazine material as part of the canon because so much of it is by the same GDW authors who wrote the actual modules - Loren for instance submitted a bunch of articles much of which went into the V2.2 version

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by Schone23666

One could argue we eventually got it right with the M1 Abrams tank...though it only took us several decades and conflicts to do so.

There is however no "right" or "perfect" design is there. It's always a trade off between the big three - Protection, firepower, and manoeuvrability. There's really only a "best fit" for the job at hand, and that only until somebody introduces something new - a new tactic or weapon perhaps which screws with one of the three areas.

Tank design (and pretty much all military equipment really) will continue to evolve long after we are dust. Who knows, a thousand years from now AFVs could be completely unrecognisable to us today. They could be the size of a bread box, or as big as an office building. Armour may be a thing of the past with force fields or high speed manoeuvrability the key to surviving. They could even be holograms for all we know!

A soldier in the year 3,000 may look back at us and shake their heads in disbelief, much like we do with the tactics employed in the first days of WWI.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by Olefin

The company that markets the GDW twilight 2000 product that they bought the rights to markets the challenge magazine material as part of what they bought the rights to. To me that shows that the material is official and thus canon. And as far as I know the author of that mini-module was on the GDW staff

Challenge was indeed an official product of GDW, nobody disputes that.
The articles written in the magazine were done by GDW staff and by fans. Fan submissions to a magazine are deemed as supporting articles but that does not define them as "official" or "canon". What it does mean is that the rights holder of the magazine has the right to re-publish or not, anything that was in the magazine.

Here's part of the editorial from the very first issue: -
"The new format will permit us to do a few things that we've never been able to do before, due to space constraints, but it also raises our need for articles, concerning both Traveller and Twilight: 2000, so I urge all of you who ever thought about writing something for the Journal to send in an SSAE for our manuscript guidelines and then get to it
-Loren K. Wiseman"
(my emphasis)

Far Future Enterprises owns the rights to the Twilight: 2000 material as well as for Dark Conspiracy and Traveller and 2300AD. This includes such things as Challenge magazine. FFE is Marc Miller, a former staffer of GDW.
Nowhere in any FFE literature do they proclaim that articles written by non-GDW personnel are to be considered official or as canon.
If FFE or GDW did do that, it would have put them into some serious trouble because with that line of thinking, then all the Star Wars, Cyberpunk, ShadowRun, Star Trek, Warhammer 40k, etc. etc. articles submitted to the magazine would also have to be declared as canon for their respective universes.

And as for Adam Giebel, unless I can prove he was not on GDW's staff and you can prove that he was, then all claims about him being a staff writer are purely speculative at best and wishful thinking at worst. Until we see a staff list or a contract stating he was a paid freelancer, then it will continue to be speculation or wishful thinking.

[Olefin]

That's why I edited my post because I tried to find a staff list but couldn't. And while those submissions may have been from fans the fact that they had to be vetted by the GDW staff to me implies that they are canon. In other words the people who wrote the original material were on staff and had to evaluate if they would publish it or not. If the material was not canonical then most likely it would have been rejected or clearly marked as not to canon. I cannot find any place so far in Challenge where the twilight 2000 material that was submitted was marked as "not to canon" or alternate version. The material that was submitted by the GDW staff was not marked as canon specifically.

As for Adam - he submitted over a half dozen submissions for Merc 2000 and twilight 2000 over the years. So you would think that many submissions shows that his material was regarded as canon because of the amount of material submitted.

[Legbreaker]

Or perhaps he just wrote entertaining articles?
Proliferation doesn't make canon.

[LT. Ox]

Originally Posted by Olefin

That's why I edited my post because I tried to find a staff list but couldn't. And while those submissions may have been from fans the fact that they had to be vetted by the GDW staff to me implies that they are canon. In other words the people who wrote the original material were on staff and had to evaluate if they would publish it or not. If the material was not canonical then most likely it would have been rejected or clearly marked as not to canon. I cannot find any place so far in Challenge where the twilight 2000 material that was submitted was marked as "not to canon" or alternate version. The material that was submitted by the GDW staff was not marked as canon specifically.

As for Adam - he submitted over a half dozen submissions for Merc 2000 and twilight 2000 over the years. So you would think that many submissions shows that his material was regarded as canon because of the amount of material submitted.

When an article or story is included in the Mag. It is for entertainment value and to be considered for future publication in an upcoming release as cannon. That is my take.
I have never seen nor heard at any of the Gencons or other locations that the material in the Mag was cannon.
I have often heard that the only material to be considered cannon is in the Official core books and supplements published.
However as I have stated before it is YOUR game so run the material you like and have fun.

[Olefin]

As far as I know any material submitted to Challenge would have been vetted by the editors of the magazine - that means they would have looked at it, rejected material that did not support the canon, made changes as needed and worked with the authors on their ideas.

Far Future states explicity that the material on the CD's that they sell is part of GDW's committment to the sustainment of the V2.2 timeline and their listing of the material makes no statement in any way that the material is not canonical or differentiate between what is to canon and what isnt

As Mark Miller, who was a former staffer, made that statement that the material was part of GDW's sustainment of the V2.2 timeline then I would take that as being official material for the game.

[Olefin]

However I didnt mean to take this discussion off track

And Lt Ox - I agree with you as it the right of anyone who is running a game to play fast and loose with canon if they want to or say what is canon and what isnt, at least once you get past the initial game start (after all your players could do things that make some modules not happen - Major Po nuking the Soviet HQ comes to mind)

So back to what was posted - considering the Peacekeeper is basically an armored truck modeled on the same kind of trucks used by banks to transport money would that be what should be used to model bank armored cars as vehicles used by characters or others as to armor protection?

We know from 100% canon sources (offical modules) that the 278th and the 49th both used the Peacekeeper as armored cars in combat - and that New America is using bank armored cars in Florida for sure.

So I would definitely add them to the list of improvised armored vehicles types - with possibly extra armor added onto them to make them even more resistant to damage - i.e. kevlar, extra armor plates, possibly spaced armor bolted on top of them - and there definitely would be a lot of them to go around if you look at the total number in use right now in the USA and Canada.

[Olefin]

Oh and by the way the Challenge magazine articles being canon has been discussed before - i.e.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainbow Six
IIRC there was a scenario published in a Challenge magazine that involved an M1 plant in Lima, Ohio (I haven't viewed the Youtube video so don't know if that's the plant in question). I can't recall the specifics - I think it might have involved the PC's having to recover some machinery or such like.

That Challenge Mag adventure has been discussed a number of times on this forum before. It's titled Lima Incident and it's in Challenge issue #56. Opening paragraph of the description:

*SPOILERS*

"The 112th Medical Division recently learned that 30 M-1 Abrams MBTs are sitting outside the former General Motors Lima Tank Plant in Lima, OH."

During one of the previous discussions about this scenario it was suggested (by Kato perhaps) that according to the canon strike lists, the Lima tank plant would likely have been within the zone of destruction caused by a nuke strike. However, given that GDW sanctioned a Challenge Mag adventure featuring the plant being intact, I treat it as being intact in my campaigns.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

canon
noun
1. a general law, rule, principle, or criterion by which something is judged.
2. a collection or list of sacred books accepted as genuine.
3. material accepted as officially part of the story in an individual universe of that story.

Originally Posted by Olefin

And while those submissions may have been from fans the fact that they had to be vetted by the GDW staff to me implies that they are canon.

It might imply that to you but that in no way means that line of thinking is correct. What it says to me is that GDW accepted the articles as support material for the game. If you were arguing point 1. in the definition of "canon" I listed above, then we might agree.

Originally Posted by Olefin

In other words the people who wrote the original material were on staff and had to evaluate if they would publish it or not. If the material was not canonical then most likely it would have been rejected or clearly marked as not to canon.

A total supposition on your part. There is no requirement for a magazine that clearly states that it supports gaming and also very clearly states they want fan submissions, to accept the submitted material as canon. Nor is there any requirement on their part to point out that it is not canon. Generally, the audience is smart enough to realize that articles in a magazine that has fan written submissions, are not to be assumed automatically as canon.

Originally Posted by Olefin

I cannot find any place so far in Challenge where the twilight 2000 material that was submitted was marked as "not to canon" or alternate version. The material that was submitted by the GDW staff was not marked as canon specifically.

Like every other game support magazine that asks for fan submissions, they had no need to, they felt their audience was smart enough to know that a lot of the material was written by fans and was acceptable for use but was very much "unofficial".

Originally Posted by Olefin

As for Adam - he submitted over a half dozen submissions for Merc 2000 and twilight 2000 over the years. So you would think that many submissions shows that his material was regarded as canon because of the amount of material submitted.

Not in any way what so ever. What it makes me think is that he was a dedicated writer and his material was good enough to be published in support of the game. The quantity of material submitted is not the criteria that makes it eligible as canon.

Originally Posted by Olefin

As far as I know any material submitted to Challenge would have been vetted by the editors of the magazine - that means they would have looked at it, rejected material that did not support the canon, made changes as needed and worked with the authors on their ideas.

Absolutely they would have vetted it, but they rarely work with the authors of fan submissions, they don't have the time. They edit fan material as they see fit and their legal terms state that they reserve the right to do so. However, they are under no obligation to declared those submissions as "canon". It's a completely different story when the writer is being paid for their work, they are contracted to provide material and then the implication is that the material will be part of canon.
Tegyrius is a good example of this - he wrote the Czech vehicle sourcebook for 2013 as part of a contract to provide canon material. The sourcebook was ultimately not accepted for publication so it is not part of official canon. It's not a fan submission, he was to be paid for the work. Fortune dictated otherwise and the 2013 rights holder did not exercise any attempt to claim the material so although everyone can clearly recognize the book was meant to be canon, it is not officially part of the product line and therefore, not canon.

Originally Posted by Olefin

Far Future states explicity that the material on the CD's that they sell is part of GDW's committment to the sustainment of the V2.2 timeline and their listing of the material makes no statement in any way that the material is not canonical or differentiate between what is to canon and what isnt

What this means is that FFE is offering material to continue to support the original product. It does not mean that the supporting material is canon and it does not mean people should jump to the conclusion that everything in a magazine that asked for fan submissions is actual canon.
If we were take that line of thinking then the Paranoia/Twilight: 2000 crossover adventure must also be considered canon - it is endorsed and official licensed material but it does not fit the T2k universe and is accepted as being sideline to the main game. It is official and accepted, but not as canon.

Originally Posted by Olefin

As Mark Miller, who was a former staffer, made that statement that the material was part of GDW's sustainment of the V2.2 timeline then I would take that as being official material for the game.

You can take it as "official material" but what it actually is, is "official support", there is a difference.
Ultimately you can do with it as you will, just as we will - you might desire to believe it is canon but that does not mean that we too should believe it's canon.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Oh and by the way the Challenge magazine articles being canon has been discussed before - i.e.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rainbow Six
IIRC there was a scenario published in a Challenge magazine that involved an M1 plant in Lima, Ohio (I haven't viewed the Youtube video so don't know if that's the plant in question). I can't recall the specifics - I think it might have involved the PC's having to recover some machinery or such like.

That Challenge Mag adventure has been discussed a number of times on this forum before. It's titled Lima Incident and it's in Challenge issue #56. Opening paragraph of the description:

*SPOILERS*

"The 112th Medical Division recently learned that 30 M-1 Abrams MBTs are sitting outside the former General Motors Lima Tank Plant in Lima, OH."

During one of the previous discussions about this scenario it was suggested (by Kato perhaps) that according to the canon strike lists, the Lima tank plant would likely have been within the zone of destruction caused by a nuke strike. However, given that GDW sanctioned a Challenge Mag adventure featuring the plant being intact, I treat it as being intact in my campaigns.

If you are going to drag me into your canon / non canon debate would you mind at least quoting me properly?

This is what I said.

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six

IIRC there was a scenario published in a Challenge magazine that involved an M1 plant in Lima, Ohio (I haven't viewed the Youtube video so don't know if that's the plant in question). I can't recall the specifics - I think it might have involved the PC's having to recover some machinery or such like.

Not quite sure what the above quote has to do with whether material published in Challenge is canon or isn't but it was my sole contribution to the thread in question; everything after it, which you appear to have attributed to me, was said by other people.

[Olefin]

did not mean to imply any agreement or disagreement on your behalf - that was a piece of the discussion showing acceptance in that line of discussion that the factory still being intact was a reality because GDW, by posting the article, had sanctioned the factory still being in existence even though earlier canon had stated the city had been hit by a nuke strike.

Was only used by me to show similar discussions from the past and opinions beyond my own

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Olefin

did not mean to imply any agreement or disagreement on your behalf - that was a piece of the discussion showing acceptance in that line of discussion that the factory still being intact was a reality because GDW, by posting the article, had sanctioned the factory still being in existence even though earlier canon had stated the city had been hit by a nuke strike.

Was only used by me to show similar discussions from the past and opinions beyond my own

Olefin, what I was really looking for in your response was just "sorry Rainbow, I'll edit that just now to show the proper quote" not a defence / justification.

You misquoted me. Period.

[Olefin]

And I will edit it when I get the chance when I get back to my desk and can properly edit it - and sorry not trying to defend any misquote - the part at the end was a response to your original quote by Targan and not you - and again was used as an example of how others see the articles as at the very least GDW sanctioned.

However until I can get to my desk later today please accept my full apology - no slight of any sort was intended. I will show the full thread and who the quote at the end as to sanctioning came from.

[.45cultist]

Originally Posted by Olefin

Guys A Rock In Troubled Waters is canon not a fan submission - if its in Challenge Magazine its canon as far as I know - lots of what became the 2nd edition are also in Challenge Magazine

And Adam Giebel wrote seven pieces for Challenge Magazine - and that was hardly a fan submission magazine - it was official GDW material for a bunch of their products

so canon it is unless what you are saying is that every article in Challenge Magazine wasnt canon

I liked that article. Who did the Texas inland waterway article? And which issue is it in?

[simonmark6]

"Angels are pure intelligences, not material, but limited, so that they have location in space, but not extension. Therefore, the number is infinite."

Dorothy L. Sayers

[Olefin]

With big time apologies to Rainbow 6 - this shows how the question of a Challenge Magazine article was canon was discussed in the past

thread

http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.p...ght=tank+plant

Initial quote is from Rainbow 6

Originally Posted by Rainbow Six
IIRC there was a scenario published in a Challenge magazine that involved an M1 plant in Lima, Ohio (I haven't viewed the Youtube video so don't know if that's the plant in question). I can't recall the specifics - I think it might have involved the PC's having to recover some machinery or such like.

Response to his post from Targan

Originally Posted by Targan


*SPOILERS*
"The 112th Medical Division recently learned that 30 M-1 Abrams MBTs are sitting outside the former General Motors Lima Tank Plant in Lima, OH."

During one of the previous discussions about this scenario it was suggested (by Kato perhaps) that according to the canon strike lists, the Lima tank plant would likely have been within the zone of destruction caused by a nuke strike. However, given that GDW sanctioned a Challenge Mag adventure featuring the plant being intact, I treat it as being intact in my campaigns.


I am sorry again Rainbow Six and I never meant to make it sound like that whole quote had come from you

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Years ago a group I was playing with added about ten layers of corrugated roofing iron to a light truck. Was more psychological than actual armour, but anything's better than nothing right?

You actually had a fairly decent form of light armor there. If you place the corrugated tin with the raised sections "overlapping" (put the raised edge of one sheet into the trough of another one) and bolt or weld them all together; You will produce a form of spaced armor that will stop handgun rounds and even some light rifle rounds (M1 Carbine rounds). Back it with some cork or fiberglass and it will resist multiple rounds. Bolt it to a frame about a foot away from the vehicle of structure and you have a fairly good "RPG Screen" as well.

[Olefin]

One last post on canon and Challenge magazine which was edited by Loren Wiseman - i.e. the articles by him, by Frank Frey, and others who were GDW authors - these articles are either by known GDW authors or ones who Loren worked with directly on articles he submitted, meaning they may have worked for GDW in some capacity - so do you consider these to be canon for either Twilight or MERC?

"Twilight scenario: False Knight on the Road", Ch25: 9-10
Frey, Frank

"Twilight: 2000 Air Module", Ch26: 3-11
"Air Module II", Ch28: 3-5
Frey, Frank, & Loren Wiseman

"All that Glitters", Ch67: 12
"Poppies", Ch68: 6
"Avery's Raiders", Ch69: 6
"Altruistic Motives", Ch73: 10
Brown, Timothy B.

"Black Siberia", Ch51: 6-12 (1991)
"Merc: 2000 - Jumpy Jehosophat", Ch55: 10-11 (1991)
Kiesche, Fred, and Loren Wiseman

"Equipment for Armor Crews", Ch32: 3-7 (1988)
"Haute Cuisine a la 2000", Ch33: 3-5 (1988)
Keith, William H.

"Going On Safari", Ch52: 6-12 (1991)
Mulkey, Thomas E. (Capt., US Army, ret'd)

"Merc 2000: Silence is Golden", Ch58: 12-16 (1992)
"Things Got Weirder", Ch62: 12-13, 16-18 (1992)
Smith, Lester W., & Loren K. Wiseman

"Umpiring Twilight", Ch38: 4-5 (1989)
Wiseman, Loren K.


"Target 2000: The 'Hit List' for WWIII", Ch27: 9-10/47 (1986)
"Twilight: 2000 Consolidated Price List", Ch27: 11-14 (1986)
"Buildings: Optional rules for Urban Locales", Ch29: 12-14 (1987)
"TWILIGHT Survey", Ch33: 11 (1988)
"Heavy Weapons Guide Preview", Ch40: 4-6 (1989)
"The Stoner 63 Weapon System: the Guns that Never (Really) Were", Ch40: 8-9 (1989)
"Sheltie Holiday", Ch43: 6-15 (1990)
"TWILIGHT II: The Adventure Continues", Ch45: 6-11 (1990)
"Attack of the Mud Men", Ch46: 6-9 (1990)
"Merc: 2000 - Barbados", Ch48: 7-12 (1991)
"Infantry Weapons: Special Preview", Ch48: 16-17 (1991)
"HOW TO: Obtain Maps for Gaming", Ch49: 16-17 (1991)
Wiseman, Loren K., and Timothy B. Brown

"Inside an M1", Ch29: 8-10 (1987)
"Mobile Artillery - Mortars", Ch34: 6-7 (1988)
McRae, Legion G.

"Canada: 2000", Ch30: 13-18 (1987)
"Red Maple", Ch36: 3-10 (1988)
"Seeing is Believing", Ch54: 6-9 (1991)
"It Was Unlikely...", Ch65: 8
McRae, Legion G., and Michelle Sturgeon


"Citymaker", Ch35: 4-10 (1988)
Wiseman, Loren K., and Legion G. McRae

[Raellus]

My Lions of Twilight was publicly endorsed by Frank Frey, right here on this very forum. Does that mean that it's canon? Does it mean that it's more canonical than Olefin's East African Sourcebook? Does it matter?

My take on these is:
A. No.
B. No.
C. No.

Why are we still debating what is and what is not canon? Every GM has the power to decide what to use and what to omit from his/her own T2KU. Some forumites ignore Howling Wilderness, which is, by Olefin's definition, canon. So, why do some of those same people bring out the "this is in canon so it's more valid" argument elsewhere (i.e. in this thread)?

My point is, we all pick and choose, so no one should really be trying to impose their views on others with the "this is canon" argument. It's moot because all determine what is or isn't the case in our own T2KUs.

Let's drop it and move on.

[Olefin]

No actually I am not trying to impose any view Raellus. I am just asking because I had always assumed that the challenge magazine material was canon because so much of it was written by the GDW authors themselves. And I have seen others refer to it as such as well.

With the exception of HW and Kidnapped I try to keep my writing and play as canonical based as I can. Thus it's good to know what a canon source is versus non. But again in the big scheme it's not that big a deal. If I base something on A Rock in Troubled Waters then I do. If someone doesn't accept it then they dont

[pmulcahy11b]

Here it is:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/misc_pages/armor_values.html
It doesn't actually have a link to it anywhere on the site (as far as I can tell)

As far as I can calculate (according to that chart), the 10 layers of corrugated iron (assuming 2mm sheets) would have an AV of 3 (actually 3.33), and possibly spaced (especially if it's welded together loosely).

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Olefin

No actually I am not trying to impose any view Raellus. I am just asking because I had always assumed that the challenge magazine material was canon because so much of it was written by the GDW authors themselves. And I have seen others refer to it as such as well.

With the exception of HW and Kidnapped I try to keep my writing and play as canonical based as I can. Thus it's good to know what a canon source is versus non.

It's seems like you're doing a lot more than "asking". Folks have answered you several times yet you persist to "ask". Let's be honest here.

Originally Posted by Olefin

But again in the big scheme it's not that big a deal. If I base something on A Rock in Troubled Waters then I do. If someone doesn't accept it then they dont

Right on! More power to you.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

There was a small number of vehicles made by the nascent Israeli state when they were in dire need of armoured vehicles. I've never found much in the way of technical specs and they are all generally referred to as "Sandwich armour" cars/trucks etc.
The "sandwich armour" was an early sort of composite but you can see the vehicles were made in a decent workshop and are not "hillbilly" as such. In some cases the vehicles are changed enough that its difficult to tell what it originally was before they added the armour.

The Israelis may have started using the "sandwich" label early on but there's just so little information available that the who & when is still unclear. What is known is that they constructed the armour as a thick wooden board between two iron or steel sheets and that they armoured a number of vehicles to make scout cars, APCs and protected ambulances. It's also stated at the Latrun museum that the vehicles were heavy and a strain on the motors so the vehicles were slow moving - and hence easy targets.
There's two examples on the following link (pics 7 & 8)
https://milinme.wordpress.com/2012/03/27/
And a much more in depth look at one such APC on the following link
http://svsm.org/gallery/improvised_armored_car?page=1

At a guess I'd say that the steel plates probably didn't add much protection and so the board provided most of it, (the plates were probably more to stop splinters from flying off the wood). I'm guessing at game stats (2nd Ed.) but based on the table for AV, the larger vehicles could have been AV 6 or 7 with the smaller vehicles having maybe AV 4 or 5. Useful against smallarms but when the vehicle is slow, it ain't so great for anything else

[Olefin]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Here it is:
http://www.pmulcahy.com/misc_pages/armor_values.html
It doesn't actually have a link to it anywhere on the site (as far as I can tell)

As far as I can calculate (according to that chart), the 10 layers of corrugated iron (assuming 2mm sheets) would have an AV of 3 (actually 3.33), and possibly spaced (especially if it's welded together loosely).

So Paul - how would the Cadillac Gage Ranger (i.e. the Peacekeeper) compare to a typical armored car - are the numbers for the vehicle comparable to what a bank armored car would be?

[.45cultist]

Originally Posted by Olefin

So Paul - how would the Cadillac Gage Ranger (i.e. the Peacekeeper) compare to a typical armored car - are the numbers for the vehicle comparable to what a bank armored car would be?

Doesn't the Ranger use the "Cadalloy" aluminum alloy armor by Textron?

Cadillac Gage became Textron, Food Machinery Corp. became Alliant Tech. Some mistake "FMC" for Ford Motor Co.and not Food Machinery Corp.

[Olefin]

I think you may be right - wasnt it only about a 1/4 inch thick?

The Stingray tank and the V-100 Commando had the Cadalloy armor for sure

[StainlessSteelCynic]

Originally Posted by .45cultist

I liked that article. Who did the Texas inland waterway article? And which issue is it in?

Title: The Inland Waterway: Supplemental Material for Red Star/Lone Star
Author: William H. Keith, Jr
Challenge Issue No27, pages 6 to 8 then continued on page 22.
Published: sometime around the end of 1986.

It would be a bit of luck to find a printed copy these days but if you have the spare dollars, Far Future Enterprises has PDF copies for purchase either individually through places like DrivethruRPG (and the price is discounted at the moment)
http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/...Magazine-No-27
or on the 1st edition or 2nd edition CD-ROMs of T2k. FFE also offer a CD-ROM of all the Challenge mags.
http://www.farfuture.net/FFE-CDROMs.html
The T2k disks cost US$35 each, the Challenge disk cost US$45