Trinity RPG - about space tactics

[moving_target]

I argee completely about sonar being useless in space, radar is accually more effective in space than it is on the ground. Radar uses radio waves to find objects, which like all electromagnetec waves travel perfectly well in vacuum. and it works better in space because it doesn't have atmosphere to scatter the waves or ground to block them.

of course fighting in a electromagnetic storm or in a debris field like a planatery ring, would severly limit the effectiveness of radar, for most situations it is the perferred tool for navagation.

[Ayre el KaBeer]

for most situations it is the perferred tool for navagation.

#1 By who?

#2 When do you expect to get the signal back?

[Finbar]

The problem with using radar in space is the "bounce-back". Either a) there's nothing to bounce-back from, or the distance between you and and the object is far enough to worry about diffraction (the waves breaking up).

Ignoring a), has a lot of connected issues. First, it currently takes mathematical analysis to develop a space-radar picture; also, it takes time to receive the picture. A scientist sitting in Arecibo has plenty of time to do both; a starship captain in the middle of combat doesn't. Even allowing for faster times due to advanced computers, it is arguable that you'd have time to do the latter in battle, with images taking as long as 3-5 seconds to come in and be analyzed.

Keep in mind that, although most combat distances are well under a light-second (300,000 km), and there's virtually nothing else there, you are splitting your computer between a number of important systems (life support, defensive, offensive, and communication).

Also, due to the distance and it being an effectively randomly moving object, you don't have the ability of the scientist to continually aim your radar. Thus, the potential for the radio waves to go in random directions when they hit the ship becomes a real problem. In fact, I'd probably make sure that such things were part of the pilot's training and ship's design.

If I were tracking the ship, I'd take advantage of the detail that ships broadcast a number of EMF's and use them to triangulate onto the ship(s) in questions, which is far simpler and uses their communicaion against them. I figured most ships would do it in a futuristic space combat, especially as radios (which use EMF's) are just to convenient.

And don't get me started on ships painted black ::crazy ...I can't believe I forgot those...

Any other comments?

FR

[moving_target]

diffraction isn't so much of a worry in vacuum, especially within tactical range. but I agree there is a problem with the distances, although I think there is a way around that by varing the frequency of the signal over a set amount of time to allow the computer to effectively time stamp the returned signal.

as for the computing issue, you are not going to need the computering power of Arecibo because you are not going to be collecting the massive amounts of data that Arecibo is. A radar is only going to be collecting the small set of frequencies that it is sending out. Arecibo monitors as many frequencies as it is possible.

also for combat situations it would be sufficient to know the distance, size and brightness of an object which should be able to be calulated almost immediately and provide enough information to distinguish friend from foe.

as for losing signals due to reflection, yea thats going to happen (and according to the ships it is designed to happen) thats the chaos of battle, and nothing is perfect.

and I agree about tracking the EMF's but some ships designed for military use are going to have silent modes where the are going to have a reduced emf signature. Thats why you should have redudant systems watching out for bogies.

even with radar, ladar, and ship tracking, I sill would rather have a good clear watching my back.

and what's wrong with painting ships black ::ninja ::cool

[knave]

I figured that Trinity era ships would navigate through extremely sensitive mass detection. They detect gravitic fields that anything with a mass exerts on them. Directed Radar or certain frequency lasers would be fine for detecting and identifying closer range stuff.

[Ayre el KaBeer]

also for combat situations it would be sufficient to know the distance, size and brightness of an object which should be able to be calulated almost immediately and provide enough information to distinguish friend from foe.

Only proper way to determine friend or foe is to use IFF (Identify Friend/Foe) technology, same as used by the millitaries of today. Detect a potential target, your comp queries their transponder, if their transponder sends the required info showing it's friendly then you don't engage. You can never rely on visual, well unless it's a coalition ark then you're pretty sure your buddies didn't make it, although you never know ::sly .

[knave]

Only proper way to determine friend or foe is to use IFF (Identify Friend/Foe) technology, same as used by the millitaries of today.

Please, God, don't let it be like the technology they use today.

[Ayre el KaBeer]

Fine, same idea as today's, but with future technology... err... enhanced by EK's. ok?

[moving_target]

I wasn't suggesting that radar be used to the exclusion of other systems, just that it would still be a viable navagation and tactical tool.

I hadn't really thought about having massometers, but with the discovery of the gravaton that innovation would probably would be quick in comming, although I don't think it's use wuld be very widespread. mostly in large military vessals and high-end commercial ships.

[knave]

I hadn't really thought about having massometers, but with the discovery of the gravaton that innovation would probably would be quick in comming, although I don't think it's use wuld be very widespread. mostly in large military vessals and high-end commercial ships.

Personally I think its the only sensible and safe way of navigating for all spaceships since its guaranteed to pick up anything that's likely to be able to hurt you. Course whether you can dodge in time is an entirely different matter.

-Knave

[Kimi]

OMG, my head hurts now! ::tongue

[moving_target]

Personally I think its the only sensible and safe way of navigating for all spaceships since its guaranteed to pick up anything that's likely to be able to hurt you.

I don't think that anything can guarante to pick up everything that can hurt you.

it would only take a small object traveling at insane speeds to puncture a hull, and both massometers and radar would have a tough time picking it up.

but I still think that radar would be suffecient for most commercial ships, for making sure that there are no large rocks to plow into.

[knave]

I don't think that anything can guarante to pick up everything that can hurt you.

it would only take a small object traveling at insane speeds to puncture a hull, and both massometers and radar would have a tough time picking it up.

As I said whether or not you could dodge would be a different story altogether. The difference with gravity detection is that it doesn't rely on getting a bounce back - so the composition of the object doesn't matter.

but I still think that radar would be suffecient for most commercial ships, for making sure that there are no large rocks to plow into.

I'd say that ships have 3/4 methods of detection.

1) Gravity - used for detecting objects at range. The Upside - anything with mass has no way of hiding, however, this won't tell you what something looks like.

2/3) EM Emission detection - used for position (against the backgreund of stars) - as well as passive identification of engine flare etc. Also used as a receptor for laser range finding.

4) and Radar which is more or less only useful within a perimeter of a few thousand miles for determining position and in micro-milliwave bursts for determining shape.

[Asbjørn]

1) Gravity - used for detecting objects at range.  The Upside - anything with mass has no way of hiding,  however, this won't tell you what something looks like.

Wouldn't that also mean that you can hide a vessel or object in front of a larger object? Like a battleship in front of a moon?

Early fighter pilots dreaded the sun because they had no way of seeing an enemy coming at them from that direction. Wouldn't this gravity sensing business give a similar effect?

[moving_target]

thats right, of course any detection method is going to have its blind spots, thats why you pile on as many redudant systems as you can get and afford.

now getting and affording are an entirely diffrent can of worms ::wink ::teleport

[phoenix]

Wouldn't that also mean that you can hide a vessel or object in front of a larger object? Like a battleship in front of a moon?

Not if you knew the mass of the moon and had the mother of all supercomputers on board.

[Tamoline]

One good way to detect ships, if not random debris, is just to look at IR signatures. Ships are very hot compared to background. (Actually, getting rid of heat is a big problem in spaceships: you can't rely on convection or conduction to aid you. Unless they've found some way to get around it, most ships probably have large fins so they can radiate it.)

[Finbar]

Are we talking IR or thermographs? If via IR, that's something else entirely and getting rid of heat wouldn't necessarily help. However, as far as thermographs are concerned, well, you've got something that 600+ C in a -170 C situation; how far do you think the heat is going to last? It may be visible, but I'm not sure that you'd be able to detect the heat...

FR

[knave]

Are we talking IR or thermographs? If via IR, that's something else entirely and getting rid of heat wouldn't necessarily help. However, as far as thermographs are concerned, well, you've got something that 600+ C in a -170 C situation; how far do you think the heat is going to last? It may be visible, but I'm not sure that you'd be able to detect the heat...

Heat / light or whatever the energy is going to keep going till it hits something. If it hits you you can detect it with a sensitive enough detector.

[Finbar]

Heat is defined as the excitation of molecules...When something "heats up", its molecules are excited. When it "cools" down, these molecules are less excited.

If I heat something up, say, exhaust, then put it into an extremely cold area, say, space, then the object should quickly "calm down". The initial IR burst (from the heat) may continue, but the heat won't.

Note: There is a big difference between heat and IR. IR may produce heating (and most heat travels through space as sub-IR radiation), and a number of industrial projects underway currently are trying to figure out better ways to vent heating due to IR. However, all I'd have to do to keep something cold in space is put into the shadow of the nearest object, and it'll stay cold forever...

Heat vs. IR is sort of like an explosion in space: The immediate effects (sound and kinetic energy) would be felt only by something close by, where the energy produced (and any pieces flung out by the explosion) would be felt a long ways a way.

FR

[knave]

Ya... we do seem to be arguing the toss quite a bit don't we. ::cool

heat. n. A form of energy associated with the motion of atoms or molecules and capable of being transmitted through solid and fluid media by conduction, through fluid media by convection, and through empty space by radiation.

So - when the energy hits the detector it makes it hotter. ::tongue

[Finbar]

Meh...It's summer ::tongue ...Territory and all that...

It's not that I'm necessarily saying that the ship itself wouldn't light up an IR detector (in fact, I think even a sophisticated IR detector would be blurry due to the difference of the ship's temp and the space around it), just that my analness wants there to be a distinction between the exhaust (where heat would die quickly) and the rest of the ship (which would conserve the heat)....

Basically, I don't think IR would give the detail needed to make ship identification possible (same with radar); and that relying on heat (especially in a shadow, where I can keep something frozen practically forever) as your detection source is not a good idea. There is a reason, after all, that heaters are part of the ship design...

Overall, I think that the further away from a star you got, the less heat you'd throw (the farther you are, the less heat to pick up from the sun, and the more likely you'll find yourself in a shadow), so the less IR detectors would likely work...

FR

[Finbar]

Some things I got thinking about on the way home re: IR...

1) If IR projection was going to be an issue, wouldn't at least the military ships build the engine on the inside of the ship, that way a) you save some energy re: heating, and the heat build-up would be on the inside, so that you could allow your hull to get to the temp of the space around it?

2) This after realilzing that you could probably mark off the solar system into four zone re: IR (because of distance from the sun and shadows):

Zone I would be the inner system up to just beyond Mars (the outer limit of the so-called "Life Zone", where the Sun still projects enough heat to support life, and where IR would still be able to heat objects to where they would stand out;

Zone II would be any point past that to the orbit of Saturn (IR would fade, becoming more and more chancier);

Zone III would be any point past that, where IR would not be able to warm anything past a few degrees of the surrounding space; and

Zone VI, basically defined as a any point where the asteroid belt is between the ship and the Sun, acting as an "IR Buffer" and casting a shadow to the end of the solar system, as well as any significant shadow.

Sound okay?

BTW, any other comments re: Space Tactics?

FR

[moving_target]

I do have one more thing to add, and that is that the ships hull wouldn't cool down that quickly.

Space isn't accually cold in the sense we know it. sure the ambient tempature is way down there, but a vaccume lacks the two most effecient modes or heat transferance, which are convection and conduction. The only way for a ship to shead heat is to radiated it through the hull (which is pretty slow) or to store it in a medium that can be expelled (exhaust)

not that that really changes much, except that IR detectors would be more accurate.

[Tamoline]

Just thought that I would add that (AFAIK) heating ships is generally not a problem. Getting rid of heat in space is. For a ship in particular, the heat you would throw out (due to power generation, machinery, humans, etc) is going to dwarf that which is absorbed from the sun at most distances from the sun. Also, bear in mind that the surface of the ship will not be at ambient temperature. Not that any of this would help you if the enemy were using automated weaponry that has been lying idle in space for some time.

[Grizzly]

About radar, I believe a so called Doppler-Radar would be quite handy. It is especially sensitive for moving objects. ::thumbsup

What´s about tachion emission by fusion reactions ( Stars ). But I do not know if hyper-fusion reactors emit tachions at all. ::blink

Another point would be traces of ions from the engine exhaust.

[ProfPotts]

What´s about tachion emission by fusion reactions ( Stars ). But I do not know if hyper-fusion reactors emit tachions at all.

Have FTL particles been detected / discovered in Trinity? I thought all the FTL stuff in the game was via psionic teleportation?

[Grizzly]

Have FTL particles been detected / discovered in Trinity? I thought all the FTL stuff in the game was via psionic teleportation?

Shame on me! ::smiley4

Erase tachion, set in neutrino

It seems it was a little too late last time ::sleepin

[ProfPotts]

Ah yes, that makes much more sense ::thumbsup . Neutrinos are still pretty darn hard to detect, but I'd guess that the tech' of Trinity would be up to the task, considering the other stuff they can do.

[Grizzly]

They (don´t know exactly who) have build a neutrino-"Detector" into the polar ice. It is a huge construction of cables with rows of light sensitive sensors on them. When a neutrino hits a molecule in the ice, that molecule sheds photons. One of the sensors "see" the flash of light. The neutrino passes on and hits another molecule somewhere else in that big areal and another sensor gets triggered. Because all sensors are in a 3D grid, they can backtrack the original trajectory of the neutrino. ::wacko

In Trinity, I think they could coat the hull with microscopic sensors in a thin layer of water between inner and outer hull. The sensors registrate the neutrinos when they hit the hull from outside and then again, when it leaves it on the other side. ::hmmm

[ProfPotts]

IRL the problem with detecting neutrinos is differentiating them from the ambient background radiation that's around pretty much everywhere. That's why neutrino detectors (there are a few, I think) are built in places like the bottom of mine-shafts that happen to have a very low amount of radioactive rock in them. The then surround the thing in pure heavy water to further filter-out random radiation. Space has loads of random radiation, so current-day methods of detecting neutrinos wouldn't work.

Luckily Trinity is set a long time in the future & their science can do all sorts of clever things the ST would be wise not to define too closely... ::sly

[Grizzly]

Sometimes it is enough to know that it functions and not how it functions. ::wacko

Anyway, there is much more to space combat than only detection. That is just the first step, the second is engaging, the third attack and the last but not least important, disengaging.

You can only engage if you have detected your enemy and you have to close in on him to attack. Then you have to disengage and watch your back for his buddies, who might be around, too. ::sneaky2

[Datsun]

As far as neutrino detectors I bet a clever EK could either make a bio-app that is directly sensitive to them or one that converts them into a less energetic particle that could be easily detected (like a photon)

imagine a vacuum chamber photosensetive walls the bioapp lines the outside of the chambers and makes a field inside that converts the neutrinos to photons and the chamber wall absorbs them making a digital photo of the neutrino spray. Now put two or more of these things onto your ship and you can trianglelate how far away the source is.

whatda think

Methinks i will write this up a little more and submit it to the tech page and tech book.

Datsun

[Finbar]

1) Disengaging is a bit tricky...You need to either a) be faster than your opponent, somehow totally evade him (which could be fun), or c) give the opponent a reason to let you run (like you damage him a lot or ransom your way out)...

2) I hate asking the question, but...Does a radioactive material emit neutrinos? Read: I'm not sure if having a sensor who's only purpose is to "see" a reactor would be more than a scientific instrument (ie, not placed on a non-research ship) as other sensors could also do the task (IR, for example). However, if it could help find radioactive materials in space, then a neutrino sensor would be seriously used. So does it?

FR

[Grizzly]

Neutrinos aren´t caused by fission reaction, so radioactives don´t emit them. As far as I know they are caused through fusion reactions only. So stars are the major "producer" of neutrino particles.

And for the search for radioactive materials in space, give a good sample of the stuff to a Clear and he can find it easier than any technical sensor would do it. ::tongue

[Finbar]

Backing up a few steps:

So far a good ship has the following types of sensors:

Radar

LANSA (for abbies)

IR/UV

Spectrometers

Visual

Massometers

Geiger Counter

Psionic (don't forget your crew! ::rolleyes)

(I really begun to wonder how you would sucessfully claok itself ::sneaky2 !)

Would a neutrino detector be of any real use (and it's looking like probably not) ?

FR

[Datsun]

A fusion reaction in stars is how stars make neutrinos.

see this picture http://www.pppl.gov/fusion_basics/pages/fu...tions_pict.html

this is the same reaction that takes place in a fusion reactor.

Datsun

[Grizzly]

(I really begun to wonder how you would sucessfully claok itself  !)

That was one thing about that I have been thinking a lot. A EK can project any shield to block electro-magnetic waves etc. A Legionaire is able to block kinetic energie and thermo-effects. But nobody is able to do so in a vehicle scale. Hybrids in Trinity still have to dive through the athmosphere with red hot noses, because they must shed orbital velocities through friction. They still have to use ceramic tills for insulation.

Why don´t build an bioapp to create a heat shield with an telekinetic barrier around that vessel. Or siphon that heat away through pyrokinesis. Hard radiation, quite strong in space, could be blocked through electrokinesis effects. A Clear could be able to enlarge his Psi Cloak enough, to hide a whole spaceship in it.

Example:

• • • • Psi Screen: This power is an alternative use of the Psi Cloak. The difference is the scale. Psi Screen affects not a person but a Vehicle. Cloaking a larger Vehicle is more difficult than cloaking a small Skimmer.

System : Spend two Psi points and roll Psi. Each net success after substracting for size equals a +1 difficulty applied to anyone trying to detect someone/-thing inside the vehicle or the vehicle itself psionically (if you roll three net successes, a character attempting Dowsing on your vehicle does so at an automatic +3 difficulty). Your character need not to concentrate to maintain it. The Sceen at this level lasts 10 times your characters Psi score in minutes. At five dots in the Mode, Psi Screen functions a number of hours equal to times your character's Psi score.

SIZE MODIFIER CHART

Modifier Mass Example

-2 difficulty ::confused ::smokin