Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Tarantul OTH capacity

 
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 >> Tech Support >> Tarantul OTH capacity Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/6/2021 12:22:45 AM   
MarkJoergensen

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 9/21/2021
Status: offline
Posting a save/scen here as was suggested in a differented thread. (In the general forum)

A tarantul III can detect a ship in EMCON over the horizon. (Here I've set it at 60nm)

According to the manufacturers website of the Mineral radar complex (Cant post links yet. It's the ROE website), it can only detect emissions OTH. The contact report says no emissions were detected.

Save/Scen was made in Pro Ed.

Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/6/2021 12:38:01 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6462
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
Here is the link:

http://roe.ru/eng/catalog/naval-systems/shipborne-electronic-systems/mineral-me/

ROE claims an active radar range of around 250 km. Passive (ESM) of 450 km. I suspect both are overstated. Thats just detecting, not tracking. Tracking is much shorter.

I just ran a test scenario with a Tarantul III 1987 500 miles from a Tico 1984. Both ships heading towards each other. Two different scenarios:

The Tranatul III with active Band Stand detects the Tico with no emissions between 100 and 110 nm consistently
The Tarantul III with no emissions from the Band Stand detects a radiating Tico at 150 nm with some variability.

Ran them multiple times. Didn't check if the contact was solid enough for a shot at those ranges.

edit: At 90 nm on active contact was solid enough to fire. Still had to wait on the range to drop for the missile.



< Message edited by thewood1 -- 10/6/2021 12:47:50 AM >


_____________________________

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 MarkJoergensen)
Post #: 2
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/6/2021 4:41:23 AM   
MarkJoergensen

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 9/21/2021
Status: offline
Yeah, my point is it shouldn't be possible for it to detect a surface ship in EMCON beyond the radar horizon. The 250km is for air targets as well.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 3
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/6/2021 10:30:18 AM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6462
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
My assumption is that that is what was unique about the ESM on that radar. The ability to detect radar OTH is called out in a number of sources. Not sure what's physically possible.

_____________________________

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 MarkJoergensen)
Post #: 4
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/7/2021 12:27:54 PM   
MarkJoergensen

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 9/21/2021
Status: offline
Yes, to detect RADAR. When a ship is in EMCON, there are no radar emissions to detect. But in CMO it can do that. Which it shouldn't be able to. The radar horizon for a tarantul is ~20-25nm. Not 60nm.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 5
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/7/2021 12:51:55 PM   
Parel803

 

Posts: 555
Joined: 10/10/2019
From: Netherlands
Status: offline
If I remember correctly there has been an discussion about it earlier. I agree that a I-band active radar is contstrained, in normal circumstances, to the radar horizon equation. Looks that the passive radar is in fact a ESM. If you don't take max radar ranges, receiver heigth, etc into account it still is the radar hozizon, bit depending on the received radar RF. There are advantages for the ESM side.
Looks it's not a passive radar than?
The possibility of triangulation needs more than one receving unit I guess, bearing and timing.
But I could be completely wrong, it looks extremely positive.
regards GJ

(in reply to MarkJoergensen)
Post #: 6
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/7/2021 1:11:41 PM   
MarkJoergensen

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 9/21/2021
Status: offline
Yeah, and the passive radar can only detect emissions. Which is where my problem with it lies. The I-band radar detects a non-radiating ship, which is impossible. If its passive, it can't detect a passive ship above the horizon.

(in reply to Parel803)
Post #: 7
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/7/2021 1:34:18 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6462
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
So you mean the active portion of the Band Stand is detecting the passive ships. Because the ESM version didn't detect any non-radiating ships in CMO commercial 1147.30.

_____________________________

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 MarkJoergensen)
Post #: 8
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 10/7/2021 2:05:47 PM   
MarkJoergensen

 

Posts: 22
Joined: 9/21/2021
Status: offline
Yes

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 9
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/4/2021 12:11:46 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13232
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
Checking this now, using CPE v2.03.7.

I'm not sure what the problem is. The Monolit system (Band Stand) has three elements, two of them active radars (C- and X-band) and a passive ESM/ELINT antenna. In the example scenario, the Tarantul is continuously detecting the Visby with the Monolit's C-band radar, and nothing else (no ESM detections since the Visby is not radiating).

Am I missing something?

_____________________________


(in reply to MarkJoergensen)
Post #: 10
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/5/2021 9:54:55 AM   
Blast33


Posts: 386
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
The passive system cannot detect it because the Visby is not radiating. And that works fine.

The active part is detecting the Visby, but should not be able to, because of the radar horizon.
I did some big thumb calculations but the radar horizon should look something like this. And in the game the range is much higher than that.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 11
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/5/2021 9:57:11 AM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13232
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
But all elements of the Monolit system are reportedly OTH capable (using atmospheric backscatter), in addition to their direct-LOS mode.

So, WAD ?

_____________________________


(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 12
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/5/2021 11:57:07 AM   
Eggstor

 

Posts: 347
Joined: 1/24/2016
Status: offline
The C-band (NATO designation, not IEEE) portion of the Monolit system could be OTH capable, though not through either skywave or groundwave backscatter. Open-source material strongly suggests the upper frequency limit of skywave propagation is 30 MHz (lower A band), with the groundwave propagation limit even lower.

However, UHF radio waves (which the C band is a part of), and to a lesser extent VHF, are subject to range-extending tropospheric propagation, which happens best over water and flat land. The bad news is that is dependent on the weather (warm, calm and high pressure are best), time of day (or more specifically, nighttime), and season (most pronounced in summer/autumn). This also should apply to ESM receivers that pick up UHF signals.

This doesn't apply to the X-band (NATO I/J) portion of the Monolit; the frequency is too high for any meaningful sort of refraction beyond the horizon.

(in reply to Dimitris)
Post #: 13
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/5/2021 12:38:10 PM   
Dimitris

 

Posts: 13232
Joined: 7/31/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Eggstor
The C-band (NATO designation, not IEEE) portion of the Monolit system could be OTH capable, though not through either skywave or groundwave backscatter. Open-source material strongly suggests the upper frequency limit of skywave propagation is 30 MHz (lower A band), with the groundwave propagation limit even lower.

However, UHF radio waves (which the C band is a part of), and to a lesser extent VHF, are subject to range-extending tropospheric propagation, which happens best over water and flat land. The bad news is that is dependent on the weather (warm, calm and high pressure are best), time of day (or more specifically, nighttime), and season (most pronounced in summer/autumn). This also should apply to ESM receivers that pick up UHF signals.

This doesn't apply to the X-band (NATO I/J) portion of the Monolit; the frequency is too high for any meaningful sort of refraction beyond the horizon.


Thanks! I did some related reading on this and stand corrected. We'll need to update the OTH flags of these two emitters in the DB.

So, we agree that (as long as there is no land mass between them) the C-band element can indeed pick up the Visby.

_____________________________


(in reply to Eggstor)
Post #: 14
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/5/2021 1:04:24 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6462
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: offline
Do any OTH receivers work with non-flat terrain nearby?

_____________________________

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 #: 15
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/5/2021 9:13:54 PM   
Parel803

 

Posts: 555
Joined: 10/10/2019
From: Netherlands
Status: offline
This site says something about the ANAPROP, as mentioned earlier
https://marinegyaan.com/what-factors-affect-the-radar-horizon/

This site gives a short brief on OTH radars
https://www.radartutorial.eu/07.waves/wa51.en.html
Due to the low RF these are very large radars antennas
So I think they work with non

If I remembered correctly RF start to bend with the earth around 3 or 4 GHz. But lower RF means larger antennas, so slower turn and to get range means more power and so longer PW's and with that a smaller pulse paint. In general of course.

Great for those EW Crows

Small RF text
https://www.radartutorial.eu/07.waves/Waves%20and%20Frequency%20Ranges.en.html


(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 16
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/6/2021 8:56:26 PM   
Eggstor

 

Posts: 347
Joined: 1/24/2016
Status: offline
Tropospheric propagation is less reliable and more variable than skywave/groundwave propagation. Back in the days of analog TV, while there were days (really, mostly nights) where I could pick up Chicago stations, mostly the UHF but sometimes the network stations on VHF, in (just south of) Milwaukee (about 80 miles of essentially flat land) as clearly as the Milwaukee stations, and sometimes UHF stations out of South Bend and Grand Rapids (both about 100 miles away, with much of that distance over Lake Michigan), there were more days that it was nothing but snow.

I don't know how well the atmospheric conditions needed for tropospheric propagation can be modeled in CMO.

< Message edited by Eggstor -- 11/6/2021 9:07:09 PM >

(in reply to Parel803)
Post #: 17
RE: Tarantul OTH capacity - 11/7/2021 8:05:05 AM   
Parel803

 

Posts: 555
Joined: 10/10/2019
From: Netherlands
Status: offline
Agree with Tropospheric propagation and CMO, not easy and probably not contributing to the game. In real life you that in some area's under certian circumtances and and some times of the day you may have extreme ranges on your EW.

(in reply to Eggstor)
Post #: 18
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> Tarantul OTH capacity 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

0.430