It's not an example of not detecting it at all, though. Nor of stealth. Nor of spacecraft.
In fact, it doesn't apply to the discussion in any meaningful way.
Wikipedia is a perfectly fine source of information as far as I'm concerned, though.
Hans
Magical Traveller starship heat sinks discovered?
- Thread starter navanod
- Start date
It's not an example of not detecting it at all, though. Nor of stealth. Nor of spacecraft.
In fact, it doesn't apply to the discussion in any meaningful way.
Wikipedia is a perfectly fine source of information as far as I'm concerned, though.
Hans
And I pointed out in rather grand detail in the real world exactly how that can be done. In short you radiate the false signal and a higher intensity than the real one and hope that they stop looking after they get the first spectrum.
I was using that as an example of how important the Human element in a Detection system is. So far many people have been arguing that all you need is Detection and after that everything is simple. I've been saying that just because you've detected doesn't mean that you know what to do with it but people keep trying to make that point seem insignificant. For a defender operating a Detection&Identification System, the Operator is one of the weakest links and therefore a smart attacker does recon and research on that element in order to exploit it.
What false signal? There is no object in space that emits a stronger signal than a spacecraft.
Hans
A bigger spacecraft? a half dozen scouts looking like cruiser squadron is a pretty good feint...
Well, no. What we've been arguing is that there is no way to not be detected.
But, yes, once you are detected as a spacecraft, everything is pretty simple for the defender. There are ways to overcome the defender's advantage (mostly bribery and corruption), but none of them depends on stealth[*].
Stealth: 2: the act or action of proceeding furtively, secretly, or imperceptibly <the state moves by stealth to gather information — Nat Hentoff>
-- as defined by Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary
Hans
It happens.
And then there are the near misses. So losing and not seeing planes does happen.
Now speaking as someone who does my fair share of watch standing being a security system dispatcher, let me tell you false alarms are far, far more common than real alarms. I have in my twenty years I have gotten kinda crispy at times and even when I am not I tend to let some stuff go until the expected cancel comes in.
So, I have to side with the folks who are saying that there may be no stealth in space, but that doesn't make for perfect detection, identification and prosecution. But then, they too talk of the human factor messing up the perfect physics and no one wants to give them the time of day so I expect to also be poo-pooed. Still I had to try.
In this I speak not as a player trying to get over on the Ref, but as a Ref giving players a chnce to have some fun.
Laterness,
Craig.
Actually, I saw a PBS/BBC program that dealt with a mid-air collision between a passenger and cargo plane in the Netherlands due to the single controller losing the passenger plane while he was standing watch on two ATC consoles while the other controller was on break. And this was after he contact with the pax plane.
And then there are the near misses. So losing and not seeing planes does happen.
Now speaking as someone who does my fair share of watch standing being a security system dispatcher, let me tell you false alarms are far, far more common than real alarms. I have in my twenty years I have gotten kinda crispy at times and even when I am not I tend to let some stuff go until the expected cancel comes in.
So, I have to side with the folks who are saying that there may be no stealth in space, but that doesn't make for perfect detection, identification and prosecution. But then, they too talk of the human factor messing up the perfect physics and no one wants to give them the time of day so I expect to also be poo-pooed. Still I had to try.
In this I speak not as a player trying to get over on the Ref, but as a Ref giving players a chnce to have some fun.
Laterness,
Craig.
Hi,
And/or a jammer or decoy craft/ probe either sending out false signals or a signal strong enough to overpower the defenders sensors.
Hi,
Not really. The overpowering of a set of sensors by one jamming aircraft (or for our case, perhaps a drone) can mask other craft/vessels, rendering these other craft hidden or hard to detect, or in some ways giving them a stealth-like capability.
And yet no where in that definition does it say that it HAS to be "Invisible" or "Undetectable" does it?
Furtive or Secretly, could just as well mean something visible and yet unrecognized for what it truly is ...
We've reached the point where I can reply to the recurring arguments by cutting and pasting from past posts. When a discussion devolves to that level, I usually realize that Life is too short and quit.
I do reserve the right to snipe at particularily egregious inanities, but otherwise I'm done here.
Hans
Rigel Stardin
SOC-13
This will probably get lost in the shuffle of the present discussion. However, I’m going to throw this out there since it came up in another thread about Fusion reactors.
Gravitronics plays an important part in the power generation of a Traveller Starship. It compresses the Fusionable material to the point where it becomes a micro star within the reactor chamber. Nuclear Dampers control the reaction during the power plant’s operating cycle. I bring this up because it is one way of explaining why there is no excess heat escaping the reactor.
Now, if I remember my high school physics, Absolute Zero is where all molecular activity ceases. Therefore one must assume Nuclear Dampers can bring about the same result. I state this because if you take the literal meaning of Nuclear Damper, it means to limit or deter nuclear reaction. This solves the need for coolant in Traveller Power Plants because the heat is being deterred by the damping field inside the reactor.
If you take this explanation for how a power plant control the heat produced inside the reactor you can make two deductions. The first is you can make the outside of the reactor whatever temperature you want. And the second is, Nuclear Dampers are not only projectors but fields as well. Under this model, we know the Nuclear Damping Field allows for power generation within the reactor chamber. It wouldn’t be hard to produce such a field around a starship if this technology exists in Traveller.
Another thing which hasn’t been brought up in this discussion is Black Globes. My only information on the subject comes from Larry Niven’s Mote in the Eye of God. They absorb energy from attacker’s weapons. If they absorb energy then they would also act like a cloaking device. They would also be invisible to most sensing devices since any active detection system would be absorbed by the globe and not reflected back to the receiver.
Gravitronics plays an important part in the power generation of a Traveller Starship. It compresses the Fusionable material to the point where it becomes a micro star within the reactor chamber. Nuclear Dampers control the reaction during the power plant’s operating cycle. I bring this up because it is one way of explaining why there is no excess heat escaping the reactor.
Now, if I remember my high school physics, Absolute Zero is where all molecular activity ceases. Therefore one must assume Nuclear Dampers can bring about the same result. I state this because if you take the literal meaning of Nuclear Damper, it means to limit or deter nuclear reaction. This solves the need for coolant in Traveller Power Plants because the heat is being deterred by the damping field inside the reactor.
If you take this explanation for how a power plant control the heat produced inside the reactor you can make two deductions. The first is you can make the outside of the reactor whatever temperature you want. And the second is, Nuclear Dampers are not only projectors but fields as well. Under this model, we know the Nuclear Damping Field allows for power generation within the reactor chamber. It wouldn’t be hard to produce such a field around a starship if this technology exists in Traveller.
Another thing which hasn’t been brought up in this discussion is Black Globes. My only information on the subject comes from Larry Niven’s Mote in the Eye of God. They absorb energy from attacker’s weapons. If they absorb energy then they would also act like a cloaking device. They would also be invisible to most sensing devices since any active detection system would be absorbed by the globe and not reflected back to the receiver.
Ok, as this is a Traveller forum, I am going to chime in with a Traveller answer.
First, when a ship comes out of jump, its at the 100D limit. For an Earth sized world this is a mere 800 000 Miles away. According to game mechanics, it gives off a LOT of energy, energy which can be used to pinpoint its size and location. It is spotted. If it does not respond with its transponder codes, according to all that I have read, patrol craft are dispatched to see whats wrong, as if it doesn't respond, it is either a foe or a ship in trouble and in need of help. Also, secondary sensor readings will be made, including visual, and if its a warship, appropriate measures WILL be taken at that time. What those measure are depends upon the world in question, and can range from run and hide in a cave, to surrender, to launch a fleet to stop it, as well as anything in between.
Should the jump signature happen outside of the 100D limit and within sensor ranges ( 2 AU, AU being astronomical units, or 291 195 742 km or 185 811 614.4 miles ), then they will take a close look at the appearing object, and attempt to make contact. Should attempts to make contact fail, then a patrol craft will be dispatched if one is available to see if the ship is an enemy or in need of help.
Should the ship jump in outside of sensor range, and try to make itself look like ...whatever... and coast in, its sudden appearance in sensor range (when it arrives) will be noted, its trajectory logged and it will be studied, as it could be an extinction level event for the world in question. That self same patrol ship will probably also be launched to go check it out as well.
Now before you say something about "operator error" or such, this is all automated, with multiple redundancies, and with calls going out to those who DO care if anything new shows up. Anything at all.
Every nation on this planet tracks anything larger than a bolt that is anywhere near our planet as a matter of course (and yes, we even track a glove that was left in orbit too). any object regardless of its apparent size will be checked out, studied, analysed and charted.
This is just how things are done, and I do not expect them to lighten up the way things are done, ever. ALso as a former member of SAC, MAC, AMC, and ATOCs, I know for what I am talking about.
First, when a ship comes out of jump, its at the 100D limit. For an Earth sized world this is a mere 800 000 Miles away. According to game mechanics, it gives off a LOT of energy, energy which can be used to pinpoint its size and location. It is spotted. If it does not respond with its transponder codes, according to all that I have read, patrol craft are dispatched to see whats wrong, as if it doesn't respond, it is either a foe or a ship in trouble and in need of help. Also, secondary sensor readings will be made, including visual, and if its a warship, appropriate measures WILL be taken at that time. What those measure are depends upon the world in question, and can range from run and hide in a cave, to surrender, to launch a fleet to stop it, as well as anything in between.
Should the jump signature happen outside of the 100D limit and within sensor ranges ( 2 AU, AU being astronomical units, or 291 195 742 km or 185 811 614.4 miles ), then they will take a close look at the appearing object, and attempt to make contact. Should attempts to make contact fail, then a patrol craft will be dispatched if one is available to see if the ship is an enemy or in need of help.
Should the ship jump in outside of sensor range, and try to make itself look like ...whatever... and coast in, its sudden appearance in sensor range (when it arrives) will be noted, its trajectory logged and it will be studied, as it could be an extinction level event for the world in question. That self same patrol ship will probably also be launched to go check it out as well.
Now before you say something about "operator error" or such, this is all automated, with multiple redundancies, and with calls going out to those who DO care if anything new shows up. Anything at all.
Every nation on this planet tracks anything larger than a bolt that is anywhere near our planet as a matter of course (and yes, we even track a glove that was left in orbit too). any object regardless of its apparent size will be checked out, studied, analysed and charted.
This is just how things are done, and I do not expect them to lighten up the way things are done, ever. ALso as a former member of SAC, MAC, AMC, and ATOCs, I know for what I am talking about.
Hi,
With regards to the 100D jump limit, its my understanding that not all rules sets agree on this.
Also with respect to the tracking of orbital material, I believe that its not necessarily true that every nation on this planet tracks anything larger than a bolt (for example see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_debris ).
As for other issues, in general, for every measure someone will eventually devise a counter measure, and after that someone will come up with a counter-counter measure. As such, its not necessarily just an issue of looking for something out of the ordinary and reacting, but rather you may have to look at a bigger picture.
For instance, a clever opponent looking for info on a system's defenses could easily have two or more ships jump into a system. As one vessel goes through the motions of trying to appear to be a very normal free trader, the other could act suspiciously drawing the attention of the local defenses, allowing the first ship to track and analyze the in system responses. in this case, the one ship has gained some 'stealthiness' by simply looking normal while the other ship isn't being so "normal".
Other issues to also consider in a more war like setting would be trying to disorient the enemies sensors. Specifically, looking at modern police and special forces stuff from games, movies, and TV you can see how objects such as "flash bang" devices can get employed to disorient and/or overwhelm the senses/sensors on the other side. Similar tactics could also be used on a larger, Traveller ship combat scale to disorient or disable the sensors on a ship (or group of ships, satellites and drones) especially passive sensors which may be set to detect small scale visual or temperature differences, which may thus be quite susceptible to a large scale sudden surge.
In general, its also my understanding that on modern ocean going naval combat systems effort goes into trying to "fuse" all the data being received into a Common Operating Picture, which requires some powerful computing to bring all the data from all the different sensors together and resolve any anomalies. Tactics such as copying incoming "active sensor" energy (such as radar waves) and then either playing it back at a delay or perhaps transmitting it to another ship in your group to be played back can be used to cause false echoes and tracks on the defenders sensors, as well.
As such, it would seem to me that there are probably a lot of ways that a clever opponent could try and distract, disable or dupe a defenders sensors to limit the ability of the defender easily track and ID him (and vice versa).
To me, any such measure which may end up preventing you from looking like a threat or which aid in hiding you from enemy sensors and/or which may end up disabling or duping those sensors can help make your own forces more "stealthy" by their nature.
Last edited:
Here is a better link for you than a wikki link. http://orbitaldebris.jsc.nasa.gov/
And I should have said any nation with a space program tracks any object in the near Earth environment larger than a square cm. Not doing so could cost potential lives and billions of dollars in equipment.
As for larger objects, we keep close watch on everything else in our solar system that we can find because of the possibility that it might make us extinct.
As for how those in control of a system will react, will depend on the worlds government, and whatever Imperial presence is in system.
AFAIK all TRAVELLER systems have ships reentering real space at 100D or more, and never within that limit. You can jump out within that distance, but that can cause issues like mis-jumps. This is one of the primary tropes that makes Traveller, Traveller, and I would love to know what Traveller rules set does not include this.
Oh, and if the Nukes thrown around in traveller aren't flash bang enough, nothing is. As they have no effect on sensors in the rules, your flash bang in space wont work, I think because you just cant make one big enough. (Super Nova the local star maby?)
And I should have said any nation with a space program tracks any object in the near Earth environment larger than a square cm. Not doing so could cost potential lives and billions of dollars in equipment.
As for larger objects, we keep close watch on everything else in our solar system that we can find because of the possibility that it might make us extinct.
As for how those in control of a system will react, will depend on the worlds government, and whatever Imperial presence is in system.
AFAIK all TRAVELLER systems have ships reentering real space at 100D or more, and never within that limit. You can jump out within that distance, but that can cause issues like mis-jumps. This is one of the primary tropes that makes Traveller, Traveller, and I would love to know what Traveller rules set does not include this.
Oh, and if the Nukes thrown around in traveller aren't flash bang enough, nothing is. As they have no effect on sensors in the rules, your flash bang in space wont work, I think because you just cant make one big enough. (Super Nova the local star maby?)
Last edited:
First of all, Would you please be so kind as to tell the ones not used with sensors detection what ROW stand for?
If you depend on transponders, that can easily (when we talk about combat operations) be tampered with you nay be in atrouble quite early. I'd track and watch even those with "friendly" transponders...
Maybe they're just unskilled enough as for bein unable to repair it...And if so, they probably wellcome this lot of attention, as they probably will need some help.
FUlly agreed here
As I said, I'm quite unfamiliar with detection systems, so let me ask: how long had it taken to get those pictures? Those small asteroids did nothing to avoid those images, and we've probably had time to take them in detail and study them. That's not the case if you're concerned about if it might have hostile intention.
If you depend on transponders, that can easily (when we talk about combat operations) be tampered with you nay be in atrouble quite early. I'd track and watch even those with "friendly" transponders...
Maybe they're just unskilled enough as for bein unable to repair it...And if so, they probably wellcome this lot of attention, as they probably will need some help.
FUlly agreed here
As I said, I'm quite unfamiliar with detection systems, so let me ask: how long had it taken to get those pictures? Those small asteroids did nothing to avoid those images, and we've probably had time to take them in detail and study them. That's not the case if you're concerned about if it might have hostile intention.
Finding an object is reasonably quick - each pair of images is a couple hours dirtside. Finding the orbits is much longer - you need the same object over a span of weeks. Faster moving objects take less time to plot. Three separate image sets, minimum.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
I believe your point is that not all systems seem to require you to pop out at the 100d limit - you could drop out further away. You might be right that some versions don't explicitly say you will always be at the 100d limit, but I think that is an assumption many make (based on the other versions that do, and the wording in the versions that don't). If you have to pop out at the 100d limit, then stealth becomes much harder. (Keep in mind, though, that you could jump to the 100d limit of some other body, then maneuver in from there - which takes us back to the discussion as it was a moment ago.......)
More correctly (in the normal usage), stealth is technically defeating expected sensors. If you're relying on the sensor operator to be an idiot/bored/asleep, that isn't stealth, it's hope, and hope isn't a plan.
It still isn't stealth. It's distraction, but it certainly isn't "furtive" or "secretive". The radar *jammers* on those bombers are for once they are detected. If you're trying to sneak in, jamming a radar or other sensor is a sure way to get everyone's attention. Again, that might be your intent - to get them looking somewhere else, perhaps - but it isn't really "stealth".
This is the difference between a pickpocket and someone doing sleight of hand. The sleight of hand is saying "watch this stuff over here and not over here" as he pulls an egg out your ear, while the pickpocket is trying to have you never even know your wallet is gone (until it's too late). (And, yes, sometimes they use distraction, but it's dangerous since you probably saw them if they bumped into you or such.)
The point folks are trying to make is that a human presence in space requires bringing along things that make you very visible out there: heat, atmo, mobility, etc. To cover those things up is VERY hard, nigh unto impossible. To dupe someone into thinking it's something else - possible, but also hard. Mainly because most benign things in space are pretty darn cold and dark and don't give off a lot of electromagnetic noise. You're in a warm (hot, relatively), metal, noisy can that moves in the wrong way - you stand out... if someone has the capability and is looking for you.
You can try to make yourself look like an asteroid - but that doesn't get you much of anywhere, unless your job is to passively collect information. You have to move to get anywhere (like attacking the defenders or getting to a planet to smuggle stuff), and that opens up those problems of standing out. Your best option isn't really stealth (by the definition above) but pretending to be something you're not - let them see you, but not see who you really are/what you're really doing.
And, this is the point. There isn't any way to hide yourself in space, short of getting behind something else or going totally cold and dark (no work and no power generation). However, that doesn't mean you *will* be detected or IDed in a proper fashion.
As much back and forth as I've seen on this - along with plenty of "you don't know what you're talking about" - I'm happy to see that noone has called anyone else a poopy-head or ranted about how they're never coming back. Thank y'all for keeping it civil (even if it has drifted from one orbit to another
).
Sensors In Traveller
Real World sensors are not the same as Traveller sensors. For one thing, I suspect Traveller sensors have a wider arc. Even so, I think most ships are detectable, but not identifiable beyond established sensor ranges. For another thing, real world sensors wouldn't use six-sided dice when they try to detect things.
TTB has positive ship identification at 2 LS, for [small] military craft, and subsequent tracking up to 6 LS.
Though the actual range is not important, what is important is to see the intent of GDW - ship identification is the main issue. What's more, ship identification is not possible until the ship is practically at your front door.
So we might know someone's out there, and we know where he's going, but we won't really know who he is until we get him within sensor range.
Something like this was done, by Bruce Allen Macintosh, for T4, back in 1998 or 1999. Comprehensive sensor rules. I find them completely opaque.
Real World sensors are not the same as Traveller sensors. For one thing, I suspect Traveller sensors have a wider arc. Even so, I think most ships are detectable, but not identifiable beyond established sensor ranges. For another thing, real world sensors wouldn't use six-sided dice when they try to detect things.
TTB has positive ship identification at 2 LS, for [small] military craft, and subsequent tracking up to 6 LS.
Though the actual range is not important, what is important is to see the intent of GDW - ship identification is the main issue. What's more, ship identification is not possible until the ship is practically at your front door.
So we might know someone's out there, and we know where he's going, but we won't really know who he is until we get him within sensor range.
Something like this was done, by Bruce Allen Macintosh, for T4, back in 1998 or 1999. Comprehensive sensor rules. I find them completely opaque.
Last edited:
