Subj:	#1(2) TRAVELLER digest 293
Date:	95-05-22 16:48:32 EDT
From:	traveller@mpgn.com
To:	traveller@mpgn.com

From:	traveller@mpgn.com
Sender:	traveller@mpgn.com
Reply-to:	traveller@mpgn.com
To:	traveller@mpgn.com (Multiple recipients of list)
Mail Split By Gateway

------- cut here --------
			    TRAVELLER Digest 293

Topics covered in this issue include:

  1) Re: TRAVELLER digest 291 	by George Herbert <gherbert@crl.com>
  2) Re: T2k Combat Realism	by Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
  3) Coalition Gray Areas	by Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
  4) Re: Weapon Damage 	by Mark Clark <markc@brahms.udel.edu>
  5) Re: Draft FAQ Document	by PR James <prj91@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
  6) Re: Coalition Gray Areas	by E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk (Ewan D Quibell)
  7) BOOK REVIEW *** NO SPOILERS	by DER04123@Jetson.UH.EDU
  8) RE: digest 291	by Generic Library <library@babylon5.dss.gov.au>
  9) Calculation problem	by cs5025@wlv.ac.uk (L.T.Bryant)
 10) TL7 Lunar Rover	by bonn0015@flipper.itlabs.umn.edu (STEVEN M BONNEVILLE)
 11) Re: TRAVELLER digest 286	by Sir George Anonymous <lcdavis@mailbox.syr.edu>
 12) Good Guy, Bad Guy	by E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk (Ewan D Quibell)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 21 May 1995 13:44:42 -0700
From: George Herbert <gherbert@crl.com>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: gherbert@crl.com
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 291 
Message-ID: <199505212045.AA14212@mail.crl.com>


Dane writes:
>1/  Who needs Anti-Hijacking programs?  When the ship *isn't* under
>acceleration, what's to stop you from cranking your 6G Grav comsators on
>full bore (after, presumabely, disabling the built in safety features) and
>smashing everthing into the wall at 6Gs?  And, since this stuff has been
>"shown" to be locally adjustable (ie, different rooms can either be on or
>off, etc), you can just hole up in the bridge or your stateroom or whatever,
>snug as a bug.

Indeed.  Some particularly creative players (myself included) set up
internal defenses on ships we were operating on to include things like
this sort of G-field manipulation (flipping gravity on and off, adding
high lateral accelleration with the compensators, etc.).  We also did
things like make sure we had large heavy objects available in special
compartments in the walls of most hull spaces, with centrally detachable
releases holding them in place.  What's worse than being bounced up and
down between 0 and 2 gees?  Doing so with a bowling ball in the room.

It takes very little money to design in more active defenses into
starships, and they keep coming up as useful in MY games, so ... 8-)

-george

------------------------------

Date: 21 May 1995 16:39:57 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: T2k Combat Realism
Message-ID: <1166147582.1147678@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca>

A couple of years ago I was running a T2k campaign at school.  (TNE combat is
an extension of T2k.)  One of my students tried some stunts he'd seen in the
movies, and got gunned down.  He objected; I suggested he talk to his militia
sergeant.  He apparently spent the next weekend learning to crawl through a
field (his sergeant liked the game results)!  

I also remember a letter in Challenge from some chaps in the Gulf who were
playing T2k during Desert Shield.  They found it fairly realistic (if
anything, the encumberance rules were too loose).

------------------------------

Date: 21 May 1995 17:03:21 GMT
From: Rob_Prior@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca (Rob Prior)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Cc: gdw.support@genie.geis.com
Subject: Coalition Gray Areas
Message-ID: <1169358814.1309949@nynet.nybe.north-york.on.ca>

Recently, someone on the Internet commented that the new Reformation
Coalition
background is far more polarized between "good" and "evil" than the old
Classic setting.

I've been thinking about this, and I think they are wrong.  I remember when
the Imperium was young (and so was I) the Zhodani were evil, but then we
learned that they really weren't.  Similarly, I suspect that GDW is setting
the Coalition up for a nice moral crisis.  In fact, the seeds of several are
there already:

1) The dictator of Kal is more liberal than his people.

2) Oriflamme is not a democracy, at least not in power structure.  It is also
a strongly chauvanistic society, and seemingly able to justify anything with
"we suffered terribly in the past, but never again".

3) The Coalition seems intent on exporting _their_ version of democracy to
the stars, as if it is the best form of government.  

4) The Coalition's economy is based on loot.  Ideally cold recovery, but
there is strong popular support for SAG raids ("we need this worse than you
do").  The rights of Coalition citizens come ahead of the rights of others,
even outside the Coalition.  

Sure, most of the adventures pubblished so far have been military ones, with
the players being the "good guys".  But there seems to be a lot of scope for
moral dilemmas if that's what your players want.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 21 May 1995 17:56:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mark Clark <markc@brahms.udel.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Weapon Damage 
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950521174524.3490B-100000@brahms.udel.edu>

"Small arms have always been dangerous (Because of knockdown rules), but not
too  deadly.  Dead PCs have never been a strong point with my players.  The
autofire  system  needs  (Another)  overhaul  in  my  opinion.  There is an
article  in  Challenge  magazine  73,  "Lethality in Roleplaying Small Arms
Systems" which describes one set of Real World (tm) firefights taking place
on  the  US-Mexican border between a set of undercover police operatives in
the  area  and  various suspects.  While this is admittedly a statistically
small  sample  pool, it does make interesting reading and seems to bear out
GDW  house  system.   (But  then  Frank  Chadwick  wrote  it)."

I re-read the Challenge 73 article, and I have some problems with it.  
While it is an accurate reflection of the chances to hit with a weapon, 
especially a handgun - even trained individuals miss more often than they 
hit, even at close range - the description of weapon damage is flawed.  
Most of the hits described in the articles are from police pistols firing 
relatively low-velocity rounds that are not hollowpoint or some other 
form of expanding bullet.  In tests that I have read about, this is exactly 
the type of round that has a low chance of lethal damage.  Rounds that 
fragment or expand, like hollowpoint bullets, or high velocity rounds 
that hit bone and tumble or shatter, do far more damage.  The reason is 
simple: a bullet that expands or breaks into multiple fragments destroys 
more tissue and transfers more energy to the body being hit.  Frank's own 
article bears this out - look how much more lethal shotguns (multiple 
projectiles in a single round) are than the pistols as a percentage of hits.

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 21 May 1995 23:49:01 +0200 (BST)
From: PR James <prj91@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Draft FAQ Document
Message-ID: <9933.199505212249@gan.ecs.soton.ac.uk..ecs.soton.ac.uk>

James Dempsey writes:
> 
> 3. What subjects have been 'Done To Death' already on the TML
> 
> The following subjects have previously been discussed in some depth on the 
> TML. They invariably had staunch defenders on both sides, and led to some 
> fiery debates. So, unless you have some new and inspired material, please
> don't stoke the coals.
> 
> 3.1 Effects of rocks on Planets
> 
> 3.2 Was this Virus thing such a good idea?
> 
> 3.3 SDBs and the Defence of Gas Giants
> 
> 3.4 What is a Feudal Technocracy?
> 
I would suggest for each of these subsections include the relevant digest
numbers so people can actually find out easily if their material is new and
inspired.

Paul James

Many things went on at Unseen Univeristy and, regrettably, teaching had to be
one of them. The faculty had long ago confronted this fact and had perfected 
various device for avoiding it. But this was perfectly all right because, to
be 
fair, so had the students.
                          Terry Pratchett - Interesting Times

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 21 May 1995 23:48:22 +0100 (BST)
From: E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk (Ewan D Quibell)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: Coalition Gray Areas
Message-ID: <9505212248.AA12873@diamond.bton.ac.uk>

Add to Rob Prior's list, that a cupple of Government officials on Eos
(I think) sent the Horus to Maraka (sp?) which wasn't on the flight plan,
and then didn't admit to this when it didn't return. They should get found
out pritty soon. Also a cupple of corporations on Oriflamme are more than
dodgy, dealing with Kal and not paying taxes, and the growing terorist
movement on that planet.

There are probably more.

Ewan


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- E.D.Quibell ------------------------------------ Thought is just about
----
-- Data Communications Technician ----------------- the hardest thing a
----
-- University of Brighton ------------------------- human can do - which
----
--------------------------------------------------- probably explains why
----
-- Email  e.d.quibell@bton.ac.uk ------------------ so few seem to do it.
----
--        quibez@essex.ac.uk -------------------------------- Henry Ford
-----

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Who me ? Na, I didn't say that. My Employers ? They don't say anything
---
----- My spelling is entirely due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic licence
-----

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 21 May 1995 18:38:54 -0500 (CDT)
From: DER04123@Jetson.UH.EDU
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: BOOK REVIEW *** NO SPOILERS
Message-ID: <01HQRWMQ4ETU91XJK7@Jetson.UH.EDU>

     BOOK REVIEW *** NO SPOILERS *** BOOK REVIEW

     Title:  _Igniting the Reaches_
     Author: David Drake

     Publisher: ACE
     Damage: $4.99US ($6.50CAN)

     Review:

     My first impression was that David Drake is a Traveller player,
heart and soul, from the earliest days of classic Traveller.  His prose
in _Igniting the Reaches_ is different from that of his "Hammer's Slammers"
genre in subtle ways.  I think that the desperation he creates in the
psyche of his characters is very convincing.  The closest Slammers works
to the power of this new text are _The Sharp End_ and _The Warrior_; if you
liked those, you'll love this one more...
     My second impression was that Drake has exactly the same b*tch*s about
TNE that we do, not to paint with TOO broad a brush. [sarcasm]  _Reaches_
is set after the collapse of interstellar civilization, the cover blurb says
a millenium, but the design artist types never get the facts right anyway,
(but it sure as h*ll beats a 70 year recovery from total techological
collapse)
however the cover art on the paperback is superb.  Drake uses a stutterwarp-
style drive, and lavishes detail upon the difficulties of insterstellar,
three-
dimensional astrogation (for those of you out there who claim that the
universe
isn't flat, no matter what GDW says).
     My third impression was that Drake's combat scenes have only gotten
better
as he ages.  The two main characters, Stephen Gregg and Piet Ricimer, are
"traders" in the expansive definition of Sir Walter Raleigh (Drake's
"Author's
Note" lays claim to great inspiration from _Haykluyt's Voyages_, circa 1598).
The two characters are very nicely dynamic, well-fleshed, and vivid.  (I wish
all PCs had such rich backgrounds and depth of "character" - all puns are the
fault of the limitations of the English language.)
     My last impression was that Drake spent a lot of time considering the
ramifications of his interstellar technology, optics, the limitations of
inferior systems, but he felt compelled to keep in silly 16th Century-style
cannon ports and plasma cannon to be run out of them to be fired!  He does,
however, put a very interesting twist on the difficulties involved with using
autoloaders when automated mass-production is at a premium...  I have some
ascetic objections to the Molts (Drake's "magic wand" per se), but I prefer
them to gravitic technology (um, there's no relation there folks).  I like
very much his graphic detail on the use of plasma/ion thruster technology,
and I hope one of you physics/engineering types out there will work up a 
materials table for me on the ceramic technology he uses for some of the
non-metallic starship hulls!

     Recommendation: *****
     Buy it.  Read it.  Love it.  It will add a new dimension to any 
campaign, New Era (RC), Third Imperium (cT), or New Era (Regency).  Please
forward flames of _Reaches_ to me personally, as I would be VERY interested
to see what if any objections there are to rating this a first class book.
(I wish GDW would hire the likes of Drake (fiscal considerations aside) to
write their novels...  After those reviews, I've been hesitating to buy
_Death
of Wisdom_.)


David Reed
undergraduate peon
Political Science Department
University of Houston
[not as cool as Thor]

der04123@jetson.uh.edu

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 14:04:23 -0700 (PDT)
From: Generic Library <library@babylon5.dss.gov.au>
To: traveller <traveller@MPGN.COM>
Subject: RE: digest 291
Message-ID: <Pine.SGI.3.91.950522135416.12311A-100000@babylon5.dss.gov.au>

Dear Folks -

In digest 291, Dane Johnson wrote:

>Who needs Anti-Hijacking programs...[you can]smash everything into the 
wall at 6G's.

I thought that IS what a-h programs did - or at least KO people so that 
the crew can mop up more easily later.

Andrew Boulton's comments about an airlock describe a tactic that one of 
my players has designed a ship around...

>...Anti-hydrogen instead?

>From memory, anti-matter creation and the use of  disintegrators only 
come in at TL16+.

- Hyphen
  (David Jaques-Watson)
  "Fireball, fireball, lightning bolt! - what was it?"


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 13:17:43 +0100 (BST)
From: cs5025@wlv.ac.uk (L.T.Bryant)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Calculation problem
Message-ID: <m0sDWQb-0003tmC@ccub.wlv.ac.uk>

Dear all
	I  recently  tryied to work through the  design  for  the
Tl13  4mm gauss pistol in RCES as i wanted to stick a bigger  mag
on  it  and no matter what way i worked the figures  i  cant  get
them to mach the FF&S one with the RCES one, i used the  recently
posted  list  of corrections for the gauss round but  that  dosnt
make  any differance as the gun is still over weight , over  long
, and the recoil is twice that of the RCES version.

	Would some one please check the RCES design for me as  im
unable to see where the mistake is, ( Yes this is a veriation  on
the shot gun request of last year but this time im Shure that  my
calculations and TLs are correct.)

	Yours
Lawrence Bryant
-- 
oh rose thou art sick
               the invisible worm that flys by night.....STEEL


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 10:10:24 -0500
From: bonn0015@flipper.itlabs.umn.edu (STEVEN M BONNEVILLE)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: TL7 Lunar Rover
Message-ID: <9505221510.AA02131@natasha.itlabs.umn.edu>


It's the time of year around here where people start getting ready to
go on their summer vacations.  So here's a vehicle which could be used
in several ways for a Traveller character's vacation: 


Boeing "LRV" Lunar Roving Vehicle
---------------------------------

    "The Boeing LRV "Lunar Rover" was built for the United States of 
 America for use in the initial, tentative exploration of Luna in the
 mid twenty-sixth century pre-imperial.  Only three examples of this
 exact vehicle were landed on the moon, but the design may have had 
 an influence on the scouting rovers used to develop the Archimedes
 area in later years.
    The only LRV on public display is Rover 1, which is on permanent
 exhibition at the Pioneer Museum in picturesque, suburban Hadley Base,
 along with other priceless artifacts of one of the earliest lunar 
 expeditions. 
    For more information on visiting the historic Pioneer Museum, the 
 metropolitan Archimedes area, or for general information on visiting 
 Luna, please xmail the Tourism Office of the Province of Luna, Terra/Sol, 
 your local Traveller's Aid Society facility, or the IISS Interstellar 
 Tourism Bureau."

Tech Level: 7       Price:  Cr 15650
Size:   7 kL (0.5 tons displacement)
Mass:   0.93 metric tons empty, 1.23 metric tons loaded
Power:  20 kW TL7 electric battery (3 hr endurance)
Maint:  1
Controls:   Basic Mechanical, TL7 gyrocompass
Commo:      30 km radio 
Sensors:    video camera and 16mm movie camera on pintle mounts
Cargo:      92 kg, 369 kL
Crew:       1 (driver)
Passengers: 1 (cramped seat)
Speed:      30 kph road, 12 kph cross-country
Travel Move:  60/24
Combat Move:  24/5

Config: Open    HF: [0]
Susp: W (1)     HS: [0]
                HR: [0]
Deck: Open      Belly: 1


NOTES:

  Tricky to design in FF&S, but this is about as close as it gets.  
  The actual LRV only massed about 200 kg, and folded for delivery in
  the LM; this is too heavy.  Also:

* Errata for STEP 8: TRANSMISSION.  Prices should be in Cr, not MCr.
* Suggestion for CHAPTER 4: CONTROLS.  Consider adding a "Restricted"
  workstation of 1.5 kL for motorcycles.  I just noticed this as I was
  stripping weight, it has nothing to do with this design.
* I looked at the official designs, and "Open" means that the vehicle is
  designed like a convertible or civilian car, with sides and a front and
  back.  The LRV is just a platform with wheels.  So I used the adding 
  armor rules in reverse, and removed all the front, rear, top, and side 
  armor.  Use the open vehicle rules in combat, but shots that hit the 
  armor automatically penetrate (but the damage table changes normally).  
  This is the only house rule I used for this design.  The hull was also 
  lightened by using a quarter centimeter of TL7 light composite as the 
  material, the lightest FF&S material available at TL7.  The control 
  system is only tech-5, as is the cramped crewstation, but then a big
  computer isn't necessary.   Wheels are cross-country.  The 16mm movie
  camera was treated the same as the video camera, which came from the
  control section's RPV rules.  The radio relays the video camera, and
  maybe the suit radios.

  Steve Bonneville
  <bonn0015@gold.tc.umn.edu>


------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 13:29:03 -0400 (EDT)
From: Sir George Anonymous <lcdavis@mailbox.syr.edu>
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Re: TRAVELLER digest 286
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950522130046.23203A-100000@kong.syr.edu>



> A few weeks ago I posted a question regarding how PCs aquire starships 
> when they
> are created.  I got not a single answer :-(

That's because were all too busy throwing rocks at each other and 
deciding whether to buy bronze daggers or FGMP's for our mercenary 
units.  :-)  Since no one else has posted a response to your query, I 
will try.


> When a group of characters are first created they can pool together their
> ship DMs.  They then roll on the [first of the two tables] table and see
how
> many minus DMs they get to allot to their ship - assuming they don't end up
> with High or Middle Passages.  For example lets assume they end up 
> with -16 DMs
> to allot (the worst case).

Look at the other end of the scale too.  If you have five PC's with four 
terms each in the Navy, and each character spends two terms enlisted and 
two as an officer, the group gets 70 ship DM's.  They can get almost any 
type of ship they want with no DM's to work off.


> They must then work these DMs off as either modifiers to the Ships Type
table
> roll (table two on the page), or modifiers on the wear of the ship (up to
> -10) or modifiers on the amount of money outstanding on the mortgage 
> (up to -8).
> 
> The problem lies in the Ship Types table.  If they are taking a Scout 
> ship, what
> is to stop them using up all 16 negative DMs on this table.  They are bound
> to end up with a Scout ship anyway, and this way have no DMs to work 
> off as wear
> or as outstanding repayments - they get a brand new, completely paid up
scout
> ship!
> 
> Possible solutions I have thought of:
> 
> 1) The players must state how many DMs they wish to use on this table
before
> they roll the dice.  Then, if the total score rolled on the Ship Types 
> table is
> less than -2 they get no ship at all.  So the most negatives they can risk
> sensibly are -4.
>
> 2) [deleted]

I reread the section in question several times, and can find nothing which 
better explains ship acquisition.  (I have the first printing.)  I would 
either go with your solution #1 or use one of these:

3) Set a limit to the maximum negative modifier (e.g. -4).  This will 
   have a similar effect to #1.

4) Forget the random table and give the players a ship if you want them 
   to have one.  You are the GM and must decide what best fits into your 
   plans.

Personally, I prefer #4, although I might look at the number of ship DM's 
the players have in making this decision.  If you prefer random 
determination, #1 sounds the best to me, although I would make the 
players distribute the DM's to wear and payments before rolling on the 
type table.

I hope this helps (at least a little).


>>>  Sir George Anonymous  <<<

**************************************************************************
**                                                                      **
**  The Imperium is not a supernatural force.  The Imperium is not an   **
**  exhibit in a museum.  The Imperium is us.  And the Imperium isn't   **
**  over until we say it's over.  - Norris Aella Aledon 1125            **
**                                                                      **
**************************************************************************

------------------------------

Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 20:03:54 +0100 (BST)
From: E.D.Quibell@bton.ac.uk (Ewan D Quibell)
To: traveller@MPGN.COM
Subject: Good Guy, Bad Guy
Message-ID: <9505221903.AA13497@diamond.bton.ac.uk>

G'day y'all ...

I was thinking of the good, bad guy discussion when reading Path of Tears
and the TNE rules, and came up with a couple of other points. Please
note that this is a very cynical veiw of the RC and is meant for discussion
not flames ....

Page 82 TNE rules, shows what happens when the RC comes up against the 
Regency, the Sector Govorners quote, but then goes on to justify the RC
down the page.

The RC thinks they're the good guys, hoping they have good morals, but
using bad guy tactics, and blaming those tactics on limited time and
resources, justifying it's self by saying "For the Good of Humanity" ....
What else has been justified by similar quotes ? (I can think of a couple
that would get flamed if I put them in).

"Dose the end justify the means ?"

If the RC dosn't like the way someone is running their world, and resists
becoming an RC member and changing their ways, they abitarily
exterminate them, stop.

Not only that, but they are armed robbers. They nick other peoples property
using lethal force, for no other reason than that the people who have it
aren't using it properly, ie not for the good of the RC, and that the RC
needs it for it's purposes .... to remove other rulers, using higher
technology, to expand it's power base .... sound like a TED to you ?

On Junak (Oriflamme), Oriflamme marines do SAG raids on the place for no
other reason, than to find better ways of doing SAG raids. I imagine killing
many innocents on the way ... Armed robers perfecting, armed robery ...
Although this can be blamed on Oriflamme, the bad guys of the RC, to the
rest of the universe it makes no difference, and the outside of the RC is
what matters when rebuilding interstellar society.

The RC isn't very PC with it's mission titles, like when it goes in to
take out a TED, it uses decapitation raids, not libaration raids, smash 
and grab, not relic recovery. The Star Vikings jump from the sky,
and start shooting people, not as bad as the guild captain portrays,
but still pretty frightening. Once you get to know them, they're realy nice
people ... but before then ?

What will the Regency think ? .... see page 82.

After thought, the Regency reckoned that the RC wasn't a bad place, even
though it was a Hiver manipulation ;-) and then asked it's self

"Did the end justify the means ?"

the age old philisophical question ....

Please note this is me playing devils advocate, and not taking high moral
ground. If I were running the RC I'd probably do the same things. I also
like "the what you see is what you get" approach to the RC. When they go on a
decapitaion raid, that's what they do, no pussy footing about. If they can't
do something one way they'll do it another, but they'll get it done. They do
what they think is best for the "Good of Humanity", and they do it any way
they can, using any means, where necessary. They have justified to themselves
that "The end justifies the means." and once people are in the RC they find
that it's a nice place, where people are striving to do their best, with
what limited time and resources they have.

But then my stomping ground is the Spinward Marches, so in the New Era
I'd be in the Regency .... ;-)

Ewan


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- E.D.Quibell ------------------------------------ Thought is just about----
-- Data Communications Technician ----------------- the hardest thing a----
-- University of Brighton ------------------------- human can do - which----
--------------------------------------------------- probably explains why----
-- Email  e.d.quibell@bton.ac.uk ------------------ so few seem to do it.----
--        quibez@essex.ac.uk -------------------------------- Henry Ford-----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Who me ? Na, I didn't say that. My Employers ? They don't say anything---
----- My spelling is entirely due to dyslexia, typos, and poetic licence-----
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

End of TRAVELLER Digest 293
***************************



----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
From traveller@mpgn.com Mon May 22 16:47:19 1995
Received: from Ambassador.MPGN.COM by mail03.mail.aol.com with ESMTP
	(1.37.109.11/16.2) id AA220715639; Mon, 22 May 1995 16:47:19 -0400
Return-Path: <traveller@mpgn.com>
Received: from  (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by Ambassador.MPGN.COM (8.6.9/8.6.9)
with SMTP id QAA26776; Mon, 22 May 1995 16:30:56 -0400
Date: Mon, 22 May 1995 16:30:56 -0400
Message-Id: <199505222030.QAA26776@Ambassador.MPGN.COM>
Errors-To: traveller-request@mpgn.com
Reply-To: traveller@mpgn.com
Originator: traveller@mpgn.com
Sender: traveller@mpgn.com
Precedence: bulk
From: traveller@mpgn.com
To: Multiple recipients of list <traveller@mpgn.com>
Subject: TRAVELLER digest 293
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: Traveller Mailing List
