Michael Layne
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 02:48:40 EST
Subject: Re: DG: Igor's sad tale, and a Victor (long)

On Sat, 23 Jan 1999 08:29:57 +0100 Jesper Anderson writes:
> Note: I'm in no way an expert on submarines. This is a basic sketch of
> an interesting, modified submarine the Karotechia can get their hands
> on. It's currently based on a Victor class submarine. If someone knows
> why it shouldn't be, let me know. Any and all comments are welcome.
A Victor would be a good choice -- likely a Victor III -- unless your mission absolutely requires ballistic missile launch capability. Other good choices would be K-222 (the sole example of the Papa class SSGN) or an Akula (newest type of Russian SSN actually in service and probably more difficult to obtain)....

(Sad fate of Igor snipped to conserve bandwidth...)

Personally, I think Galt made a major blunder in his treatment of Igor. Not only does killing and eating your technical advisors tend to earn you exactly the wrong sort of reputation, but the unfortunate Igor (apparently at least a Captain Second Rank (Kapitan Vtorogo Ranga) in the former Soviet Navy, and likely a Captain First Rank (Kapitan Pervogo Ranga)) was probably the only person at the SVB with experience in SSN command! Igor was most likely a graduate of the Leninsky Komsomol Higher Naval School of Submarine Warfare (Leningrad), along with some postgraduate work at Soviet Naval Schools and universities. If he was being considered for Flag rank, he would have also been a graduate of the Grechko Naval Academy (Leinigrad) -- roughly equivalent to the USN's Naval War College -- and the Voroshilov General Staff Academy (Moscow) -- equivalent to the US National War College. I doubt this training and experience made him taste any better to the cannibal Herr Galt, but it is training and experience the Karotechia is likely to sorely miss!

If the same sort of treatment was afforded the boat's Chief Engineer (most likely a Captain Third Rank (Kapitan Tretyego Ranga), a graduate of the F.E. Dzerzhinsky Higher Naval Engineering School and the prestigeous Krylov Institution (an engineering school, considered equivalent to MIT, currently part of the Grechko Naval Academy)) , they may be in for an even more difficult time -- those Karotechia scientists and mercenary Russian techs may be able to tinker with the plant, but they are probably not experienced reactor operators! IIRC, the Russian Navy does much the same thing as the British Royal Navy, splitting its officers after their initial SSN/SSBN tour, to the "Operational track" which leads to command (I'm not sure if the Russians have anything like the USN's Submarine Command Course or the RN's "Perisher" course), and the "Engineering track" which leads to a posting as a Chief Engineer. (Before the breakup of the USSR, there was a separate track for "Political Officer" -- the infamous "Zampolit", but I don't think that one's being used any longer....)

Also, unlike the USN and RN, the Russian Navy crews its vessels largely with short-time conscripts -- only the senior CPOs (starshinii), warrant officers (michman), and officers really have any great degree of technical training. (For further research on this matter, I can recommend Norman Polmar's "Guide to the Soviet Navy".)

Certainly, the Special K could try and resurrect a WWII U-boat ace (Kapitaenleutnant Werner Henke of U-515, for example), but he would have to spend a great deal of time familiarizing himself with the technology and tactics.

Nuclear power and the Albacore hull, together with a host of less obvious new technologies, have extensively changed the way a submarine operates and fights. Rather than a submersible torpedo boat (capable of 17.7 knots on the surface, 7.6 submerged -- in the case of a Type VIIc) with sharply limited underwater endurance (180 nm at 2 knots on a full battery charge), we now have a true submarine, with an air-independent propulsion plant, operational endurance limited primarily by the amount of supplies carried, and a submerged speed of 30+ knots! A modern SSN is considerably stealthier than its WWII counterpart, with better sensors, considerably greater depth capability, better habitability (in most cases), and (in many cases) the addition of stand-off ordnance to the weapons mix... I'm not saying someone like Kapitaenleutnant Henke couldn't handle a Victor or Papa -- just that, especially at first, he couldn't use it to its full potential!

(If a USN or RN sub captain, assigned to hunt him down, realizes who and what he is up against, things could get really interesting as the DG Friendly SSN captain figures out that his foe is using adaptations of WWII U-boat tactics, and works to anticipate and sink him before the German captain can get ahead of the learning curve!):)

(For a look at how a Henke might do things, check the WWII German Navy's "bible" for U-boat commanders.... "The U-Boat Commander's Handbook"; my copy is a 1989 reprint by Thomas Publications of the 1943 edition (ISBN 0-939631-21-0)):)

> Modified Victor class submarine
>
> The submarine is purchased via the Russian Mafia. They also provided a
> few crewmembers, including Igor, to train the aryan crew. It was part
> of a proposed sale to (India? suggestions?) that didn't fall through
> because of the breakup of the USSR.
This is quite plausible. The Soviet Navy leased a Charlie I SSGN to the Indian Navy on 1 January 1988. The boat operated under the name "Chakra", and was returned (reportedly in poor material condition) in January of 1991. A second Charlie I (to be named "Chitra") was to have been leased, but, for some reason, this deal apparently was cancelled. The Indian Navy is reportedly conducting research toward building its own SSN, but, although the program enjoys priority funding, most Naval analysts consider an indigenous Indian SSN to be "many years in the future due to India's economic problems and the uncertainty of outside assistance".

>. It was shipped to TEUFELHAUS in parts.
 Extraordinarily difficult, incredibly time-consuming, and probably quite unnecessary! Far more likely the boat was transferred (under the Arctic ice) from the Northern Fleet anchorage to the Pacific, and proceeded from Vladivostok to the SVB, with a crew from the new owners, and Russian technical advisors (such as our unlucky friend Igor). Any observers would consider it another Russian SSN going out on patrol....

There is the matter of the US Pacific Fleet SSN that would be standing "gatekeeper" duty in international waters near Vladivostok. (Yes, we still have them out there, submerged off the Russian sub bases, even in this era where The Russians Are Our Friends!):)

There are ways around that.

One Russian submarine doctrine is operation of SSNs in pairs -- a practice left over from the days when the technology gap between US and Russian SSNs was much wider than it is today. The Special K sub would sortie together with a "linebacker" SSN of the Russian Navy (likely a Victor III or Akula), the second SSN operating a few km astern of the Karotechia boat.

When the US SSN (a Los Angeles or Sturgeon class boat) detects the lead Russian SSN (and it will) and moves into its baffles to get a closer look, the "linebacker" would make its move. It wouldn't torpedo the American -- that would be an act of war, and, also, acoustic homing torpedoes can be rather unselective and might home on the wrong boat. However, almost anything else would go... The "linebacker" would charge in, screw cavitating as necessary, ping the American with high-intensity sonar, make close approaches (as if it is going to ram) and generally gain and hold the American boat's attention.

Eventually, after the Karotechia sub has safely departed the scene, the Russian SSN would disengage. (The Russian Captain had a relatively safe assignment -- under current Rules of Engagement, the American Captain couldn't shoot first, and the major worries would be collision with the American SSN or its towed passive sonar array!) This has been done before by the Russians -- mainly to shake American SSNs following Russian SSBNs -- and would probably rate a write-up in the American Captain's patrol report -- if the other sub wasn't a "boomer", why did it rate this sort of treatment?

> The skin is created/summoned by the spell learned from the insane
> resurrected Eisenschloss scientist.

> It absorbs most EM and kinetic signals going in and out of the vessel,
> making radio contact a bit harder than usual but also lowering the
> vessels EM and sound signature significantly.
It probably won't do a thing to the sub's effect on the local magnetic field, so the boat would still be detectable by MAD. (Magnetic Anomaly Detection -- normally used by aircraft.) Of course, that also means the sub's magnetic compasses wouldn't be screwed up... :)

Interestingly, though, the Russian Navy has been conducting limited experiments with flexible hull coatings and boundary-layer control (sometimes with the aid of polymer injection) although Russia's current economic troubles have apparently kept these innovations from seeing operational service. (As far as the public knows...):)

The USN apparently tried out a flexible hull coating nicknamed "mammalian skin" (likely patterned off dolphin skin) on some of its 637 class (Sturgeon class) SSNs. On the 688I (Improved Los Angeles class) vessels it switched to sound-absorbing tiles on the exterior. Many of the Russian SSNs, SSGNs, and SSBNs already use rubber-compound anechoic tiles of varying thicknesses. (Look closely at some of the photos of Russian subs on the surface, and you'll occasionally see odd random rectangular depressions where one or more tiles have come loose -- as Norman Polmar puts it in "Combat Fleets of the World 1995", "apparently Russian adhesives technology is deficient"...):) This would not rule out substitution of an exotic flexible hull coating on something like the boat in consideration here, especially as it would _not_ be applied by a Russian shipyard!

> It also provides an extra protection against kinetic energy attacks,
> sealing up small leaks and even closing over the broken ends if the
> sub gets destroyed. This enhances the survivability of the vessel
> against conventional weapons considerably.
Depending on the exact class of boat, and where it takes the hit, a Russian submarine might be able to survive a hit from a Mk 48 torpedo, or might sink immediately. Some types, such as the Typhoon SSBNs and Oscar SSGNs, have a double hull, with significant "stand-off" distance between the outer and inner hulls, and a torpedo hit amidships might just rupture a ballast tank, and inflict personnel and equipment casualties through concussion. Other classes (such as the Victor, I believe) are closer to the "single hull" construction of most US SSNs (with the ballast tanks at the bow and stern, instead of on each side of the pressure hull), and a hit there that penetrates the hull would probably be a kill. 300 meters down, it's hard to get a "small" leak in the hull!

The Karotechia mad scientists may _claim_ the material "will close over the broken ends if the sub gets destroyed", but (IMHO) this is wishful thinking on their part! (Significantly, they are still going to be outside the submarine when the hatch is closed...) :) The violence of an explosion sufficient to break the submarine's back, and the pressure of the sea, are probably going to make the sealing effects of the hull coating "too little, too late"! If the boat gets blown in half, most of her crew probably won't even have time to drown!

(Some of the watertight bulkheads might hold up initially in such a case, but the wreck would eventually bottom -- very rapidly and destructively (leaving an impressive debris field for the local Deep ones to sift through) -- or would sink to a depth where the remaining watertight compartments would collapse from the pressure. When a bulkhead breaks, even the shock-front of air moving ahead of the incoming water would be enough to kill anyone (through heat and pressure) who survived the original break up...)

> Of course, even a near miss
> with a tactical nuclear missile will destroy it and the sub outright.
Yes, the Mk 45 ASTOR nuclear antisubmarine torpedo the USN used for several years was rumored to have a kill probability of 2.0: target vessel and firing vessel!

> Navigation and communication technology is state of the art US tech,
> combined with state of the art USSR tech, purchased through Dr Frank's
> contact net. Several types of float antennas and scope mounted
> antennas are used to bypass the EM absorbtion provided by the skin.
You'd be using these antennas in any case -- even when surfaced, a submarine's metal hull is going to block radio reception without external antennas.
Your normal antennas would be a whip antenna on a mast you could extend (like a periscope) from the sail while operating at periscope depth (remember to slow down when you come to periscope depth -- speeds of over 8 knots or so can bend over extended periscopes and antennas), and a trailing wire antenna (supported by a buoy) intended for reception of VLF radio broadcasts from the headquarters ashore. You would only be able to receive regular radio stations, and transmit, using the retractable whip antenna(s) in the sail.

In addition, you would likely have a retractable ESM (Electronic Surveillence Measures) mast in the sail, which you would extend first to detect any radar emissions in the area.

Some Russian subs have only one periscope, but most have two.

One of these is an "attack periscope" -- with a thin upper section intended to produce as little visible spray, and as small a radar return, as possible. This is generally the one you would use for attacking surface targets with torpedoes.

Your other periscope is a more bulky affair, nicknamed the "night periscope", because it has a larger tube and upper lens, for better light-gathering power. This scope might also be clad in RAM (Radar Absorbent Material) but is still more conspicuous than the attack periscope. This second periscope may also mount a small rangefinding radar, or a laser rangefinder (this may have been what Captain Mancuso was using to signal Captain Ramius in the movie version of "Hunt for Red October"), and frequently is also set up for photography (to get pictures of the torpedoed ships going down!).
> Armament is, depending on planned missions, the scenario and the
> keeper's whim (the ballistic missile silos have been rebuilt with
> launch platforms for more immediately useful weapons):
A Victor or Papa class boat wouldn't have any ballistic missile tubes to worry about. (A Papa would have launch tubes, but for cruise missiles...) If you absolutely _must_ play with ballistic missiles, get yourself a "boomer" -- an SSBN! I'd recommend a Delta or even a Typhoon if you could get one... :)

> Stolen Tomahawk missiles with conventional and/or tactical nuclear
> warheads. Perhaps also chemical or biological agents.
Considerably more likely than the Tomahawk would be the Russian-made SS-N-25 (Kh-35) antiship missile ("official" NATO codename is "Switchblade", but its unofficial nickname in the US and UK is "Harpoonski"). (I'll post a URL for the website of the Kh-35 later...) Not only is it fully compatible with the existing firecontrol systems of modern Russian subs (unlike the Tomahawk) but the Russians are busily trying to sell the Kh-35 on the international market!

A Victor III might also mount a horizontal armored box launcher for two SS-N-21 "Sampson" (RKV-500 Granat) cruise missiles (somewhat like the Tomahawk). Several of the later Victor IIIs mount an ABL (armored to make it pressureproof, and to withstand the stresses of surfacing through ice) on the upper casing just forward of the sail.

> SAM and HARM missiles for immediate defense.
If the boat mounts SAMs, these would likely be an SA-N-5 system, using a naval version of the SA-7 "Strella" (NATO codename "Grail") -- a small tube-launched solid-fuel IR homing AA missile, not unlike an early version of the US "Stinger". This would be in a retractable quad mount on the aft end of the sail, and, aimed by remote TV camera (with a limited field of view), would be somewhat awkward to use against fast-moving aircraft (although deadly against hovering helicopters and straight and level flying patrol planes which wouldn't expect to be attacked by a sub). The missiles are not self-initiating, so you would have to get a lock with the missile's seeker on the target before you fired. Also, you have to partially broach the sail -- partially surface - -- to clear the launcher for firing.

(The USN was working on the SIAM (Self Initiating Antiaircraft Missile) which you would simply launch vertically, and let it come on line and seek its target once it clears the water, but the system apparently fell victim to the budget cutters!) The above description for the SA-N-5 is based on the systems actually installed on some Russian-built "Kilo" class submarines.

HARM would be a bit more difficult to use, but these are only useful vs. radar transmitters. An SSN or SSBN spends most of its time submerged, and would not have to worry (much) about radar detection. If you absolutely must silence a radar station from a distance, there may be an "anti-radiation" homing system available for the SS-N-25 which could do the job!
> Unmanned surveillance aircraft? Perhaps an experimental "saucercraft"?
> Or a hovercraft (perhaps outlandish looking) might be sufficient to
> perform assaults and put troops ashore in a hurry.
Unmanned surveillence aircraft are a definite possibility. The Royal Navy has operated SSNs in conjunction with "Predator" recon drones. The USN is looking into submarine-launched drones for air recon and long-range antiship missile targeting. Among the most interesting concepts are some of the small drone helicopters coming onto the market.

(In a novel I read several years ago, entitled "Warhead", I believe, a US Trident SSBN was using a modified T-LAM (Tomahawk Land Attack missile, with the extended range) as a sub-launched sensor platform and targeting system for T-ASMs (Tomahawk Anti-Ship Missiles) which would be launched when the T-LAM sensors found a target. With enough fuel to fly 1500 nm to a target, the T-LAM could circle for a considerable time, and the sub only had to keep its whip antenna up to control the drone and recieve data...)

For troop landings, you're better off with rubber boats -- you can't deflate a hovercraft and pass it down through the hatch before diving.

> Propulsion system is nuclear fission based, modernized and boosted by
> some of the finer minds the Karotechia could set on the task. It's
> also shielded in the same skin as the outer hull of the submarine, as
> an extra precaution. The larger amount of radiation this skin material
> receives causes it to be a lot more active than the outer skin. This
> manifests in a mental "noise" heard throughout the submarine. The
> range of this noise is only a few meters, but it tends to cause SAN
> loss (0/D3) when first heard. It can also slowly erode SAN of the crew
> and others who hear it (keepers discretion).
It figures they might use some of it for this... For a Victor III, your plant is going to be a pressurized water reactor (not unlike the ones in USN and RN subs, though probably with a somewhat narrower safety margin, and fewer safety devices -- which would make _me_ slightly nervous, with or without the odd effects of psychic "noise" from the nonstandard reactor shielding!).

The Karotechia would almost certainly not replace it with a sodium-cooled or even lead-bismuth-cooled reactor. (While they are crazy, they are not _that_ crazy!):)

Although liquid-metal-cooled reactors (as in the Alfa class subs or the original US SSN "Seawolf") have a significantly higher energy density, they are also less safe -- the liquid metal in the primary loop becomes highly radioactive in the reactor, and, besides the potential radiation problems, is fiercely reactive with water (such as that in the secondary coolant loop). Coolant leaks in the primary loop would announce themselves through increases in background radiation, and probable fire and explosion. (Fire and explosion in a nuclear power plant are not nice things even on the surface! If you are 300 meters underwater at the time, they are far worse...):)

In addition, maintenance problems with the "Alfas" have pointed up the fact that a liquid metal cooled reactor is "single-use" -- if you completely shut it down, the metal solidifies in the reactor! This definitely complicates your shutdown and refueling procedures. This may be one reason the Russians are retiring their "Alfas"...

If they replace the reactor on the Karotechia boat, they might do so with a "natural circulation" PWR as in the US sub "Narwhal" (SSN-671). Under normal conditions, this type of reactor doesn't require the relatively noisy circulating pumps that other PWR designs do. (The SSN-21 "Seawolf" (the USN's second SSN of the name) uses this type of reactor, I believe.)

But replacing a reactor is a nontrivial operation, requiring major yard facilities to make (and later reseal) a large opening in the pressure hull, and to handle heavy reactor vessels and other equipment! As far as I know, the USN has done it only once -- when they replaced the original sodium-cooled reactor of their first SSN "Seawolf" with a pressurized water reactor.

Even refueling a submarine reactor is nontrivial, though not nearly the difficulty level of replacing one. The Karotechia may insist their new sub be refueled before they take delivery (and, after all, the Russians have the specialized yard facilities to do it), but it would cost them extra!

More likely than really extensive reactor modifications are some detail improvements to some of the pumps and reduction gears, incorporating modern improvements to cut down on radiated noise. (Similar to what has already been done in the Sierra class SSNs -- although the Special K Victor III might not get quite the same degree of quieting -- there is less space in engineering for sound reduction and isolation....)

Most of the Victor IIIs employ a rather unusual 8-bladed screw consisting of two tandem 4-bladed screws oriented 22.5 degrees apart and co-rotating. On the modernized Victor III, these would be replaced by a single 7 or 8 bladed screw (similar to that of the 688I boats but optimized to the Victor III hull form). The Victor III also mounts two small propulsion pods ("spinners") on the aft diving planes for low-speed operations. These would probably also be given quieter, redesigned screws.

I really prefer this concept, with a modified Victor or other ex-Soviet sub, to the "U-Boat from Another Dimension"! (Sorry, MiB! Nice story, though...):)


Some links for Russian subs:


Nuclear Attack Submarines (SSN)

Podvodnaya Lodka Atomnaya (PLA) (Submarine (Nuclear)):

Nuclear Cruise Missile Submarines (SSGN)

Podvodnaya Lodka Atomnaya Raketnaya Krylataya (PLARK) (Cruise Missile Submarine (Nuclear):

Nuclear Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBN)

Podvodnaya Lodka Atomnaya Raketnaya Ballisticheskaya (PLARB) (Nuclear Powered Ballistic Missile Submarine):

Nuclear Mini Subs:



And that, I believe is enough for now (it's 2:30 AM in my time zone, I just noticed...):)

Sorry to be so wordy...


David Farnell
Sent: 26 January 1999 06:19
Subject: RE: DG: Igor's sad tale, and a Victor (long)

Actually, I like the idea of the ULTIMA THULE being crippled after its interdimensional/timeline/whatever trip, so K needs to get a Soviet sub to refit with the Naziworld tech, cannibalized off the ULTIMA. This provides the u:ber-scientists and tech while preserving the coolness of the Soviet sub (and making the UT2 more vulnerable, as it's a cobbled-together mess). It also works much better than a dropped book of matches as a trail for DG to follow (although I may include a Naziworld commando in the China Chapter--he can be killed and we can come up with some clue (physical differences? molecular resonance? maybe selective breeding and gene tampering has caused Naziworld commandos to be partly inhuman?--help me out here, guys!) that leads them on a trail to Teufelhaus.


Michael Layne
Sent: 27 January 1999 06:34
Subject: Re: DG: Igor's sad tale, and a Victor (long)

Sounds like a better idea to me! It gives MiB his Mad Scientists and Weird Science (sparks shooting off Tesla Coils, lightning jumping between two spheres, large computers with loads of (unlabeled) flashing lights and spinning tape drives, chemistry labs with more glass in evidence than you'd find at a Glassblowers' Convention...), gives some of the rest of us a Russian sub (always fun...), gives the Special K (and the players) a lot of trouble... :)

There would probably be a combination of clues:

The KIA Naziworld commandos in China (Hong Kong?) could be found to be genetically engineered (see GURPS Biotech for some interesting possibilities there)...

ONI (and MI-5?) get word of a probable Russian SSN/SSGN sale and some digging shows it wasn't to India after all, but to some folks they find are front-men for the Russian Mafia... and then (as if that wasn't bad enough) they find these nice folks are only getting the sub to sell it to the Karotechia...

Other intel data indicates that the sub in question has had its reactor refueled.

The "Los Angeles" class submarine USS "Hartford" (SSN-768), commanded by CPT Lawrence MacInnes (an old character of mine, looks somewhat like Scott Glenn (who played Al Shephard in "The Right Stuff")...):) on "gatekeeper" duty off Vladivostok, detects and attempts to trail a Victor III (or the Papa class SSGN?) "coming out of the barn" at the Russian Navy's primary Far Eastern base. Everything goes fine until the Russian Navy's "linebacker" SSN -- a Sierra class boat -- shows up and begins to ping the American SSN, play "chicken", etc... Mac avoids a collision, and no shots are fired by either side, but he loses the original contact. (Even a submariner with his Military Science and Shiphandling (SUbmarine) levels can have a bad day...) Interestingly, Mac wonders why a new Sierra was protecting an older boat? This sort of treatment, scraping off the "tattletale", is usually reserved for Russian "boomers" (ballistic missile subs) or prototypes of new classes (which the older Russian made sub wasn't)! (This could be especially interesting if the boat the Special K bought is K-222, the sole example of the fast, titanium-hulled Papa class SSGN (The sonarmen probably nicknamed it "Papa Bear"...:) which has been sitting at a pier since 1991!) Once disentangled from the furball with the Sierra, the "Hartford" clears datum, goes to periscope depth, puts up her satcom antenna mast (yes, the 688Is have a satellite dish -- only theirs is retractable, much smaller than those on residences, and 2-way) and beams the report up to a DoD satellite. (If NRO & MJ-12 somehow end up with a copy, that's their problem...)

A DG Friendly with the NRO notes an odd energy signature on an archived satellite scan of Grey Dragon Island -- the UT arriving from Naziville! One of his previous cases featured an attempt to contact other dimensions that went awry (Philadelphia Experiment III?):), and the signature looks familiar. He gets a PGP-coded message to the DG Agent he is in contact with....

Interestingly, this is the area where HM Submarine "Turbulent" (S110) was lost with 129 chaps (counting the SpecOps force).... Check of other satellite data shows a monochromatic energy burst, and evidence of a subsea explosion... (KMN "Ultima Thule" got off one or two good shots with the underwater laser thermal weapon before some frammis or greebly -- overstressed by the dimensional jump -- blew out...):)

Somebody starts putting these, and other facts, together. (Alzis, walking up to talk to an agent or Friendly in a Pentagon corridor, or at PACFLT HQ at Pearl Harbor?) Calls and emails are made, people begin going "Hmm..." (Sanity rolls are made?):)

The team members contact a mercenary in Hong Kong for transport to SVB, and/or the "Hartford" receives a message from COMSUBPAC to proceed off station and rendezvous with a helo carrying SpecOps personnel (Delta Green agents and Friendlies) for landing on the SVB.... (Cue "Ice Station Zebra" theme... or would "Hunt for Red October" be more appropriate?):)

("So, Mr. Scroggins, I'm to extend to you and your people every assistance, short of endangering my boat and crew?")
("Your mission is very simple, Captain -- get me to Tefelhaus!"):)


Published by arrangement with the Delta Green Partnership. The intellectual property known as Delta Green is TM and is a COPYRIGHT of the Delta Green Partnership, who have licensed its use here. The contents of this document are COPYRIGHTS of the respective authors, excepting those elements that are components of the Delta Green intellectual property.