Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: MK-84 on February 29, 2012, 07:28:29 PM
-
Planes such the beaufighter often carried radar. Would it be a good or a bad idea of possibly having aircraft mounted radar? I'm thinking a smaller circle then bases, with perhaps a different color when viewed from the clipboard, using the same rules as current dar. I'm thinking of this idea as purely gameplay based, and not so much historical other than what planes actually carried it. Good Idea, or stupid?
-
Its NOT a stupid idea. Many heavy/night fighters carryed radars during the WW2. 110s, 410s, He-219, Mossie, Beaufighter, F6fs, P38s, P-61 etc tec.
It could be like an ordenance, you can hang the antennas on the plane, for some speed/weight penality.
Also it can result in a smaller circle (say 7 miles) or a 90 degrees section turning as you turn your aircraft.
Obviously needs some developement even in theoretically, but it would be AWESOME for the scenarios.
:aok
-
F4Us carried it fairly late in the war, if I'm not mistaken.
Also it can result in a smaller circle (say 7 miles) or a 90 degrees section turning as you turn your aircraft.
What, like 45 degrees to each side of your plane?
-
Only if it was implemented accurately and not gamey.
-
How about the ability to take on a radar opperator, like a gunner, only he would be able to read the onboard radar and vector you in. ??
-
How about the ability to take on a radar opperator, like a gunner, only he would be able to read the onboard radar and vector you in. ??
Ooh, I like that! Would really make countrymen coordinate better that way through communications.
-
I really like this idea. It would be a tremendous add in either a night theater/arena or simply a period of time in the MA?
Boo
-
+1 :aok
-
It sounds like you guys are imagining a radar equipped aircraft acting as a short ranged AWACS and that just isn't at all what WWII airborne radar was like. The versions of the Bf110, Mosquito and so on that we have also did not have radar.
-
Karnak, not sure I agree unless I am not understanding you correctly. As for the version of birds, likely those would need to be updated. I think the F6F and F4U series simply had a kit sent to the field for update and presto, a radar is born.
Radar back then was very rudimentary in form but clearly a single bird with radar could lead the flock to the target, if it could be acquired. The range was short both in terms of distance and bredth but could be done.
A true AWACS function includes a data link system so that all birds can see what the AWACS sees. I'm not sure that we are advocating that. Simply a bird with a limited field of view radar that could guide other green guys to bad guys by voiced coordinates.
Boo
-
The field of view was very narrow and very short. Radar equipped fighters would be guided onto targets or into the bomber stream by ground control using the much more powerful ground based radar and then only try to use the on board radar to aid in the approach to the target, then switching to visual tracking once the radar determined that the target was within visual range. I'll have to try to find the data again, but it is possible that WWII airborne radar had a shorter range than the icons in AH, I don't quite recall.
The Lancaster's 'corkscrew' evasive would not be very effective in daylight, but at night it would drop the Lanc out of the radar's view or out of the pilots visual field and the nightfighter would have to start the hunt all over, essentially from the beginning.
I will admit that I would very much like the Mosquito NF.Mk 30 added to AH, but that is not so much because I want the radar it is because I want a Mosquito fighter with high blown engines so that I can bomber hunt in it.
Mosquito NF.Mk 30:
(http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/album/watermark.php?file=5031)
-
I didnt know they were that limited. Good to know. Sadly, for practical purposes of "the game" nature it may negate them. It would be fun to add a night fighting element to AH. Imagine a scenario pitting RAF night bombing the Ruhr.
Boo
-
Radar back then was very rudimentary in form but clearly a single bird with radar could lead the flock to the target, if it could be acquired. The range was short both in terms of distance and bredth but could be done.
Well you've got it right that it was rudimentary. You're just a bit off insofar as the plane leading the flock to the target. You're right again about the range being short but you gotta understand how short short was. You're talking just a few miles which is like infinity in the dark. Night fighters (the flock) were guided to the target (the bomber stream--which is how the RAF bombed) by the longer range more accurate ground based radar and their sector controllers. Using their guidance--if it was good--the night fighter might be able to get close enough to acquire a target with it's own radar and then maybe get close enough to engage the target visually.
Airborne to air radar of the day was very very short range and generally very directional--forward.
-
I think the F6F and F4U series simply had a kit sent to the field for update and presto, a radar is born.
Haha, not quite
(http://www.ffaa.net/aircraft/hellcat/images/hellcat-001.jpg)
This is an F6F-5N. See that big ugly undoubtedly heavy bulbous thing under the wing? That's the radar pod.
It's not like they were just updating the avionics in a modern fighter jet.
-
http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ref/NightFighterRadars/index.html
-
Only if it was implemented accurately and not gamey.
People want it for gamey reasons, if they truly wanted it for historical reasons they'd know (from researching) that it would gain us nothing over what we currently have.
ack-ack
-
The current radar we have is a kinda-sorta substitute for ground controlled interception. The problem with getting into more realistic radar is that it spawns exactly the same never-ending war of ECM and ECCM that actually happened. 110s get Lichtenstein, so Lancasters get Window so 110s get Lichtenstein SN/2. Mosquitos get Serrate to home on Lichtenstein so 110s change the antenna polarization....
Don't get me wrong, I think it would be really cool to get into all that, but I'm an electronics nerd. There's a reason nightfighters had a second crewmember - making this gear work fully occupied the attention of a skilled operator, and I already can't manage to manage the bombsight and bomber guns at the same time, much less fly a fighter and tweak my superhet gain. Beyond that, the typically large antennas had drastic performance penalties, which few MA pilots would accept. I think the poor Mossie VI already suffers enough with the night-fighting flame dampeners on its exhausts.
-
I think the poor Mossie VI already suffers enough with the night-fighting flame dampeners on its exhausts.
This has been addressed. It no longer has dampers and tops out at 357mph on the deck, 19mph faster than the old dampered Mosquito Mk VI from before the graphical update.
-
The Lancaster's 'corkscrew' evasive would not be very effective in daylight, but at night it would drop the Lanc out of the radar's view or out of the pilots visual field and the nightfighter would have to start the hunt all over, essentially from the beginning.
Mosquito NF.Mk 30:
(http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/album/watermark.php?file=5031)
and yet the lost how many every night?
semp
-
and yet the lost how many every night?
semp
I believe RAF Bomber Command suffered around 30% losses. However, that doesn't remove the fact that the Corkscrew Maneuver was the primary and most effective defensive tactic employed by the Lancaster crews during their night time raids.
ack-ack