64 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Stone Wall, on 08 August 2016 - 02:38 PM, said:

Because MW3 did it and we can't have that.

MW3 did none of that. You're thinking of MW4.

[Dino Might]

Davegt27, on 08 August 2016 - 07:57 AM, said:

active radar = sends out and receives radar pulses
passive radar = only receives radar emissions (so in theory your IFF transponder could be received if the frequency was known)

IFF = identify friend or foe = transponder beacon= transmits RF energy
ECM = or Electronic Counter Measures (takes many forms) it is deigned to capture the radar emissions analyze it and send a counter which is also a radar emission

so having passive radar would not reduce lock on range since it just receives radar emissions

because of complaints (crying) PGI has just about done away with radar in the game
so this game is pretty much line of sight (they play around with it turning it off or on depending how they feel)

you might have noticed there aren't many complaints about ECM any more (get rid of radar you don't need ECM)


HTHs

"Passive Radar" is really what we would call an RWR. It can't interrogate the signal to get detailed information on the emitter (range, speed, heading), but it does get bearing information and relative signal strength information - you cannot lock a target (for fire control solution) with "passive radar." We use a gross simplification that we call "passive radar" as a low-power radar because people don't want to bother with a proper RWR implementation, which would be lightyears beyond what we have now.

Also, those worried about impact to LRMs, I hear you. That's why I recommended sweeping LRM changes as well to get them in line with a higher skill ceiling and much better implementation with the improved sensor system.

Edited by Dino Might, 08 August 2016 - 04:11 PM.

[Lyoto Machida]

Deathlike, on 07 August 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

It's Lostech.

More or less...the guy who coded the radar system is no longer with the company.

[Stone Wall]

Deathlike, on 08 August 2016 - 02:39 PM, said:

MW3 did none of that. You're thinking of MW4.

You didn't play MW3 enough or you forgot since it's been 17 years ago. Read under Radar.

http://www.crayven.n...echbay/mw3.html

[Tarl Cabot]

Does it really matter if most are not hitting the R key ?

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 08 August 2016 - 04:37 PM.

[MechWarrior319348]

I dont think PGI knows how radar works in a real world scenario. If they were to study what we have now, then they would develop a better prediction of what sensors are capable of in the future.... 3051 or whatever.

They should take a more realistic approach on radar.

[Deathlike]

Stone Wall, on 08 August 2016 - 04:09 PM, said:

You didn't play MW3 enough or you forgot since it's been 17 years ago. Read under Radar.

http://www.crayven.n...echbay/mw3.html

It was not emphasized, nor really used in MW3... online or not.

[Stone Wall]

Deathlike, on 08 August 2016 - 07:17 PM, said:

It was not emphasized, nor really used in MW3... online or not.

Yeah no one had a use for it. Durgan City was probably the only map that it would be viable in.

[Snowbluff]

Oh god this is so stupid.

Okay, it's questionable if the mechs even HAVE radar warning receivers. As far as I can tell mechs detect missile using their data link and track their possible targets with active radar. There is NO VALUE in a mech of this size shutting down it's sensors, because the radar returns are on the ******* HUGE end of things. This isn't fighter jet combat where you're trying to hit fast moving targets from much farther out than you can see with your Mark 1 Eyeball and maybe some of those targets are shaped and coated/skinned in a way that makes them harder to detect with radar. The only reason a mech doesn't pick up on radar when shut down because the sensor fusion marks it as a defeated/inactive target if their isn't a nuclear fusion reaction on the ******* HUGE scale.

I don't buy needing radar to aim, either. That's just not like any kind of vehicle using anything outside of missiles. The radar would be used for zeroing the weapons together for convergence for better pinpoint accuracy, but the weapons would operate fine otherwise.

Edited by Snowbluff, 08 August 2016 - 08:18 PM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 08 August 2016 - 02:15 AM, said:

they fired the guy who could read the code...

dunno ppl accept that as the excuse to why we cant have lbx ammo switching....



to understand the guy you quoted, go here http://mwomercs.com/...of-actual-road/

He's used to being wrong to say the least

Wasn't wrong, and i proved it. Stay salty.

on another note, i thought i read it somewhere but russ had plans on implementing something like a passive radar.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 08 August 2016 - 08:38 PM.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

What I want for a feature is the ability to turn off when ignored people quote things you say

I dont care what they have to say, I have them on ignore for a reason lol

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 08 August 2016 - 08:40 PM.

[BLOOD WOLF]

Dillion Harper, on 08 August 2016 - 06:40 PM, said:

I dont think PGI knows how radar works in a real world scenario. If they were to study what we have now, then they would develop a better prediction of what sensors are capable of in the future.... 3051 or whatever.

They should take a more realistic approach on radar.

well, this would actually depend on what radars could do in the BT universe. Even if it was 3050, the way radar would work doesnt change much on a fundamental level. as far as i know at least from what i read, even though their are differnt devices.

To be honest from what i read here, some people might be making radar seem more complicated than it is. the concern would be, could they implement a change that would be better than what we have now.

I am on the side that as far as i can tell the way you get information is okay for the game. Could their be different way to get info sure.

[Dino Might]

Snowbluff, on 08 August 2016 - 08:16 PM, said:

Oh god this is so stupid.

Okay, it's questionable if the mechs even HAVE radar warning receivers. As far as I can tell mechs detect missile using their data link and track their possible targets with active radar. There is NO VALUE in a mech of this size shutting down it's sensors, because the radar returns are on the ******* HUGE end of things. This isn't fighter jet combat where you're trying to hit fast moving targets from much farther out than you can see with your Mark 1 Eyeball and maybe some of those targets are shaped and coated/skinned in a way that makes them harder to detect with radar. The only reason a mech doesn't pick up on radar when shut down because the sensor fusion marks it as a defeated/inactive target if their isn't a nuclear fusion reaction on the ******* HUGE scale.

I don't buy needing radar to aim, either. That's just not like any kind of vehicle using anything outside of missiles. The radar would be used for zeroing the weapons together for convergence for better pinpoint accuracy, but the weapons would operate fine otherwise.

Real vehicles use radar guided guns. ZSU23 and Gepard AAA are an example. Is not just for missiles. The radar is all about getting detailed target info (speed, heading) for a fire control solution using whatever weapon you want. How do you think targeting computers work?

Also, depending on aspect and coating, a mech radar cross section may be small enough to be confused with ground clutter, especially given the low speeds it is moving. This would be even more interesting, to purposely model pulse doppler reject, giving a mech reason to go slower (to remain more stealthy).

Edited by Dino Might, 08 August 2016 - 09:11 PM.

[Snowbluff]

Dino Might, on 08 August 2016 - 09:05 PM, said:

Real vehicles use radar guided guns. ZSU23 and Gepard AAA are an example. Is not just for missiles. The radar is all about getting detailed target info (speed, heading) for a fire control solution using whatever weapon you want. How do you think targeting computers work?

Those specific kinds of weapons don't fire without their targeting computers? Do they have to fire in such close quarters? Are you fighting an aircraft?

I mean, you make a good point for maybe a rifleman, which shares a role for Anti-air like those vehicles, but that's for an entirely different role, range, speed of target, compared to a ground to ground role used by a vast majority of the mechs in the game.

That is to say, if you can get a mech to hit another mech at 500 meters without assistance, even when using a weapon that hits at the speed of light, you're too ****** of a shot to have made it into the training program. Which is my point: mechs don't need their radar to hit things anymore than an MBT does (but will need the targeting computers built in "anti-bumpiness" systems/gyros if moving like a tank would).

Quote

Also, depending on aspect and coating, a mech radar cross section may be small enough to be confused with ground clutter, especially given the low speeds it is moving. This would be even more interesting, to purposely model pulse doppler reject, giving a mech reason to go slower (to remain more stealthy).

At 20 meters tall, no shaping conducive to the purpose (lots of corners, exposed weaponry, and surfaces right down to instruments in the cockpit) and no indication that these machine are built out of anything other than steel and steel based composites (which make you count as bigger, so the opposite of RAM), you are basically getting a perfect return at all times.

I think they best you could do would look like a Stalker with internal weapons bays (which would be like the missile doors on the Archer/Catapult), with a RAM armor of some kind (I think TT has rules for that). Of course, I see 3 issues.
1) Legs aren't really ideal. This works for aircraft because being both aerodynamic and reflecting radar suitably work together well. You would have to work on low observability on all sides, which sounds difficult with the legs. I mean, it would have to be modeled in a way that the dynamic positioning of the joints and angles of the surfaces wouldn't degrade the functioning of the stealth shaping.
2) The "stealthy" armor would obviously be way less optimized to defend against both PEW (pew pew lasers) and KEW (dakka) than the steel armor.
3) The fusion reactor and weapon's systems would give off a really bad IR return that would be easy to spot at the ranges mechs operate. The Sensor package on mechs do include IRST/FLIR, which is used with the enhanced imaging view.

Stealthy mechs are hardy to do. :'(

Edited by Snowbluff, 08 August 2016 - 10:03 PM.

[Davegt27]

the AC130 has F15 radar

thought you should know

[Snowbluff]

Davegt27, on 08 August 2016 - 09:56 PM, said:

the AC130 has F15 radar

thought you should know

And your point it? Do the guns require it to fire?

[Davegt27]

to be honest I don't remember, older weapons systems like the F4 no, even the missiles did not need radar lock
some of the new ones require radar lock for missiles

given the stupidity of modern systems my guess would be yes lol

[Snowbluff]

Davegt27, on 08 August 2016 - 10:17 PM, said:

to be honest I don't remember, older weapons systems like the F4 no, even the missiles did not need radar lock
some of the new ones require radar lock for missiles

given the stupidity of modern systems my guess would be yes lol

I don't think so. I mean, even if you think newer systems are dumb, the AC130 isn't super new, and I think it's not even a modern AESA radar.

The F4 also had heat seekers, right? I mean, I heard back in the day they were janky, but if you could get behind someone and could get the missile to rack their exhaust they could work. The new ones are much better.

[EvilCow]

OP: good question...

Why?

[MechWarrior319348]

Here is the stuff that is available to the civilian population. Quaintish, but maybe not to everyone. Don't forget to update your info every so often.


They say the word "radar" like 900000000000000000000 times in this video.

Edited by Dillion Harper, 08 August 2016 - 10:30 PM.