Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.com>
Subject: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 08:23:24 -0500
Gurth wrote:
>I think so, although you might want to silence the aircraft's transponder too, else
>ground control will keep track of them with no problems at all. The question you
>have to ask, though, is "Does physical vehicle mask alter the A-10's radar
>signature?" No point in using it if every radar within 100 km says there's an
>A-10 flying there. Pay special attention to the engine turbines here -- any
>half-decent radar will say there's two TF34-100 engines flying there...

I don't know much about state-of-the-art radar, is this really possible? In the
movies you just see blips, blips w/ speeds if you are using doplar. Wouldn't you
need millimeter band radar to identify the models of the engines? or do engines
really stand out for some reason? Is your comment for 1990's tech or 2050's
tech?

Double-Domed Mike
Message no. 2
From: Marc Lipshitz <MLIPSHIT@****.CO.ZA>
Subject: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan) -Reply
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 15:36:59 +0200
>>> Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.com> 30/July/1996 03:23pm >>>
Gurth wrote:
>I think so, although you might want to silence the aircraft's transponder
too, else>ground control will keep track of them with no problems at all.
The question you>have to ask, though, is "Does physical vehicle mask
alter the A-10's radar>signature?" No point in using it if every radar
within 100 km says there's an>A-10 flying there. Pay special attention to
the engine turbines here -- any>half-decent radar will say there's two
TF34-100 engines flying there...

I don't know much about state-of-the-art radar, is this really possible? In
the movies you just see blips, blips w/ speeds if you are using doplar.
Wouldn't you need millimeter band radar to identify the models of the
engines? or do engines really stand out for some reason? Is your
comment for 1990's tech or 2050's tech?
Double-Domed Mike
*********************************************

The basic radar will give position and speed. From the major I did in Radar
in my electrical engineering I can't think of any modern radar that will tell
you what engine is out there from another from the reflection of an
electromagnetic ray, there just isn't enough information in the signal.
Where the problem comes in, is in the transponder, that is sending
detailed info about the plane to all secondary radar systems in the vicinity.

Who knows what the military standard for transponders are? can they be
toggled in the cockpit from civ spec to milspec? I'd imagine so or else any
attack on an enemy installation would be accompanied by you telling them
exactly what to expect and when.

Please note, I finished my degree five years ago and the ibfo is a bit
rusty.
Marc
Message no. 3
From: C J Anderson <nitehawk@******.net>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan) -Reply
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 11:06:21 -0500
Marc Lipshitz wrote:
>
> >>> Mike Elkins <MikeE@*********.com> 30/July/1996 03:23pm
>>>
> Gurth wrote:
> >I think so, although you might want to silence the aircraft's transponder
> too, else>ground control will keep track of them with no problems at all.
> The question you>have to ask, though, is "Does physical vehicle mask
> alter the A-10's radar>signature?" No point in using it if every radar
> within 100 km says there's an>A-10 flying there. Pay special attention to
> the engine turbines here -- any>half-decent radar will say there's two
> TF34-100 engines flying there...
>
> I don't know much about state-of-the-art radar, is this really possible? In
> the movies you just see blips, blips w/ speeds if you are using doplar.
> Wouldn't you need millimeter band radar to identify the models of the
> engines? or do engines really stand out for some reason? Is your
> comment for 1990's tech or 2050's tech?
> Double-Domed Mike
> *********************************************
>
> The basic radar will give position and speed. From the major I did in Radar
> in my electrical engineering I can't think of any modern radar that will tell
> you what engine is out there from another from the reflection of an
> electromagnetic ray, there just isn't enough information in the signal.
> Where the problem comes in, is in the transponder, that is sending
> detailed info about the plane to all secondary radar systems in the vicinity.
>
> Who knows what the military standard for transponders are? can they be
> toggled in the cockpit from civ spec to milspec? I'd imagine so or else any
> attack on an enemy installation would be accompanied by you telling them
> exactly what to expect and when.
>
> Please note, I finished my degree five years ago and the ibfo is a bit
> rusty.
> Marc

Some modern, very-expensive and large radars can detect (if the
aircraft is flying at them) the compressor blades in the engine. This
type of radar is very rare, though, and takes up mucho space on the
ground. The antenna alone is many yards wide. Also this sysetem is
usually set up in a fixed direction, so if you know where they are, you
could try to avoid them.

My 2 nuyen,

C J Anderson


nitehawk@******.net
Message no. 4
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 18:02:46 +0100
In message <s1fdc5b5.054@********.dragonsys.com>, Mike Elkins
<MikeE@*********.com> writes
>I don't know much about state-of-the-art radar, is this really possible? In the
>movies you just see blips, blips w/ speeds if you are using doplar. Wouldn't
>you
>need millimeter band radar to identify the models of the engines? or do engines
>really stand out for some reason? Is your comment for 1990's tech or 2050's
>tech?

This was a means of IFF in the Gulf War: Non-Cooperative Identification.
It is possible to get details like engine blade count and rate from
radar, though this is mostly on AWACS-type aircraft radars rather than
fighter intercept radars.

Think about the doppler return of a turbofan's compressor blades and
you'll see why they make great, and discernible, radar targets.

--
"There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy."
Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 5
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 11:46:17 +0100
Mike Elkins said on 8:23/30 Jul 96...

> >Pay special attention to the engine turbines here -- any
> >half-decent radar will say there's two TF34-100 engines flying there...
>
> I don't know much about state-of-the-art radar, is this really possible? In the
> movies you just see blips, blips w/ speeds if you are using doplar. Wouldn't you
> need millimeter band radar to identify the models of the engines? or do engines
> really stand out for some reason? Is your comment for 1990's tech or 2050's
> tech?

I read something to this extent a few years ago -- current-day radar
identifying the engine of the aircraft, and thereby the aircraft itself
(or at least the types it could be). I'm not up-to-date on radar tech
either, so it may well be impossible right now, but it should be possible
in 2057 at any rate, IMHO. That you see blips on the screen doesn't mean
the radar can see a lot more, just that it gets translated to a blip on a
screen.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Media pollution is a very bad solution.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 6
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan) -Reply
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 11:46:18 +0100
Marc Lipshitz said on 15:36/30 Jul 96...

> Who knows what the military standard for transponders are? can they be
> toggled in the cockpit from civ spec to milspec? I'd imagine so or else any
> attack on an enemy installation would be accompanied by you telling them
> exactly what to expect and when.

My guess is that you can turn them off. It certainly wouldn't do to tell
the enemy that flight of 4 F-15E's is coming up toward their HQ just by
leaving your transponders on :)

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
Media pollution is a very bad solution.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 7
From: Marc Lipshitz <MLIPSHIT@****.CO.ZA>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 13:49:26 +0200
>>> Gurth <gurth@******.nl> 31/July/1996 12:46pm >>>
My guess is that you can turn them off. It certainly wouldn't do to tell the
enemy that flight of 4 F-15E's is coming up toward their HQ just by
leaving your transponders on :)


But the transponders are also used to identify friend from foe, there must
be some system for communication between the two. You really don't
want to shoot down that blib on the screen that is your buddy.
Marc
Message no. 8
From: "Sambo" <polan881@******.edu>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 1996 12:24:44 +0000
The IFF transponder comes "on" when it is interrogated by another
friendly IFF. It sends a response to the interrogating IFF, which
is recognized as friendly. If an IFF interrogates an unknown and,
there's no response, it's an enemy.

> >>> Gurth <gurth@******.nl> 31/July/1996 12:46pm >>>
> My guess is that you can turn them off. It certainly wouldn't do to tell the
> enemy that flight of 4 F-15E's is coming up toward their HQ just by
> leaving your transponders on :)
>
>
> But the transponders are also used to identify friend from foe, there must
> be some system for communication between the two. You really don't
> want to shoot down that blib on the screen that is your buddy.
> Marc
***Sambo***
Message no. 9
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 10:28:40 +0100
Marc Lipshitz said on 13:49/31 Jul 96...

> But the transponders are also used to identify friend from foe, there must
> be some system for communication between the two. You really don't
> want to shoot down that blib on the screen that is your buddy.

That's what you have an IFF system for: before opening fire, you request
an ID from the aircraft you're aiming it. If it responds with the proper
code you go looking for another target; if it doesn't, well...

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I've been searching most my life for anything to believe in,
like God or love or something -- any kind of simple solution.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 10
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 1996 19:44:35 +0100
In message <199608010827.KAA24018@**********.xs4all.nl>, Gurth
<gurth@******.nl> writes
>Marc Lipshitz said on 13:49/31 Jul 96...
>
>> But the transponders are also used to identify friend from foe, there must
>> be some system for communication between the two. You really don't
>> want to shoot down that blib on the screen that is your buddy.
>
>That's what you have an IFF system for: before opening fire, you request
>an ID from the aircraft you're aiming it. If it responds with the proper
>code you go looking for another target; if it doesn't, well...

Unfortunately, the enemy can find you too using this: you typically only
put IFF on when you're approaching friendly units or when asked to do so
(such as when a unit with long-range missiles is about to open fire and
knows you're in the area).

History is littered with friendly-fire casualties where IFF equipment
was malfunctioning, turned off, wrongly set, wrongly interrogated or
just misused.


--
"There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy."
Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk
Message no. 11
From: "Gurth" <gurth@******.nl>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 11:48:36 +0100
Paul J. Adam said on 19:44/ 1 Aug 96...

> History is littered with friendly-fire casualties where IFF equipment
> was malfunctioning, turned off, wrongly set, wrongly interrogated or
> just misused.

As I recall, not all that many fighter pilots like shoulder-launched
anti-aircraft missiles, not on the enemy's side and not on their own side.
The chance of someone mistaking a friendly aircraft for an enemy is a bit
too large, it seems, even with IFF.

--
Gurth@******.nl - http://www.xs4all.nl/~gurth/index.html
I can give it up any time.
-> NERPS Project Leader & Unofficial Shadowrun Guru <-
-> The Character Mortuary: http://huizen.dds.nl/~mortuary/mortuary.html <-

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version 3.1:
GAT/! d-(dpu) s:- !a>? C+(++)@ U P L E? W(++) N o? K- w+ O V? PS+ PE
Y PGP- t(+) 5+ X++ R+++>$ tv+(++) b++@ DI? D+ G(++) e h! !r(---) y?
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
Message no. 12
From: "Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan)
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 17:38:04 +0100
In message <199608020949.LAA29591@**********.xs4all.nl>, Gurth
<gurth@******.nl> writes
>As I recall, not all that many fighter pilots like shoulder-launched
>anti-aircraft missiles, not on the enemy's side and not on their own side.
>The chance of someone mistaking a friendly aircraft for an enemy is a bit
>too large, it seems, even with IFF.

The ability of scared, tired soldiers on the ground to identify an fast,
low-flying aircraft in the few seconds available is frequently
overrated. This is one reason the RAF does very little close air
support: it allows the air defences to assume anything they see is
hostile. (The other reason is that it's far more effective for jets to
kill tanks by the dozen in their repair yard or marshalling area, or by
cutting off their fuel and ammo supply, than hunting them one at a time
on the front line)

--
"There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy."
Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about Radar (was Re: The Rigger's Plan), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!