Classic Traveller Sensor Rules

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ptah:
On cost, how about a geometric scale.

Class I cost N
Class II cost 2N
Class III cost 4N
Class IV cost 8N

I'm in general agreement with this too. Hit me with some number, bro. What do you think?

I'm thinking we need to keep things simple--

--like how about having the sensor packages be some percentage of the cost of the computer.

You buy a computer for your ship, you get Class I sensors as part of the deal.

(I've always envisioned CT computers to be "computer systems" on ships anyway--not just a single cpu, but a whole network system. The model number describes the "grade" of the entire ship's system.)

You want upgraded sensors? Class I not good enough for ya? Well, that'll cost you a little something extra.

I agree with Ran Targas point that civilian ships will not need great passive sensors, besides a cost savings maybe a dton savings? This may change things too much from CT though.

I had to disagree with Ran. See my post above.

Finally, a sensor "lock" I take it that which is sufficient to obtain a firing solution, which is more information than just detection.

Check out the rest of the rules I just posted. This is addressed.

A very long way of saying, could there be a target number/range, for just detecting something? ("Sir had a faint blip on the screen, bogey at 12-6, range 75, mass indeterminate. Should we launch a patrol?")

Yep. Check out the rules.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ptah:
On cost, how about a geometric scale.

Class I cost N
Class II cost 2N
Class III cost 4N
Class IV cost 8N

I'm in general agreement with this too. Hit me with some number, bro. What do you think?

I'm thinking we need to keep things simple--

--like how about having the sensor packages be some percentage of the cost of the computer.

You buy a computer for your ship, you get Class I sensors as part of the deal.

(I've always envisioned CT computers to be "computer systems" on ships anyway--not just a single cpu, but a whole network system. The model number describes the "grade" of the entire ship's system.)

You want upgraded sensors? Class I not good enough for ya? Well, that'll cost you a little something extra.

I agree with Ran Targas point that civilian ships will not need great passive sensors, besides a cost savings maybe a dton savings? This may change things too much from CT though.

I had to disagree with Ran. See my post above.

Finally, a sensor "lock" I take it that which is sufficient to obtain a firing solution, which is more information than just detection.

Check out the rest of the rules I just posted. This is addressed.

A very long way of saying, could there be a target number/range, for just detecting something? ("Sir had a faint blip on the screen, bogey at 12-6, range 75, mass indeterminate. Should we launch a patrol?")

Yep. Check out the rules.

 

[Supplement Four]

---RULES APPENDIX--- (page 1 of 1)


-----------------------------------------
GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT SENSORS

(This information is intended for GMs to add "color" and "atmosphere" to their games when using the sensor rules.)


Sensor Scans detect other vessels (and objects). A scan provides general information about the object scanned.

Sensor Locks provide detailed information about objects detected with the Sensor Scan.

The first thing a ship typically does when tumbling back into N-Space from a jump is conduct a Sensor Scan in order to detect any nearby objects.

Objects must be detected first from a Scan before they can be Locked.

Sensor Locks are required for an enemy vessel to be targeted in space combat.

Passive sensors can be used for both Sensor Scans and Sensor Locks, but Passive sensors are better suited to scans.

Some Active sensors can be used for both Sensor Scans and Sensor Locks, but most Active sensors are "directional" instead of "broadbeam" and therefore are only capable of Sensor Locks. Active sensors are better suited to Sensor Locks than Passive sensors, and Active sensors typically provide more detail about a detected object than a Passive Lock will provide.

Passive sensors typically have much greater range than Active sensors. (Active sensors must send a signal out and wait for it to bounce back before the return can be read. Passive sensors receive incoming signals in half the time.)

Passive sensors that can be used in both Sensor Scans and Sensor Locks have the capability of being focused in a narrow tight beam. For example, the Passive EMS sensor will receive incoming data omni-directionally when in Scan mode but can also be focused (as a telephoto lens used on a camera) on a narrow target. This latter setting of the sensor is used for Passive Sensor Locks.


-----------------------------------------
TYPES OF SENSORS

There are many types of sensors used in Traveller, and the list below is representative of what is available to a Traveller starship captain but not exhaustive.

The Active and Passive sensor packages listed in the sensor rules will typically incorporate each of these types of sensors in the two sensor arrays. The ship's computer functions in collecting data reported by the various sensors and presenting it in a form that is relatively easy to digest by the sensor operator. More powerful computer systems are better at this than computers with lower model numbers (thus the -6DM applied to Active or Passive targeting locks).


RADAR is an Active sensor that detects objects by emitting radio energy across wide angles before detecting that energy when it bounces back from distant objects. Radar can be used for Active Sensor Locks, but is most often used for Active Sensor Scans.


LADAR is a similar Active sensor to radar except that it uses a tight beam laser rather than radio energy to bounce light off a target. Sand from sandcasters can make use of a ladar less effective. And, ladar can only be used for Sensor Locks (not Sensor Scans).

(A situational DM a GM could spring on his players involves the ladar having to detect a target through a cloud of sand. In a case like this, the same -3DM used for the ship's laser weapons would be appropriate.)


HRT is a High-Resolution Thermal detecting device--a Passive sensor that detects targets by their emmitted infrared radiation (heat). HRT can be used for either a Passive Sensor Scan or a Passive Sensor Lock.


EMS Active is an advanced version of radar which incorporates the use of wavelengths other than radio and includes sophisticated computerized image enhancement of the electro-magnetic spectrum. EMS Active can be used as either an Active Sensor Scan or Active Sensor Lock.


EMS Passive is an advanced (incorporates a camera) passive sensor that has the capabilities of HRT plus EMS direction finders and computerized image enhancement. EMS can be used for either Passive Sensor Scans or Passive Sensor Locks.


DENSITOMETERS detect an object's natural gravity and by doing so locate and classify the object according it it's particular density type. Densitometers can be used for either Passive Sensor Scans or Passive Sensor Locks.


LASER SENSORS, RADAR DIRECTION FINDERS, RADIO DIRECTION FINDERS, and NEUTRINO SENSORS are all Passive sensors that can locate and classify energy emissions, indicating size and power level status. These sensors can all be used in Passive Sensor Scans but only the neutrino sensor can be used in a Passive Sensor Lock.


Other sensors in Traveller, those not listed here, are possible and available to starship captains when upgrading their ships.

GMs can consider the information in this appendix when describing sensor results to players.

For example, the densitomer, HRT, and EMS arrays are important to a Navigator when plotting a course through the dangerous electro-magnetic and gravitational jetties of the upper atmosphere of a gas giant when skimming fuel.

The ship's densitometer is relied upon heavily when the Navigator informs the captain that the ship has passed through a planet's 100 diameter gravitational zone.

When a player asks for range to a target, in effect, that information is being reported by the ladar when the ship is using Active sensors. Missiles use the ladar system as they fly towards their target.

A lot of color can be added to a game by a GM who has a grasp of what jobs for which these sensors can be used. Yet, the game rules are kept simple, so that the game proceeds at a fast, furious, but fun pace.


-----------------------------------------
HIGH GUARD

Can these sensor rules be used with the abstract system detailed in High Guard?

Yes.

Simply consider a sensor's medium and long range to correspond with the Short/Long ranges used in the HG combat system.


-----------------------------------------
OPTIONAL SENSOR DMs

Some GMs will want to incorporate DMs to the sensor task other than what is listed in the rules.

Here are some modifiers that you may consider:

Configuration: A GM might find it interesting to draw a silhouette of a target vessel, handing that to a player, stating, "This is what appears on your sensor panel."

This is called an RCS, a Radar Cross-Section, and here are a few DMs for you to consider based on High Guard hull shapes.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">+0DM Sphere
+1DM Needle/Wedge/Cone/Cylinder/Dome/Disc
+2DM Box/Close Structure
+3DM Slab</pre>[/QUOTE]Orientation: Some GMs might consider a target vessel's orientaton, with respect to the sensing ship, when sensor tasks are made. A bogey with drives facing the sensing ship is easier to detect than a target approaching bow-on.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">+0DM Bow-on
+1DM Port/Starboard/Dorsal/Ventral Profile
+2DM Aft-on</pre>[/QUOTE]Other/Different DMs to sensor throws are possible. These are just examples.

 

[Supplement Four]

---RULES APPENDIX--- (page 1 of 1)


-----------------------------------------
GENERAL INFORMATION ABOUT SENSORS

(This information is intended for GMs to add "color" and "atmosphere" to their games when using the sensor rules.)


Sensor Scans detect other vessels (and objects). A scan provides general information about the object scanned.

Sensor Locks provide detailed information about objects detected with the Sensor Scan.

The first thing a ship typically does when tumbling back into N-Space from a jump is conduct a Sensor Scan in order to detect any nearby objects.

Objects must be detected first from a Scan before they can be Locked.

Sensor Locks are required for an enemy vessel to be targeted in space combat.

Passive sensors can be used for both Sensor Scans and Sensor Locks, but Passive sensors are better suited to scans.

Some Active sensors can be used for both Sensor Scans and Sensor Locks, but most Active sensors are "directional" instead of "broadbeam" and therefore are only capable of Sensor Locks. Active sensors are better suited to Sensor Locks than Passive sensors, and Active sensors typically provide more detail about a detected object than a Passive Lock will provide.

Passive sensors typically have much greater range than Active sensors. (Active sensors must send a signal out and wait for it to bounce back before the return can be read. Passive sensors receive incoming signals in half the time.)

Passive sensors that can be used in both Sensor Scans and Sensor Locks have the capability of being focused in a narrow tight beam. For example, the Passive EMS sensor will receive incoming data omni-directionally when in Scan mode but can also be focused (as a telephoto lens used on a camera) on a narrow target. This latter setting of the sensor is used for Passive Sensor Locks.


-----------------------------------------
TYPES OF SENSORS

There are many types of sensors used in Traveller, and the list below is representative of what is available to a Traveller starship captain but not exhaustive.

The Active and Passive sensor packages listed in the sensor rules will typically incorporate each of these types of sensors in the two sensor arrays. The ship's computer functions in collecting data reported by the various sensors and presenting it in a form that is relatively easy to digest by the sensor operator. More powerful computer systems are better at this than computers with lower model numbers (thus the -6DM applied to Active or Passive targeting locks).


RADAR is an Active sensor that detects objects by emitting radio energy across wide angles before detecting that energy when it bounces back from distant objects. Radar can be used for Active Sensor Locks, but is most often used for Active Sensor Scans.


LADAR is a similar Active sensor to radar except that it uses a tight beam laser rather than radio energy to bounce light off a target. Sand from sandcasters can make use of a ladar less effective. And, ladar can only be used for Sensor Locks (not Sensor Scans).

(A situational DM a GM could spring on his players involves the ladar having to detect a target through a cloud of sand. In a case like this, the same -3DM used for the ship's laser weapons would be appropriate.)


HRT is a High-Resolution Thermal detecting device--a Passive sensor that detects targets by their emmitted infrared radiation (heat). HRT can be used for either a Passive Sensor Scan or a Passive Sensor Lock.


EMS Active is an advanced version of radar which incorporates the use of wavelengths other than radio and includes sophisticated computerized image enhancement of the electro-magnetic spectrum. EMS Active can be used as either an Active Sensor Scan or Active Sensor Lock.


EMS Passive is an advanced (incorporates a camera) passive sensor that has the capabilities of HRT plus EMS direction finders and computerized image enhancement. EMS can be used for either Passive Sensor Scans or Passive Sensor Locks.


DENSITOMETERS detect an object's natural gravity and by doing so locate and classify the object according it it's particular density type. Densitometers can be used for either Passive Sensor Scans or Passive Sensor Locks.


LASER SENSORS, RADAR DIRECTION FINDERS, RADIO DIRECTION FINDERS, and NEUTRINO SENSORS are all Passive sensors that can locate and classify energy emissions, indicating size and power level status. These sensors can all be used in Passive Sensor Scans but only the neutrino sensor can be used in a Passive Sensor Lock.


Other sensors in Traveller, those not listed here, are possible and available to starship captains when upgrading their ships.

GMs can consider the information in this appendix when describing sensor results to players.

For example, the densitomer, HRT, and EMS arrays are important to a Navigator when plotting a course through the dangerous electro-magnetic and gravitational jetties of the upper atmosphere of a gas giant when skimming fuel.

The ship's densitometer is relied upon heavily when the Navigator informs the captain that the ship has passed through a planet's 100 diameter gravitational zone.

When a player asks for range to a target, in effect, that information is being reported by the ladar when the ship is using Active sensors. Missiles use the ladar system as they fly towards their target.

A lot of color can be added to a game by a GM who has a grasp of what jobs for which these sensors can be used. Yet, the game rules are kept simple, so that the game proceeds at a fast, furious, but fun pace.


-----------------------------------------
HIGH GUARD

Can these sensor rules be used with the abstract system detailed in High Guard?

Yes.

Simply consider a sensor's medium and long range to correspond with the Short/Long ranges used in the HG combat system.


-----------------------------------------
OPTIONAL SENSOR DMs

Some GMs will want to incorporate DMs to the sensor task other than what is listed in the rules.

Here are some modifiers that you may consider:

Configuration: A GM might find it interesting to draw a silhouette of a target vessel, handing that to a player, stating, "This is what appears on your sensor panel."

This is called an RCS, a Radar Cross-Section, and here are a few DMs for you to consider based on High Guard hull shapes.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">+0DM Sphere
+1DM Needle/Wedge/Cone/Cylinder/Dome/Disc
+2DM Box/Close Structure
+3DM Slab</pre>[/QUOTE]Orientation: Some GMs might consider a target vessel's orientaton, with respect to the sensing ship, when sensor tasks are made. A bogey with drives facing the sensing ship is easier to detect than a target approaching bow-on.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">+0DM Bow-on
+1DM Port/Starboard/Dorsal/Ventral Profile
+2DM Aft-on</pre>[/QUOTE]Other/Different DMs to sensor throws are possible. These are just examples.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ptah:
WJP,
Why the power plant code instead of power output or excess power?

For the simple reason that I wanted to keep these rules simple and easy to use.

I didn't want to require people to create a "signature" for a ship or guess at how many MW a ship's powerplant would produce.

I wanted to take existing Book 2 starship data and use that to create some quick, easy, clean, good sensor rules in which to play with Classic Traveller.

I didn't want it to get too technical.

Thus, I used a single set of throws (2+, 4+, 6+, 8+) for every starship, and I used existing starship data (Computer Model number/powerplant letter code) to establish those ranges.

As the rules stand now, a GM or player can pick out a standard Traveller ship and know it's sensor profile just by looking at the ship stats--no extra work involved.

For example, with the Type A Free Trader, it's powerplant-A tells me, immediately, that a 6+ is needed for ranges 10 hexes or less, and a 8+ is needed for ranges greater than that.

Since it's a civilian vessel, I know it's probably got a Class I sensor suite, so I know it's max range is 15 hexes.

Boom, I've got just about all I need for make a sensor roll right there at my fingertips.

It's quick, easy, and clean.

It's got a real Classic Traveller "feel" too.

Just asking, this may be desired to make fighters have a good patrol role with a small computer and Class I sensors.

I don't see any reason, provided you have the credits, why you couldn't mount Class IV sensors on a fighter if you wanted to create some type of long-range detector (like the Y-Wing Long Probe in Star Wars).

As you're thinking of putting PP requirements on vessels with small powerplants, you may consider the reason why I didn't in the sensor rules.

And that simple fact is that canon CT has the small Type S Scout, with its puny PP, boasting military-grade Class IV sensors.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ptah:
WJP,
Why the power plant code instead of power output or excess power?

For the simple reason that I wanted to keep these rules simple and easy to use.

I didn't want to require people to create a "signature" for a ship or guess at how many MW a ship's powerplant would produce.

I wanted to take existing Book 2 starship data and use that to create some quick, easy, clean, good sensor rules in which to play with Classic Traveller.

I didn't want it to get too technical.

Thus, I used a single set of throws (2+, 4+, 6+, 8+) for every starship, and I used existing starship data (Computer Model number/powerplant letter code) to establish those ranges.

As the rules stand now, a GM or player can pick out a standard Traveller ship and know it's sensor profile just by looking at the ship stats--no extra work involved.

For example, with the Type A Free Trader, it's powerplant-A tells me, immediately, that a 6+ is needed for ranges 10 hexes or less, and a 8+ is needed for ranges greater than that.

Since it's a civilian vessel, I know it's probably got a Class I sensor suite, so I know it's max range is 15 hexes.

Boom, I've got just about all I need for make a sensor roll right there at my fingertips.

It's quick, easy, and clean.

It's got a real Classic Traveller "feel" too.

Just asking, this may be desired to make fighters have a good patrol role with a small computer and Class I sensors.

I don't see any reason, provided you have the credits, why you couldn't mount Class IV sensors on a fighter if you wanted to create some type of long-range detector (like the Y-Wing Long Probe in Star Wars).

As you're thinking of putting PP requirements on vessels with small powerplants, you may consider the reason why I didn't in the sensor rules.

And that simple fact is that canon CT has the small Type S Scout, with its puny PP, boasting military-grade Class IV sensors.

 

[Ran Targas]

BillDowns: Don't necessarily agree with that, Ran. Sure, the computer behind the gear is important, but the detection gear itself is also important. If it can't filter ambient noise, a cpu down the chain isn't likely to, either.

The only way to filter out background noise in a passive system is by computing it out. Unless you are willing to physically desensitize your array (i.e. deafen yourself) by limiting its coverage area (baffles) or reducing its reception capability (removing receivers), you need a controllable filter to reduce the junk; this goes back to needing a good computer control system. Processing power and software act to prevent sensory overload to the operator.

WJP:I have to disagree with this as well.

Space is a dangerous place (and I'm not just talking about pirates). In such a hostile enviornment, I would think that nobody in his right mind would go out into the void without at least a basic passive sensor package.

No kidding (deep) space is dangerous, that's why commercial shipping companies don't want their freighters going there. If you're going from 100D to 100D, why do you need several tons of basically useless electronic equipment; equipment that must be bought and maintained for every ship in your fleet. The added cost and tonnage would be economically prohibitive.

Think like a "corporate suit" for a minute. Do you want your freighter captains wandering around solar systems chasing sensor ghosts or doing research? Heck no, it affects delivery times, ticks off customers, and jacks up insurance costs. And defeating pirates and blasting space debris is what the company pays taxes to the Imperium for; any losses are covered by insurance anyway or will be recovered in law suits against the system's government for not doing their job.

Again, I will stand on my statement that civies do need anything but the basics; adventurers, on the other hand, will want more for their Far Trader. Let them invest in it as part of making the ship truly theirs.

 

[Ran Targas]

BillDowns: Don't necessarily agree with that, Ran. Sure, the computer behind the gear is important, but the detection gear itself is also important. If it can't filter ambient noise, a cpu down the chain isn't likely to, either.

The only way to filter out background noise in a passive system is by computing it out. Unless you are willing to physically desensitize your array (i.e. deafen yourself) by limiting its coverage area (baffles) or reducing its reception capability (removing receivers), you need a controllable filter to reduce the junk; this goes back to needing a good computer control system. Processing power and software act to prevent sensory overload to the operator.

WJP:I have to disagree with this as well.

Space is a dangerous place (and I'm not just talking about pirates). In such a hostile enviornment, I would think that nobody in his right mind would go out into the void without at least a basic passive sensor package.

No kidding (deep) space is dangerous, that's why commercial shipping companies don't want their freighters going there. If you're going from 100D to 100D, why do you need several tons of basically useless electronic equipment; equipment that must be bought and maintained for every ship in your fleet. The added cost and tonnage would be economically prohibitive.

Think like a "corporate suit" for a minute. Do you want your freighter captains wandering around solar systems chasing sensor ghosts or doing research? Heck no, it affects delivery times, ticks off customers, and jacks up insurance costs. And defeating pirates and blasting space debris is what the company pays taxes to the Imperium for; any losses are covered by insurance anyway or will be recovered in law suits against the system's government for not doing their job.

Again, I will stand on my statement that civies do need anything but the basics; adventurers, on the other hand, will want more for their Far Trader. Let them invest in it as part of making the ship truly theirs.

 

[Plankowner]

From a color point of view, how many sensor bogies would you include in a standard sensor sweep?

For example, a ship comes out of Hyperspace at 120 Planetary Diameters and does a passive scan. Assuming no ships, how many bogies would you throw at them? How much rock or satellites or debris would you have floating around a given planet? I assume it would vary by Starport Type and maybe Population? What about TL?

If the only bogies the players ever had to worry about were ships, that would take some of the unknown out of it.

Sensor Operator to Captain:
I have completed initial scan of the area, there are three bogies in our area, none appear to be powered and none are moving in our direction, attempting to lock on.

LATER:

Captain! Two of the bogies are identified as metal debris. I am not able to get a good lock on the third bogie.

LATER STILL:

Captain, I have positively identified the third bogie as a small meteor.

Then the ship is hit by the missile from the pirate operating in "run silent" mode. (Bogie #2). Bogie #1 was a drop tank that had not been picked up yet.

 

[Plankowner]

From a color point of view, how many sensor bogies would you include in a standard sensor sweep?

For example, a ship comes out of Hyperspace at 120 Planetary Diameters and does a passive scan. Assuming no ships, how many bogies would you throw at them? How much rock or satellites or debris would you have floating around a given planet? I assume it would vary by Starport Type and maybe Population? What about TL?

If the only bogies the players ever had to worry about were ships, that would take some of the unknown out of it.

Sensor Operator to Captain:
I have completed initial scan of the area, there are three bogies in our area, none appear to be powered and none are moving in our direction, attempting to lock on.

LATER:

Captain! Two of the bogies are identified as metal debris. I am not able to get a good lock on the third bogie.

LATER STILL:

Captain, I have positively identified the third bogie as a small meteor.

Then the ship is hit by the missile from the pirate operating in "run silent" mode. (Bogie #2). Bogie #1 was a drop tank that had not been picked up yet.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ran Targas:
If you're going from 100D to 100D, why do you need several tons of basically useless electronic equipment; equipment that must be bought and maintained for every ship in your fleet.

I do see your point. I'm not in total agreement, but you do have a persuasive argument.

Have you considered, though, that a "basic" package might not cost as much as you assume?

As we develop costs for the four classes of sensor packages, I'm thinking that Class I sensors come standard, without extra charge, when the ship's computer is purchased (in a similar manner to the MCr's that are provided for a standard software package for that computer---or even how the hull is considered to have a number of fittings and what not on it).

And, what about the law? Maybe Imperial regs require basic Active and Passive suites on spacecraft, the way that survival gear (vacc suits and survival bubbles) are required.

If a Class I sensor package is included in the cost of the ship's computer, and it is the law that all ships have basic sensors, then your commercial shipping companies that you mention will include the Class I suite on their vessels.

Another aspect not addressed yet is the jump through J-Space. I'm sure at least some sensor information is required as the ship makes it calculations for jump. Maybe the Class I package is the minimum required set-up in order to transverse J-Space (or at lease enter jump).

Lastly, you say that commercial ships might not need sensor suites because they're only travelling to the 100 diam limit of planets. But, this is still a LONG journey in an hostile environment without sensors. From an Earth-sized planet, it's, what, something over 5 hours (on a 1G vessel) before the jump point is reached. Would you go such a distance, in such a hostile environment, blind?

I do see your argument against commercial vessels needing even basic sensor packages, but I'm of the opinion that the reasons for basic sensors on a ship are many.

 

[Supplement Four]

Originally posted by Ran Targas:
If you're going from 100D to 100D, why do you need several tons of basically useless electronic equipment; equipment that must be bought and maintained for every ship in your fleet.

I do see your point. I'm not in total agreement, but you do have a persuasive argument.

Have you considered, though, that a "basic" package might not cost as much as you assume?

As we develop costs for the four classes of sensor packages, I'm thinking that Class I sensors come standard, without extra charge, when the ship's computer is purchased (in a similar manner to the MCr's that are provided for a standard software package for that computer---or even how the hull is considered to have a number of fittings and what not on it).

And, what about the law? Maybe Imperial regs require basic Active and Passive suites on spacecraft, the way that survival gear (vacc suits and survival bubbles) are required.

If a Class I sensor package is included in the cost of the ship's computer, and it is the law that all ships have basic sensors, then your commercial shipping companies that you mention will include the Class I suite on their vessels.

Another aspect not addressed yet is the jump through J-Space. I'm sure at least some sensor information is required as the ship makes it calculations for jump. Maybe the Class I package is the minimum required set-up in order to transverse J-Space (or at lease enter jump).

Lastly, you say that commercial ships might not need sensor suites because they're only travelling to the 100 diam limit of planets. But, this is still a LONG journey in an hostile environment without sensors. From an Earth-sized planet, it's, what, something over 5 hours (on a 1G vessel) before the jump point is reached. Would you go such a distance, in such a hostile environment, blind?

I do see your argument against commercial vessels needing even basic sensor packages, but I'm of the opinion that the reasons for basic sensors on a ship are many.

 

[Plankowner]

Suggestions:

Allow a sensor suite to maintain detection/lock to DOUBLE it's normal range, rather than a fixed 90 hexes. This gives even more advantage to the more powerful sensors.

Other types of Sensors:

Mass Sensors: A sensor that detects the gravity waves produced by all objects. It is a Passive sensor only and cannot be used for Lock On.

Meson Sensors: A limited use sensor that the military developed to detect Meson weapons. This sensor can detect a vessel that is mounting Meson Guns, even if the weapon system is not active. A positive DM may be applied if the weapon is active or being fired.

Maybe this is a bit Star Trekkie, but could a target ship detect if the enemy ship obtained a sensor lock? I am thinking no, but it is a pretty common thing in movies etc. Can't modern fighters detect enemy weapons lock somehow? Maybe I have watch Top Gun too much. I really don't know if this is possible.

I would give a Mass and Cost for each Sensor Class, but assume that the mass is accounted for within the bridge mass. The Cost thing would only be needed for upgrades or replacement of damaged systems. I would think that the Basic Class I Sensors are standard (no extra cost). I would be very hesitant to have higher class sensors cost extra dTons. The Type S Scout has Class IV sensors with no additional mass needed. I think that should be the guiding principle.

A first cut at Costs etc:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">TYPE COST TL
Class I 1 8
Class II 2 A
Class III 4 C
Class IV 7 E
</pre>[/QUOTE]Typically CT (LBB1-3) doesn't really give discounts for higher TL versions of things, so I didn't do that. My personal opinion, however, is that the cost should go down when a lower sensor class is produced at a higher TL.

Class III and IV sensors are restricted to Naval military or Scout Vessels. Black market prices would be double the listed price.

OK, someone had to put some numbers down, so here you go.

 

[Plankowner]

Suggestions:

Allow a sensor suite to maintain detection/lock to DOUBLE it's normal range, rather than a fixed 90 hexes. This gives even more advantage to the more powerful sensors.

Other types of Sensors:

Mass Sensors: A sensor that detects the gravity waves produced by all objects. It is a Passive sensor only and cannot be used for Lock On.

Meson Sensors: A limited use sensor that the military developed to detect Meson weapons. This sensor can detect a vessel that is mounting Meson Guns, even if the weapon system is not active. A positive DM may be applied if the weapon is active or being fired.

Maybe this is a bit Star Trekkie, but could a target ship detect if the enemy ship obtained a sensor lock? I am thinking no, but it is a pretty common thing in movies etc. Can't modern fighters detect enemy weapons lock somehow? Maybe I have watch Top Gun too much. I really don't know if this is possible.

I would give a Mass and Cost for each Sensor Class, but assume that the mass is accounted for within the bridge mass. The Cost thing would only be needed for upgrades or replacement of damaged systems. I would think that the Basic Class I Sensors are standard (no extra cost). I would be very hesitant to have higher class sensors cost extra dTons. The Type S Scout has Class IV sensors with no additional mass needed. I think that should be the guiding principle.

A first cut at Costs etc:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">TYPE COST TL
Class I 1 8
Class II 2 A
Class III 4 C
Class IV 7 E
</pre>[/QUOTE]Typically CT (LBB1-3) doesn't really give discounts for higher TL versions of things, so I didn't do that. My personal opinion, however, is that the cost should go down when a lower sensor class is produced at a higher TL.

Class III and IV sensors are restricted to Naval military or Scout Vessels. Black market prices would be double the listed price.

OK, someone had to put some numbers down, so here you go.

 

[Black Globe Generator]

As far as cost, if I remember correctly avionics and sensors are subsumed as part of the bridge costs (and tonnage). If you want to upgrade the sensors, perhaps you could make it a percentage of the bridge cost and displacement - call it 0% for class 1, 10% for class II, 20% for class III, and 40% for class IV.

 

[Black Globe Generator]

As far as cost, if I remember correctly avionics and sensors are subsumed as part of the bridge costs (and tonnage). If you want to upgrade the sensors, perhaps you could make it a percentage of the bridge cost and displacement - call it 0% for class 1, 10% for class II, 20% for class III, and 40% for class IV.

 

[BillDowns]

First, let me say that even civ ships are going to need sensors so they pop into an asteroid when jumping into a system. Civ aircraft liners have radar for that purpose now.

Tackling sensor tasks in a RW context, we two general types: Active and Passive, and we have two roles: Detection and Targeting. So, here is a quickie table marking with an 'X' an appropriate use:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Detection | Targeting
Active | X | X
Passive | X | -</pre>[/QUOTE]Note that I did not mark Passive Targeting. There are enough resources on the 'net to indicate this is not really practical. You can get close enough for self-targeting weapons like heat-seeking missles to work, but not really close enough to make a gun - projectile or laser - to work.

Please also note, there are also enough 'net links to show modern warships have 2 separate systems for detection and targeting. Some our Navy "skimmers" out there can verify this. Ever notice the two little towers on an Aegis cruiser that look like they have a cone on its side? Those are the targeting radars for either the gun or missle turrets. The detection gear are the funky flat plates on slanted uppers of the main superstructure.

Tackling the different passive sensors, Laser detectors, radar detectors, and meson detectors would only report if there is something going active. So, restricting the discussion to HRT, neutrino detectors, and even radio df, those would have ambient "noise" from the star, planet and possibly moons. DENSITOMETERS would also, except the moon "noise" would be definite and not a possible. The quality of the sensor is going to determine how sensitive the sensors are to the signal over ambient noise. If a sensor can differentiate a -5dB signal over ambient, cpu power ain't gonna improve it. The computer would, however, allow one to establish a sensor profile or signature of the bogey to determine what it is. I would think normal navigation aids would have the most common signatures for a given system, if only to prevent crying wolf because a tramp picked up a metallic asteroid.

Going back to what would be on an A2, I would think a short-range radar for collision avoidance, radio detectors for beacons, low-res HRT and Densitometers plus a visual like an electronic telescope for navigational aids. No targeting - that would be optional and covered under the "additional 1 ton per turret for fire control" rule.

Any, such are my thoughts.

 

[BillDowns]

First, let me say that even civ ships are going to need sensors so they pop into an asteroid when jumping into a system. Civ aircraft liners have radar for that purpose now.

Tackling sensor tasks in a RW context, we two general types: Active and Passive, and we have two roles: Detection and Targeting. So, here is a quickie table marking with an 'X' an appropriate use:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Detection | Targeting
Active | X | X
Passive | X | -</pre>[/QUOTE]Note that I did not mark Passive Targeting. There are enough resources on the 'net to indicate this is not really practical. You can get close enough for self-targeting weapons like heat-seeking missles to work, but not really close enough to make a gun - projectile or laser - to work.

Please also note, there are also enough 'net links to show modern warships have 2 separate systems for detection and targeting. Some our Navy "skimmers" out there can verify this. Ever notice the two little towers on an Aegis cruiser that look like they have a cone on its side? Those are the targeting radars for either the gun or missle turrets. The detection gear are the funky flat plates on slanted uppers of the main superstructure.

Tackling the different passive sensors, Laser detectors, radar detectors, and meson detectors would only report if there is something going active. So, restricting the discussion to HRT, neutrino detectors, and even radio df, those would have ambient "noise" from the star, planet and possibly moons. DENSITOMETERS would also, except the moon "noise" would be definite and not a possible. The quality of the sensor is going to determine how sensitive the sensors are to the signal over ambient noise. If a sensor can differentiate a -5dB signal over ambient, cpu power ain't gonna improve it. The computer would, however, allow one to establish a sensor profile or signature of the bogey to determine what it is. I would think normal navigation aids would have the most common signatures for a given system, if only to prevent crying wolf because a tramp picked up a metallic asteroid.

Going back to what would be on an A2, I would think a short-range radar for collision avoidance, radio detectors for beacons, low-res HRT and Densitometers plus a visual like an electronic telescope for navigational aids. No targeting - that would be optional and covered under the "additional 1 ton per turret for fire control" rule.

Any, such are my thoughts.

 

[Ran Targas]

Originally posted by BillDowns:
First, let me say that even civ ships are going to need sensors so they pop into an asteroid when jumping into a system. Civ aircraft liners have radar for that purpose now.

I never said a starship pilot is expected to make due with a pair of opera glasses; I'd expect the average commercial freighter to have:

1. A decent radar/lidar with collision avoidance software
2. A decent gravimetric sensor tied into the jump drive somehow
3. A good narrowband communications array with very high transfer rate
4. A decent broadband radiation sensor to warn crews of dangerous space phenomenon

Again, the bare minimums I would expect. Scouts and warships would have a considerably more advanced standard sensor package with high power telescopes and all sorts of exotic particle detectors. Belters and contract surveyors would have something in between, whatever they could afford to buy and maintain. Billionaire yacht owners and their ilk could invest in more sophisticated sensor packages too if desired; but then again, they aren't worried about RW economics.

Originally posted by BillDowns:
Note that I did not mark Passive Targeting. There are enough resources on the 'net to indicate this is not really practical. You can get close enough for self-targeting weapons like heat-seeking missles to work, but not really close enough to make a gun - projectile or laser - to work.

Any submariner surfing this thread is bound to disagree with you here and with good reason. Submarines utilize passive sonar almost exclusively for targetting. No sub commander is going to go active against a target unless he has absolutely no other options; it exposes his position and draws a lot of attention, even in the midst of a submarine dogfight. And passive targetting solutions are very accurate if done correctly; maybe not for pinpoint weapons like lasers but definitely for any sort of explosive/expanding warhead.

Originally posted by BillDowns:
Please also note, there are also enough 'net links to show modern warships have 2 separate systems for detection and targeting.

You are correct, sir. The two different types of radar serve two distinct purposes and are ill fitted to do the other, in most cases. The features you describe specifically onboard the Tico cruisers and Arleigh Burke destroyers are the SPY-1 and SPG-99 radar systems. The SPY-1 planar array is able to scan a very large volume of air space in a very short period of time; it is so effective that it can build targetting data on its own (i.e. the target nevers knows he is being tracked and targetted). This data is accurate enough to fire weapons on, even at extended ranges. The SPG-99 radars are only utilized in the last seconds of an engagement to illuminate the target. In all actuality, the SPY-1 could handle this job too but in the early stages of development the SPG-99 were necessary so as not to tax the SPY-1 system.

Originally posted by BillDowns:
The quality of the sensor is going to determine how sensitive the sensors are to the signal over ambient noise. If a sensor can differentiate a -5dB signal over ambient, cpu power ain't gonna improve it.

You're missing my point; the more sensitive your sensors, the more ambient noise you're going to hear. Going back to the submarine example: the operator is able to hear exactly what is coming through the transducers but alone, he can't process all that data; there's just too much. He needs a very sophisticated computer system to evaluate what is signal and what is noise. I would expect that in space, a passive RF array would generate a huge amount of data in a very short period of time. Filtering out what is important noise from what is meaningless noise would require tremendous effort without a good computer system.

 

[Ran Targas]

Originally posted by BillDowns:
First, let me say that even civ ships are going to need sensors so they pop into an asteroid when jumping into a system. Civ aircraft liners have radar for that purpose now.

I never said a starship pilot is expected to make due with a pair of opera glasses; I'd expect the average commercial freighter to have:

1. A decent radar/lidar with collision avoidance software
2. A decent gravimetric sensor tied into the jump drive somehow
3. A good narrowband communications array with very high transfer rate
4. A decent broadband radiation sensor to warn crews of dangerous space phenomenon

Again, the bare minimums I would expect. Scouts and warships would have a considerably more advanced standard sensor package with high power telescopes and all sorts of exotic particle detectors. Belters and contract surveyors would have something in between, whatever they could afford to buy and maintain. Billionaire yacht owners and their ilk could invest in more sophisticated sensor packages too if desired; but then again, they aren't worried about RW economics.

Originally posted by BillDowns:
Note that I did not mark Passive Targeting. There are enough resources on the 'net to indicate this is not really practical. You can get close enough for self-targeting weapons like heat-seeking missles to work, but not really close enough to make a gun - projectile or laser - to work.

Any submariner surfing this thread is bound to disagree with you here and with good reason. Submarines utilize passive sonar almost exclusively for targetting. No sub commander is going to go active against a target unless he has absolutely no other options; it exposes his position and draws a lot of attention, even in the midst of a submarine dogfight. And passive targetting solutions are very accurate if done correctly; maybe not for pinpoint weapons like lasers but definitely for any sort of explosive/expanding warhead.

Originally posted by BillDowns:
Please also note, there are also enough 'net links to show modern warships have 2 separate systems for detection and targeting.

You are correct, sir. The two different types of radar serve two distinct purposes and are ill fitted to do the other, in most cases. The features you describe specifically onboard the Tico cruisers and Arleigh Burke destroyers are the SPY-1 and SPG-99 radar systems. The SPY-1 planar array is able to scan a very large volume of air space in a very short period of time; it is so effective that it can build targetting data on its own (i.e. the target nevers knows he is being tracked and targetted). This data is accurate enough to fire weapons on, even at extended ranges. The SPG-99 radars are only utilized in the last seconds of an engagement to illuminate the target. In all actuality, the SPY-1 could handle this job too but in the early stages of development the SPG-99 were necessary so as not to tax the SPY-1 system.

Originally posted by BillDowns:
The quality of the sensor is going to determine how sensitive the sensors are to the signal over ambient noise. If a sensor can differentiate a -5dB signal over ambient, cpu power ain't gonna improve it.

You're missing my point; the more sensitive your sensors, the more ambient noise you're going to hear. Going back to the submarine example: the operator is able to hear exactly what is coming through the transducers but alone, he can't process all that data; there's just too much. He needs a very sophisticated computer system to evaluate what is signal and what is noise. I would expect that in space, a passive RF array would generate a huge amount of data in a very short period of time. Filtering out what is important noise from what is meaningless noise would require tremendous effort without a good computer system.