|
Post by RiftandRend on Aug 29, 2017 0:26:52 GMT
The main issue with radar is it's range to power ratios. I don't see it being more cost effective than IR+Laser Rangefinding at 10,000+ kilometer ranges where most of our combat takes place. An IR system can give you bearing data and a laser rangefinder can provide a range. Where radar would probably be more useful is in detecting cold and dark targets, but a LIDAR system can do that just as well for less cost and power requirements. It's much easier to make a target "dark" to a visible/IR band laser than it is to make it radar-absorbent. Radar by its nature doesn't solely interact with the surface of the target, and even the best RAM materials don't have more than 10dB absorbtion over broad bands, no more than 20-30 over a narrow target band. Materials like carbon black or copper chromite match that performance across the entire visible/UV/IR bands, with reflectivity of 0.02-0.01(equivalent to -20 dB). Engineered materials can drive that down to something like -34, and applying a thin layer is all that's needed to counter a laser-based system. It is practically impossible to hide from IR. Heat leaks out no matter what you do. And your ships laser weapons would be used for rangefinding, not a weak secondary system. No matter how reflective at first few materials hold up to 10 Gw lasers for long.
|
|
|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Aug 29, 2017 0:28:12 GMT
My point was that it's a bit silly to argue about sensors if you can afford to fill every spot in the solar system with sensor stations. How would they communicate with each other and warships? How would you process the sensor data from literally billions of IR cameras? What's there to stop anyone from burning them with lasers since the opponent can afford a similar gigantic sensor swarm and can therefore see all your sensors?
|
|
|
Post by princesskibble on Aug 29, 2017 0:29:47 GMT
I have nanoreconsats that can detect your microsats from millions of miles away and disable them though. Now you need to use your ship's sensors. but I have picoreconsats that can detect your nanoreconsats from millions of megameters away and disable them though. adĀ infinitum The point (along with the whole reason behind putting sensing in the game) is that in real life you can't count on an indestructible ever-present completely omniscient all-seeing network of perfect spy/warning/acquisition/control satellites that everyone has instantaneous constant communication with.
|
|
|
Post by bigbombr on Aug 29, 2017 5:46:39 GMT
but I have picoreconsats that can detect your nanoreconsats from millions of megameters away and disable them though. ad infinitum The point (along with the whole reason behind putting sensing in the game) is that in real life you can't count on an indestructible ever-present completely omniscient all-seeing network of perfect spy/warning/acquisition/control satellites that everyone has instantaneous constant communication with. Disabling those is IMO another argument why every spaceforce would at least employ some laser based spacecraft. Destroying lots of small targets is hard to do (cost-effectively) with kinetics or missiles.
|
|
|
Post by Rocket Witch on Aug 29, 2017 14:51:48 GMT
I had a thought: qswitched might be waiting until September to release an 'anniversary edition' update.
|
|
|
Post by aetreus on Aug 30, 2017 13:07:58 GMT
It's much easier to make a target "dark" to a visible/IR band laser than it is to make it radar-absorbent. Radar by its nature doesn't solely interact with the surface of the target, and even the best RAM materials don't have more than 10dB absorbtion over broad bands, no more than 20-30 over a narrow target band. Materials like carbon black or copper chromite match that performance across the entire visible/UV/IR bands, with reflectivity of 0.02-0.01(equivalent to -20 dB). Engineered materials can drive that down to something like -34, and applying a thin layer is all that's needed to counter a laser-based system. It is practically impossible to hide from IR. Heat leaks out no matter what you do. And your ships laser weapons would be used for rangefinding, not a weak secondary system. No matter how reflective at first few materials hold up to 10 Gw lasers for long. I mean "dark" as in nonreflective, not "dark" as in nonemissive. And you can't actually effectively use your laser weapons as rangefinders. They will damage the targets surface, meaning that your return will end up distorted, and more problematically you need to do precise pulse timing in order to get an effective range, which is going to be hard with a multi-megawatt laser. Also trying to execute any sort of search function with a very narrow-band and mechanically scanned(modern electronically scanned radars can cover an entire ~60 degree search volume in less than a second) sensor is going to be basically impossible. LIDAR suffers from that problem already, and that's on very small and fast mounts.
|
|
|
Post by RiftandRend on Aug 30, 2017 15:52:10 GMT
It is practically impossible to hide from IR. Heat leaks out no matter what you do. And your ships laser weapons would be used for rangefinding, not a weak secondary system. No matter how reflective at first few materials hold up to 10 Gw lasers for long. I mean "dark" as in nonreflective, not "dark" as in nonemissive. And you can't actually effectively use your laser weapons as rangefinders. They will damage the targets surface, meaning that your return will end up distorted, and more problematically you need to do precise pulse timing in order to get an effective range, which is going to be hard with a multi-megawatt laser. Also trying to execute any sort of search function with a very narrow-band and mechanically scanned(modern electronically scanned radars can cover an entire ~60 degree search volume in less than a second) sensor is going to be basically impossible. LIDAR suffers from that problem already, and that's on very small and fast mounts. Can radar perform a 60 degree search out to 10,000 km with any level of accuracy? (I don't actually know, can it?) Your main lasers can throttle their power output if damaging the target would give inaccurate returns. You could also determine the range to target by observing the apparent brightness of the ablating material. As the laser's output is known that should be some simple math. Also, you wouldn't need to search with the rangefinder as you seem to be suggesting. Your IR would identify target bearing. If radar proves superior to LIDAR for close in detection then use if for that role.
|
|
|
Post by alias72 on Aug 31, 2017 16:15:51 GMT
Manual extrusion height on turrets? Multiple barrels on turret?
Any news?
|
|
|
Post by langesmesser on Sept 1, 2017 4:16:52 GMT
I for one would kinda like to see plumbing, such as fuel and coolant lines, and habitable tunnels connecting crew modules, and have those effects incorporated into damage modeling and effects.
|
|
|
Post by morrigi on Sept 4, 2017 4:09:20 GMT
qswitched pls giv news
|
|
|
Post by dragonkid11 on Sept 4, 2017 11:32:41 GMT
Just be patience guys. I'm sure he's working on something at the moment, either his life, or the game.
|
|
erik
New Member
Posts: 34
|
Post by erik on Sept 15, 2017 12:29:57 GMT
Are there any news on mission editor or multiplayer yet? The sandbox, ship and module editors werent enough to keep me playing... But I'd love to build missions and play ones created by others.
|
|
|
Post by The Astronomer on Sept 15, 2017 12:42:31 GMT
Are there any news on mission editor or multiplayer yet? The sandbox, ship and module editors werent enough to keep me playing... But I'd love to build missions and play ones created by others. You should learn how to write code for new campaign missions.
|
|
|
Post by Mobius on Sept 18, 2017 17:27:01 GMT
I mean "dark" as in nonreflective, not "dark" as in nonemissive. And you can't actually effectively use your laser weapons as rangefinders. They will damage the targets surface, meaning that your return will end up distorted, and more problematically you need to do precise pulse timing in order to get an effective range, which is going to be hard with a multi-megawatt laser. Also trying to execute any sort of search function with a very narrow-band and mechanically scanned(modern electronically scanned radars can cover an entire ~60 degree search volume in less than a second) sensor is going to be basically impossible. LIDAR suffers from that problem already, and that's on very small and fast mounts. Can radar perform a 60 degree search out to 10,000 km with any level of accuracy? (I don't actually know, can it?) Your main lasers can throttle their power output if damaging the target would give inaccurate returns. You could also determine the range to target by observing the apparent brightness of the ablating material. As the laser's output is known that should be some simple math. Also, you wouldn't need to search with the rangefinder as you seem to be suggesting. Your IR would identify target bearing. If radar proves superior to LIDAR for close in detection then use if for that role. By my estimations yes it can. Using the sea going modern day SBX radar platform as a basis and current commercially available S-band modules I was able to achieve a 90% Probability of detection (upon first scan) of a frigate sized object @~39,000 Km with a 90 X 90 scan area. Total radar size would be 25 meters in diameter. Screen shots: i.imgur.com/8lC8Qce.pngi.imgur.com/2yA7E1j.pngi.imgur.com/QAZNBGi.pngSources: www.mediafire.com/file/7wrkyslc1p4d36r/AESACalcTrial.xlsxdefensesystems.com/articles/2017/06/21/missile-defense-agency.aspxmicro.apitech.co.uk/s-band-dual-transmit-receive-modulewww.emcos.com/?application-examples=nalysis-of-rcs-problems-in-ship
|
|
|
Post by jtyotjotjipaefvj on Sept 18, 2017 17:31:56 GMT
100,000 square meters sounds like a pretty big frigate to me. 1 km long, 100m hull diameter? You should probably lose a zero or two from that.
|
|