radar shows altitude

[Karnak]

-1
I have a feeling that a number of players would just turn around to gain altitude if they see cons higher than them. Who am I going to pick then eh? 

Point taken.

[thndregg]

-1

No need to drive bombers even higher.

Agreed. I think the dot/darbar system is fine. At least some mystery needs to be maintained to get scouts to locate and ascertain altitude, number of bombers & escorts, exact location, and trajectory visually. I don't think I'd be playing this game if all the answers were given away on the map.

As it is on the smaller maps, an enemy darbar has been proven easy to spot the minute it appears out of the launch base. Interception is guaranteed.

[alpini13]

NO. ww2 radar didnt show altitude

[waystin2]

-1.  There has to be some mystery.

[715]

NO. ww2 radar didnt show altitude

Then, as an expert on the subject, you should correct the Wikipedia entry on Chain Home which states: "Most stations were also able to measure the angle of elevation of the formation, which, together with the range, gave the height; local geography prevented some stations from measuring elevation."  and "The receiving antennas were directional, so the signal strength received by each depended on the angle between it and the target. An operator would manually adjust a comparator device to find what angle to the target best matched the relative strengths of the two received signals. The angle of elevation to the target was estimated by similar comparison of the signal strengths from a second pair of receiving antennas closer to the ground, which produced a different sensitivity in elevation."

[Lab Rat 3947]

-1.  There has to be some mystery.

LtngRydr

[Mister Fork]

88 AAA used a three-point verification finder system that were tied together from three different batteries to triangulate altitude.  Pretty effective but it was a manual process with the use of fire control towers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_control_tower)

Three gunners point their target tracking and then the AAA coordinator had to manually calculate the altitude into the fire control tower. It was first done for naval applications and then adapted for areal AAA batteries.

So yes, any AAA with a FCT (basically any airbase) could tell the altitude of an aircraft until radar systems got better at the pencil method.

And you would also have to visually see the aircraft. Cloud cover meant altitude was impossible to calculate.

[earl1937]

Then, as an expert on the subject, you should correct the Wikipedia entry on Chain Home which states: "Most stations were also able to measure the angle of elevation of the formation, which, together with the range, gave the height; local geography prevented some stations from measuring elevation."  and "The receiving antennas were directional, so the signal strength received by each depended on the angle between it and the target. An operator would manually adjust a comparator device to find what angle to the target best matched the relative strengths of the two received signals. The angle of elevation to the target was estimated by similar comparison of the signal strengths from a second pair of receiving antennas closer to the ground, which produced a different sensitivity in elevation."

It might be of some use to some of the new guys reading this to explain how radar works. Simply stated: a radio signal is sent out along the beam which the radar operator looks at on his screen. When that signal hits a target, it is then reflected back to the antenna, there fore showing an object, in this case, an aircraft. I think that the Bell labs and RCA were the first to figure out the time from antenna to object and back, there fore they could compute the distance the object was from the antenna.
The IFF systems and transponder systems in use have this built into the system these days, so the radar operator knows the altitude of the aircraft he is looking at. Don't confuse that with the operators order to "squawk Ident", because that is for a different function, namely to positively ID the correct aircraft when several are around or in the same section of his or her responsibility. Most radar systems in use today, when the radar signal crosses a aircraft, the operator sees 2 small hash marks on his or her screen and when you Squawk Ident, the area between the two small hash marks fill in to make a small square. There is whole host of transponder frequencies in use and you would be told what frequency to tune your transponder to.
Here are just a few in use today and what they are for:

7500 Aircraft hijacking (ICAO, worldwide)
 
7501-7577 Reserved for use by Continental NORAD Region (CONR) (USA)
 
7600 Radio Failure (Lost Communications) (ICAO, worldwide)
 
7601-7607 Reserved for special use by FAA (USA)
 
7610-7676 External ARTCC subsets (Discrete codes of blocks only except for first primary block, which is used as the ARTCC’s non-discrete code if all discrete codes are assigned) (USA)
 
7615 Civil flights engaged in littoral surveillance (Australia)
 
7700 Emergency (ICAO, worldwide)

Hope this info fills in some blank spots for you!
 

[bustr]

How about when you put the cursor over the red dot on the radar it shows you an approximate altitude.  Radar was sophisticated enough during the war to tell you what alt they were at, and I would rather not waste my time flying for ten minutes chasing a dot only to find that he is at 25K, and it is going to take another 45 minutes to catch him.  I play this game to fight not chase people.

Attitude is being used lately to avoid being at a disadvantage. Inversely, the investment time wise to gain that advantage detracts from the given player's fight time whether he knows this. Or adds to their comfort zone feeling of "I'm not dead yet." I've always wondered if rewards were given for the numbers of cons destroyed before biting the big one, would more players become interested in slugging it out? They might accidentally learn fighting is rewarding rather than another opportunity to loose.

HOST: Newbee died with 5 kills confirmed, Better Luck Next Time Killer.

If everyone could hold their mouse over red dots and get an altitude update, would anyone want to fight anymore? Look at how much time is spent waiting for those hiding from all but the most favorable situation to themselves. Compare that to the less than 5 minutes to win, loose, or run away once they come down. Consider how frustrated you become listening to players on country talk about the hiding at altitude phenomenon now. Four 20K ponies over your field who never come down to fight until one of you gets fed up and heads out alone. At this juncture one has to consider our game has a cadre of vets who 4 may not be enough to survive.

How much more time will be added to this if the ones you are waiting for can get an instantaneous update on your altitude? Just like those times you run into someone finally at 15-20K and they run out over and over again dragging the fight up 2-5k every pass to feel safe.

[HawkerMKII]

Heck with all of this......if you want dar some one should have to man it....just like in R/L. No one in dar at a base.....no dar no base flash.....so there

[bustr]

Why not.

The wish to be able to give perks to players has been asked repeatedly. Now you have a reason. Radar duty including resupply when it's down. Heck even pay someone to be the radar man for the HQ along with resupply duty.

Still it's not original wanting radar modified to show things like enemy alt, type and speed. The strongest arguments against, were players knowing this info would help them to choose to avoid each other. Like the old radar minimums fostered NOE against undefended targets so that missions were 90% guaranteed to succeed.

Showing red dot altitude would be telling those adverse to running risks how much higher to climb before heading over to get into a furball over a field.

[XxDaSTaRxx]

I'll make a compromise. You can have altitude sensing tech, if I can have an A-bomb.  

[gyrene81]

I'll make a compromise. You can have altitude sensing tech, if I can have an A-bomb.  

there is no way even you could call this some sort of tech...

[XxDaSTaRxx]

there is no way even you could call this some sort of tech...

(Image removed from quote.)

YES THAT PLANE IS AT 22.5K (I can tell by looking at it) . SHOOT HIM LASER GUIDED PUFFY ACK!

[gyrene81]

YES THAT PLANE IS AT 22.5K (I can tell by looking at it) . SHOOT HIM LASER GUIDED PUFFY ACK!

way to exaggerate...i mean really.

with a little training and a piece of paper, even a backwoods farmboy like yourself could learn to approximate altitude and distance...