As pointed out below, not possible (I mistook the AND for an OR). But perhaps something of interest for future combos...

Which takes priority - Vessery's ability or Long Range Scanners?

Long Range Scanners (LRS) state:

You can acquire target locks on ships at Range 3 and beyond. You cannot acquire target locks on ship at Range 1-2.

Colonel Vessery says:

When attacking, immediately after you roll attack dice, you may acquire a target lock on the defender if it already has a red target lock token.

A quick review of the FAQ provided this, which may or may not be relevant:

So can Colonel Vessery with LRS equipped use his pilot ability to acquire a target lock on a defender with a target lock on it, even if it's within Range 2?

I'd say the LRS would make it so Vessery is only able to use his ability when attacking ships at Range 3.

Of course this is all hypothetical since Vessery cannot equip Long Range Scanners (it requires the missile _and_ torpedo icons), but I would say the "cannot" takes priority, as is the general rule. (Rules Reference, "Golden Rules")

Lot of people are missing the requirements on this card.

Of course this is all hypothetical since Vessery cannot equip Long Range Scanners (it requires the missile _and_ torpedo icons), but I would say the "cannot" takes priority, as is the general rule. (Rules Reference, "Golden Rules")

Ah - my bad. I thought it was OR. Thanks for the correction.

Of course this is all hypothetical since Vessery cannot equip Long Range Scanners (it requires the missile _and_ torpedo icons), but I would say the "cannot" takes priority, as is the general rule. (Rules Reference, "Golden Rules")

Ah - my bad. I thought it was OR. Thanks for the correction.

It's not just you. Someone was super excited about a possible Colzet combo...

Of course this is all hypothetical since Vessery cannot equip Long Range Scanners (it requires the missile _and_ torpedo icons), but I would say the "cannot" takes priority, as is the general rule. (Rules Reference, "Golden Rules")

Ah - my bad. I thought it was OR. Thanks for the correction.

It's not just you. Someone was super excited about a possible Colzet combo...

A LOT of people have been missing that particular bit of text (including me). I think I have seen this issue get corrected more than a dozen times in the past 24 hours.