Wormhole Assault: MA Style

ThinksMarkedly wrote:That depends on how far from attack that bowshock is detected. Even a peace time Navy can go to battlestations and raise interposing wedges (if they're on standby) in a few minutes.

BTW, attacking the MBS reminds me to compare the performance of the Oyster Bay weapons to the Hastas at Galton: in one of those, no bowshocks were detected. So either they were at such lower speeds that their bowshocks weren't detectable or the technology was meaningfully different to permit that. I think it's the former: the torpedoes and missile pods were sufficiently slowed to not show up in sensors.

But if it is the latter, then it's yet another point where Galton didn't have the technology that was used to attack the MBS and Grayson.

cthia wrote:That is not what I meant. I am positing that during peacetime only passive scans are being carried out. I don't think passive scans will detect a bowshock at all. I am talking about Oyster-Bay-like results.

Why would you posit that? A bow-shock is energetic, so can be seen in both optical and radio wavelengths. That is what drew attention at Galton; if it had been an active scan, then the bow-shock was not necessary to the discovery.

Anyway, I expect active scans ARE done in peacetime to protect against large meteorites or debris hitting stations or planets.

cthia wrote:That is not what I meant. I am positing that during peacetime only passive scans are being carried out.

Says who?

I don't think passive scans will detect a bowshock at all. I am talking about Oyster-Bay-like results.

I think it's the other way around. I think it was the passive sensors that did detect the bowshock. Or, explained differently: the bowshock was an event that generated and broadcast energy, so a sufficiently sensitive sensor would pick it up (passive). It did not require a beam from the sensor to hit it and come back (active).

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

cthia wrote:That is not what I meant. I am positing that during peacetime only passive scans are being carried out.

Says who?

I don't think passive scans will detect a bowshock at all. I am talking about Oyster-Bay-like results.

I think it's the other way around. I think it was the passive sensors that did detect the bowshock. Or, explained differently: the bowshock was an event that generated and broadcast energy, so a sufficiently sensitive sensor would pick it up (passive). It did not require a beam from the sensor to hit it and come back (active).

My two cents.

Active scans are not weapons by themselves, for the most part. But I do not think one would want to be too close to the output when the systems are activated. I do not think a human body that is on another ship's surface carrying out repairs would want to be hit by the beam. And I always wondered about the safety of -- or of any adverse effects to -- the human body when the ship is scanning for escape pods or flying Dutchmen. I do not think one would want to light up a school bus that is in close proximity with an active scan. An active scan "can take the paint off the hull." So, active scans are not the normal peace time operating mode. Not to mention the wear and tear on the system. Ordinarily, active scans are initiated under battle conditions when most civilian vessels are out of the area. Or they are directed at specific areas when something seems awry. I hesitate to take at face value that a bowshock would be detected by less than active scans under full battle conditions.

At Galton the systems went to full active scans. You tend to do that when invading a system.

cthia wrote:Active scans are not weapons by themselves, for the most part. But I do not think one would want to be too close to the output when the systems are activated. I do not think a human body that is on another ship's surface carrying out repairs would want to be hit by the beam. And I always wondered about the safety of -- or of any adverse effects to -- the human body when the ship is scanning for escape pods or flying Dutchmen. I do not think one would want to light up a school bus that is in close proximity with an active scan. An active scan "can take the paint off the hull."

Agreed so far.

So, active scans are not the normal peace time operating mode.

Here I disagree because you came to a conclusion not supported by the evidence. You've shown that active scans can be harmful at certain power levels and certain distances. That does not imply that they're always harmful to everyone just by being used.

One may be able to step down an active scanner. The fact that they talk about using a power level that will strip off the paint implies that it's not the norm to use such level, meaning that there are at least two levels. And also so long as you're not standing right in front of it, you're probably fine. Air Traffic Control radar systems are very powerful radio waves and I wouldn't want to stand in front of such an emitter, but I also wouldn't want them to be turned off.

Not to mention the wear and tear on the system. Ordinarily, active scans are initiated under battle conditions when most civilian vessels are out of the area. Or they are directed at specific areas when something seems awry.

Wear and tear I agree. Moreover, I'd expect that civilian scanning systems such as our regular ATC radars are in use most or all of the time, with military versions used sparingly or only in restricted areas. They may be used randomly too, to keep a potential enemy on their toes or simply to test that they still work every month or so (or both).

But they may want to pay the price of the wear and tear. It's simply a matter of money and you're better of safe than sorry. This in turn means it is a political decision rather than a military one.

I hesitate to take at face value that a bowshock would be detected by less than active scans under full battle conditions.

At Galton the systems went to full active scans. You tend to do that when invading a system.

That doesn't mean anything. The fact that you did detect when actively scanning does not imply you wouldn't if you weren't.

I am comparing the bowshock to the shockwaves generated by supersonic flight: they are themselves energetic and responsible for the double-boom that you hear when a supersonic aircraft flies by. You don't need a radar or sonar to hear it.

This does open the door for there being a technological way to dampen them. We the readers know that Galton did not have the best stealth technology, so it's possible the MAN in Darius does have it. But my point in bringing that up was that if the Oyster Bay weapons did use such technology, it was not in evidence in Galton, so those weapons would necessarily have to have been built and developed elsewhere.

Active sensors are a ReceivedPower=(RadiatedPower)^1/4 problem.

So if you want to reach twice as far you need to increase the radiated power by 16 times. If you want to go from the million km in HotQ to 25 million km you need to increase your radiated power by 390,625 times.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

cthia wrote:Active scans are not weapons by themselves, for the most part. But I do not think one would want to be too close to the output when the systems are activated. I do not think a human body that is on another ship's surface carrying out repairs would want to be hit by the beam. And I always wondered about the safety of -- or of any adverse effects to -- the human body when the ship is scanning for escape pods or flying Dutchmen. I do not think one would want to light up a school bus that is in close proximity with an active scan. An active scan "can take the paint off the hull."

Agreed so far.

cthia wrote:So, active scans are not the normal peace time operating mode.

Here I disagree because you came to a conclusion not supported by the evidence. You've shown that active scans can be harmful at certain power levels and certain distances. That does not imply that they're always harmful to everyone just by being used.

It is supported by logic.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:One may be able to step down an active scanner. The fact that they talk about using a power level that will strip off the paint implies that it's not the norm to use such level, meaning that there are at least two levels. And also so long as you're not standing right in front of it, you're probably fine. Air Traffic Control radar systems are very powerful radio waves and I wouldn't want to stand in front of such an emitter, but I also wouldn't want them to be turned off.

I agree to the several intensities theory. But if you dial the scan down it will be useless against stealthed systems or attacks from afar.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

cthia wrote:Not to mention the wear and tear on the system. Ordinarily, active scans are initiated under battle conditions when most civilian vessels are out of the area. Or they are directed at specific areas when something seems awry.

Wear and tear I agree. Moreover, I'd expect that civilian scanning systems such as our regular ATC radars are in use most or all of the time, with military versions used sparingly or only in restricted areas. They may be used randomly too, to keep a potential enemy on their toes or simply to test that they still work every month or so (or both).

But they may want to pay the price of the wear and tear. It's simply a matter of money and you're better of safe than sorry. This in turn means it is a political decision rather than a military one.

Not exactly. They may want to pay the cost, but they would not want to pay the price. The price would be a system that is not functioning when you need it!


Waka Waka Waka Waka Waka!

That is the annoying sound of Pac-Man gobbling up Cogswell Cogs and Spacely Sprockets. No navy can remain at Defcon indefinitely. And no navy can afford to leave the "high beams" on constantly. Active scanning is not a toggle switch you'd want to leave in the On position. You don't leave your floodlights on all of the time at home. Even at night. It gets to be expensive and time consuming. You'd be replacing bulbs every other week, or more. Active scans are mostly performed under battle conditions. Mostly. It is also kind of rude to other ships in the area. "Turn your damn high beams off!" If they are constantly on, you won't have them when you need them.

There probably are areas where there are a high concentration of these beams being used, but I bet these highly saturated areas are not normally traveled. Why would forts bombard the area around the junction with these beams? They have to be uncomfortable to passenger ships passing through an area that is highly saturated by these beams.

At any rate, the accompanying human element is being missed again. In peacetime, no one is looking for a bowshock. People are at ease sharing cake and talking about life. And two of your key officers are not flirting with the regs by "chatting" in the coat closet.

Under battle conditions the landscape is not littered with interference by all kinds of other spacecraft tickling your sensors so that the most mundane of readings might slip through.

ThinksMarkedly wrote:

cthia wrote:I hesitate to take at face value that a bowshock would be detected by less than active scans under full battle conditions.

At Galton the systems went to full active scans. You tend to do that when invading a system.

That doesn't mean anything. The fact that you did detect when actively scanning does not imply you wouldn't if you weren't.

I am comparing the bowshock to the shockwaves generated by supersonic flight: they are themselves energetic and responsible for the double-boom that you hear when a supersonic aircraft flies by. You don't need a radar or sonar to hear it.

This does open the door for there being a technological way to dampen them. We the readers know that Galton did not have the best stealth technology, so it's possible the MAN in Darius does have it. But my point in bringing that up was that if the Oyster Bay weapons did use such technology, it was not in evidence in Galton, so those weapons would necessarily have to have been built and developed elsewhere.

See above.

If we can ignore the danger of meteorites and debris and do not need to monitor ships or shuttles moving without a wedge (only tugs are allowed to use their wedge near space stations), then there is no need to use active scans during peacetime.

PS: The hull of a space ship should behave as a "Faraday Cage", so passengers on a liner should not be inconvenienced by a radar beam.

tlb wrote:If we can ignore the danger of meteorites and debris and do not need to monitor ships or shuttles moving without a wedge (only tugs are allowed to use their wedge near space stations), then there is no need to use active scans during peacetime.

PS: The hull of a space ship should behave as a "Faraday Cage", so passengers on a liner should not be inconvenienced by a radar beam.

But if the radar signal is on the order of an exawatt in order to pick up stealthy stuff at tens of millions of KM this will not be good for ships electronics if you are a couple of hundred thousand KM away.

kzt wrote:But if the radar signal is on the order of an exawatt in order to pick up stealthy stuff at tens of millions of KM this will not be good for ships electronics if you are a couple of hundred thousand KM away.

That only means you put the deep space search stations, looking for things coming in from the equivalent of the Oort Cloud, out further and away from shipping lanes. Then you monitor the radar units on ships in those lanes.

I am not saying this is specific to trying to stop the next Yawata Strike; instead I am saying that there is always active scanning going on just as a matter of traffic and hazard control. This is distinct from anyone saying that active scans are only done in wartime conditions.

PS: Anyway, once a bow shock wave starts the weapon is no longer stealthy.

tlb wrote:That only means you put the deep space search stations, looking for things coming in from the equivalent of the Oort Cloud, out further and away from shipping lanes. Then you monitor the radar units on ships in those lanes.

I am not saying this is specific to trying to stop the next Yawata Strike; instead I am saying that there is always active scanning going on just as a matter of traffic and hazard control. This is distinct from anyone saying that active scans are only done in wartime conditions.

PS: Anyway, once a bow shock wave starts the weapon is no longer stealthy.

And I'd assume Honorverse radar would have at least as much control over beam shape and instantanious power as our military radars have today.

So if there is a nearby ship that they've been tracking they can automatically dial back the radar emissions when moving the beam across it (to avoid "cooking" its electronics) -- but still pump out max power when pointing at ostensibly empty parts of space.

Sure, that's create a radar 'shadow' behind each of those closer ships -- but you'd have some shadow anyway even at full power as the energy's not going to punch through the ship and give you returns from anything directly behind it (so turning down the power just makes that shadow slightly broader). But that's one more reason you'd have multiple platforms with overlapping coverage, so any radar 'shadows' don't overlap and even with objects between one platform and a given point of space you'd have another platform off to some side that should have a clear line of sight on it.