|
|
Post by princesskibble on Sept 5, 2016 22:27:14 GMT
Finding a spacecraft against the blackness of deepest space can be as easy as tracking bright stars, or as hard as hunting dangerous asteroids. But no matter how (relatively) close and bright an enemy war rocket shines, it will usually take equipment a little more sophisticated than a porthole and the naked human eye to spot. Strategically, as is already assumed, unpiloted infrared space telescopes will constantly be monitoring the skies. But in the midst of combat, you can't wait the seconds, minutes, or even hours before that data can reach you. Tactically, tracking a spacecraft will use similar equipment to missile early warning satellites - simple cameras, looking in the infrared spectrum, protected by cone shaped baffles from the bright light of the sun, nearby planets, nuclear explosions, and high powered lasers.  I think a DLC modelling spacecraft tactical detection and tracking, and having spaceship design include sensor placement and stuff, would be really cool! |
|
|
|
Post by qswitched on Sept 6, 2016 0:25:51 GMT
I actually did have sensors and radar antennas as modules originally. As it turned out, they were so small they were essentially invisible on everything except missiles and drones, that's how tiny they were. They were a pain to keep track of (because they were so small), and because they massed basically nothing, they were both free and didn't really change anything in combat. They can be armored for free essentially, too. Thus, I removed them, as they could always be assumed there (and very heavily armored + flash protected). As mentioned here, a 10 cm diameter detector, slightly bigger than average hand size, will have a resolution of 7 meters at 1000 km distance (and 70 m at 10000 km). Combat ranges run further than that, but being able to determine your enemy's position within around 70 meters is pretty much more than you'll ever need. You could run the sensors even smaller (1 cm or even as small as 1mm, for instance) for projectile/laser ranges without issue. With that size, you can lay down thousands all across your ship's armor. |
|
|
|
Post by princesskibble on Sept 6, 2016 0:35:33 GMT
They are really cheap and small enough to be assumed there, and with full sky coverage, no matter what?
|
|
|
|
Post by qswitched on Sept 6, 2016 3:14:59 GMT
If the enemy is trying to be stealthy, you need Hubble-sized or larger sensors distributed around the solar system.
However, for combat, with enemies dumping out hundreds of MW of heat conspicuously, numerous tiny sensors on your ship's surface can be implemented cheaply.
|
|
|
|
Post by curiousepic on Sept 27, 2016 17:47:47 GMT
Would nukes not be enough to bake hull-mounted ship sensors? Or is the armoring mentioned sufficient?
|
|
|
|
Post by jakjakman on Sept 27, 2016 19:57:31 GMT
Would nukes not be enough to bake hull-mounted ship sensors? Or is the armoring mentioned sufficient?
They would... However missiles don't "sneak," so there would more than likely be armor shields to snap into place over the sensors before the nuclear missiles got within detonation range. Also, there would probably be backup sensors in armored recesses ready to snap up into place to replace any damaged sensors.
|
|
