Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

COMMs Disruption on Ships

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> COMMs Disruption on Ships Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/24/2021 6:49:49 PM   
rmeckman

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 8/18/2019
Status: offline
I just had my first encounter with a ship in NOCOMM mode while playing the Shifting Sands campaign. Since ships can communicate by lights/flags/voice when they are close enough, I thought moving a friendly ship with working radios near the NOCOMM ship might reestablish communications. However, this does not appear to be currently modeled. Has any consideration been given to adding a short-range visual/audible communication channel that can be activated on ships when the radios fail and other friendly ships are within visual range? Right now, it appears that a NOCOMM ship is off the grid even if a friendly ship is sailing alongside.
Post #: 1
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/24/2021 9:24:01 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13185
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
In order to do this properly, we'd need to model the different capabilities of various inter-platform comm links (can't really share OTH targeting data with signal flags).

_____________________________


(in reply to rmeckman)
Post #: 2
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/24/2021 9:40:27 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6328
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
There would be ways to do it using lua and changing sides, combined with comms disruption. I have done very similar things with recon and photo recon flights where the side doesn't get the info until the recon asset gets within a certain range or lands for a certain time. IIRC, with some of the newer event functions, you might be able to do most of it on the fly.

But it takes some work and isn't hugely flexible. To make it dynamic, you'd probably have to take a relatively deep dive into lua.

_____________________________

You are like puss filled boil on nice of ass of bikini model. You are nasty to everybody but then try to sweeten things up with a nice post somewhere else. That's nice but you're still a boil on a beautiful thing! - BDukes

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 3
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 1:20:57 AM   
c3k

 

Posts: 363
Joined: 4/25/2017
Status: offline
So, any thought given to use over-the-air lasers to communicate with data links from ship to another? (Wondering if that's a real-world thing...)

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 4
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 1:33:58 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6328
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
It is done, but range is limited, data throughout is limited, and it can be severely impacted by atmospherics. But it is considered super secure and almost un-interceptable. Thats my understanding of it.

_____________________________

You are like puss filled boil on nice of ass of bikini model. You are nasty to everybody but then try to sweeten things up with a nice post somewhere else. That's nice but you're still a boil on a beautiful thing! - BDukes

(in reply to c3k)
Post #: 5
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 10:20:17 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5434
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Any sort of point to point beam is useful but limited. Back in the day when we used manual survey in the artillery we had IR beam distance measuring systems, I'm sure they are used in construction still. Anyway you could use them for voice communications during high EMCON states as they were directional and single point receivers

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 6
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 11:08:22 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6328
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
Distance measuring in construction I think is all laser now. At least the ones I've used and seen.

_____________________________

You are like puss filled boil on nice of ass of bikini model. You are nasty to everybody but then try to sweeten things up with a nice post somewhere else. That's nice but you're still a boil on a beautiful thing! - BDukes

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 7
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 11:28:04 AM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5434
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Yeah that makes sense, we were using IR because eye-safe lasers were still in their infancy. I think our range finders had an NOHD of over 1Km. Technology moves on... and I'm getting old...

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 8
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 2:10:14 PM   
Randomizer


Posts: 1464
Joined: 6/28/2008
Status: online
I thought that the tellurometers used collomated microwaves and not IR but then it's been more than 30-years since I used one. That occasion was closing a 60 km survey leg between Mount Douglas in CFB Gagetown to the roof of the Chalmers hospital in Fredericton. Voice communication using the tellurometer was always crystal clear once you acquired the line of site to the other set. The entire 130+ km scheme closed to within less than 1-metre if I recall correctly, pretty good in the days before GPS became widespread.

-C

< Message edited by Randomizer -- 6/25/2021 2:12:18 PM >

(in reply to Gunner98)
Post #: 9
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 2:41:05 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6328
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
I saw a tellurometer in college, but by then, lasers were already being used. Today, a good laser rangefinder can measure in kms down to cms. GPS helps, but isn't accurate enough in construction siting.

_____________________________

You are like puss filled boil on nice of ass of bikini model. You are nasty to everybody but then try to sweeten things up with a nice post somewhere else. That's nice but you're still a boil on a beautiful thing! - BDukes

(in reply to Randomizer)
Post #: 10
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 2:49:01 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5434
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
Hay Chris, good to hear from you.

Yes a long time ago.

I am thinking of another time & location, not quite the same distance. Wainwright, 92 and I don't remember the equipment but I passed a Bde fire plan from a hill near Bde HQ near Hardesty Gate to the RCPO (Tim B) who had all the gunlines on land-line up near Airfield 21. I think Rich L was the survey officer up from CTC who showed up with the 'cunning plan' from C/S '0'. I thought it was IR, it wasn't the Tellurometers but my memory fades.

Bart

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to Randomizer)
Post #: 11
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 3:05:08 PM   
Gunner98

 

Posts: 5434
Joined: 4/29/2005
From: The Great White North!
Status: offline
quote:

Today, a good laser rangefinder can measure in kms down to cms. GPS helps, but isn't accurate enough in construction siting.


Do you use receivers or reflectors with the laser to get that accuracy? I first used an LRF about 35 years ago and it was good to +/- 10 meters, even 5 years later it was much less.

I know we used IR lasers for low level survey, they were good up to about 10Km and needed reflectors, we called them clusters and we added more and more the further we were away. They were all bright yellow until we painted the back of them and were straight off a construction site. But then a newer system was being trialed ~1990/92 which had about a 70Km range and needed a receiver, that is the one I'm talking about above.

I remember training on the tellurometers but Randomizer was the pro

_____________________________

Check out our novel, Northern Fury: H-Hour!: http://northernfury.us/
And our blog: http://northernfury.us/blog/post2/
Twitter: @NorthernFury94 or Facebook https://www.facebook.com/northernfury/

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 12
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 3:28:42 PM   
stww2

 

Posts: 188
Joined: 5/23/2017
Status: offline
As a practical matter, once you get the relief ship alongside, you could imagine that they gave the damaged ship a spare radio, a SAT phone, or whatever, and go into the editor and repair the damaged ship's comms.

Not an elegant solution but it would work.

< Message edited by stww2 -- 6/25/2021 3:29:04 PM >

(in reply to rmeckman)
Post #: 13
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 4:09:17 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6328
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
High accuracy ones need reflectors or specific receiving units for long distances. I think 2 mi is the longest range I have seen. Most of the ones I have worked with were limited to a few hundred meters and didn't require a reflector. Older ones had a real gyroscope in them that were VERY finicky. Newer ones use GPS and attitude sensors like in a smart phone.

_____________________________

You are like puss filled boil on nice of ass of bikini model. You are nasty to everybody but then try to sweeten things up with a nice post somewhere else. That's nice but you're still a boil on a beautiful thing! - BDukes

(in reply to stww2)
Post #: 14
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 7:10:56 PM   
rmeckman

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 8/18/2019
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

In order to do this properly, we'd need to model the different capabilities of various inter-platform comm links (can't really share OTH targeting data with signal flags).


With comms disruption and its more recent application to subs, CMO seems to be moving away from always-on platform communications. The NOCOMM mode is the extreme case, but there is also the issue that units transmitting on their radios are active emitters for enemy ELINT. If the game continues on its current trend of making communications more realistic, the EMCON Settings window could end up with a fourth setting for active/passive comms. Ships in radio silence would face some of the same issues as in the current NOCOMM status, relying more on short-range comms with nearby ships.

In the public version of CMO, I am aware that there are limits on how far the realistic communications can go while keeping the game enjoyable. I recall turning on a realistic-comms feature in a version of Harpoon and having subs disappear for the entirety of the scenario. Still, having ships with nonfunctioning radios being totally isolated even when friendly ships are nearby is somewhat of a step way from realism (and arguably game playability).

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 15
RE: COMMs Disruption on Ships - 6/25/2021 7:49:18 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6328
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
But it can be done. As always, the level of realism can be taken to the extreme. The tools are their for a scenario designer to do it.

_____________________________

You are like puss filled boil on nice of ass of bikini model. You are nasty to everybody but then try to sweeten things up with a nice post somewhere else. That's nice but you're still a boil on a beautiful thing! - BDukes

(in reply to rmeckman)
Post #: 16
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> COMMs Disruption on Ships Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.223