Re: FT Sensor Rules -- Request for Comments [LONG]

Thomas Westbrook wrote:

> In space, I would expect radar emissions to be curved by the influence
of gravity [after all radar is merely an electromagnetic wave like
light] or EM influences, to include the passage of spaceships.	After
all, the way (by accounts of the story) that a B1 *stealth* bomber was
allegedly tracked by Aussies was the detection of the air turbulence
caused by the passage of the airplane on a non-military radar frequency.

Stuff like that last line makes it really difficult for me to comment. 
Assuming I knew, I couldn't say. I can neither confirm nor deny etc etc.

> What these campaign rules did not cover was the effectiveness of
active jammer also increases as the range between jamming vessel and
radiating vessel narrowed.

Nope, or rather, not usually.

An active barrage noise jammer is more effective at longer range, at 
short range the sheer power of the active sensor "burns through" the 
jamming.

Analogy: Imagine a group of people at night. All are carrying candles.
One also carries a massive great white flashlight, and points it 
straight at you. You meanwhile have your own flashlight, monochromatic, 
and more powerful. The closer people come, the more likely it is that 
they will be effectively illuminated, despite the glare. Moving the 
jammer closer doesn't help as much.

There are also active deception jammers, which inject signals into the 
receiver that the transmitter *could* have sent, but didn't, thereby 
creating false targets. Other techniques can be used to disrupt tracking

(though not detection). Analogy: look at the strobes on emergency 
services vehicles sometime - their exact position and velocity can be 
quite difficult to determine, even though their presence is obvious.

-- 
Alan & Carmel Brain
http://aebrain.blogspot.com
mailto:aebrain@webone.com.au