Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Surface Radar and Visual Ranges in Naval War Arctic Circle

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Surface Radar and Visual Ranges in Naval War Arctic Circle

    Hello friends, I would like to tell that I was looking for the detection ranges of Visual detection and Surface capable radars and founded that it is very much short and it can been seen in clear condition. It is the most obvious in the Radar tutorial test mission, in place of launching the helicopter just tell it to go to Halifax to hunt so that he can finish the fishing boats on the surface. I was getting visual detection ranges most of time of 1-2nm and also the SeaGiraffe array get possibly something 15nm. If I say from what I have seen then is that both of them are completely broken, such that when you are having a clear whether then you will be easily able to find out thing that also without binoculars from a semi-elevated position which is something around 8m above water, even you will be able to get a 12 nm in the case of large targets. It is very much tough to identify although with rough classification at about 3/4 if that is somewhat possible to do. If you are having really fine set of handheld binoculars then during time of spotting ranges will go up little and also classification is possible almost as soon as you spot something. I am telling it with large, fixed and stabilized binoculars but hoping to have it little better, so what you people have to think about it? Thank you.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Re: Surface Radar and Visual Ranges in Naval War Arctic Circle

    I would like to say about Radar, it is appearing to be something like out of whack. If anyone have checked the Commercial radar then those are been set in 25-30kW range and if is there anyone who have worked with it will be know much about it. I have heard that Furuno FAR-21x7 S/X is been best for medium/large surface targets, such that if you are having cargo ships, large fishing boats, etc and it is dependably at over 20-25nm and also during time of rougher weather, whereas operator skill and experience are the important thing which are being able to pick them out amidst clutter. Did not have the chance to work with a military grade radar system and I do also know that their capabilities are significantly greater. It is not like that they are generally much more powerful transmitters but it is that single processing gear is very much difficult and also they operate on a range of wavelengths which is granting very large flexibility. Would not mention the capabilities of a Phased Array such SPY-1 which is having plenty of MW of power in it and it is very much useful.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Re: Surface Radar and Visual Ranges in Naval War Arctic Circle

    I have recently tired both of things when I was going though modding but I was easily able to increase the radar detection range especially on air targets, when firing it from ground to air and surface to surface radar and visual in all cases are still same which were extremely limited. I am just believed that there is something which is wrong with radar horizon/curvature modeling and it is beyond our ability so that we can remedy as modders. I also believe that this game is modelling all radars which are being mounted on sea level and if you avoid radar wave curvature and in its place just use line of sight horizon or anything which is whatever the cause it is, then it is something which is serious problem. Interesting thing which I have founded that if I am replacing Sensor Type of the 'Visual' sensor to infrared then it will be making detectors at sensible ranges somewhat 10 to 11 nm. More than that I am not able to do so that can get radars to beyond 16nm but I have observed that increasing ship height will be increasing their ranges to some extent and it is been clear that there are modelled at some fraction of this. Sorry to say that isn't really an answer because this means larger RCS on targets too.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2011

    Re: Surface Radar and Visual Ranges in Naval War Arctic Circle

    I am pretty confident that the numbers given are relatively correct. How about we state we run with his 8 meters. That would be 8x39 to get 312 crawls. Divided by 12 to get feet comes to 26 feet. Put in that six feet for the middle individual, wouldn't it be great if we could express 32 feet sum. That approaches to 7 statute miles, give or take consistent with the recipe. Now, 1.15 nautical miles are in one statute mile. Furnished I have done my math right that approaches actually timid 8 nautical miles such that 7.96nm to be correct. Which is the easier close of his extent, but still at it? Then after that once you take into his different variables, 10-12nm for superficial distinguishing proof from assorted indicates on a warship, which I am essentially sure are taller than 26 feet and sounds faultlessly sensible with the certain image based helps a guard may have.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2011

    Re: Surface Radar and Visual Ranges in Naval War Arctic Circle

    When it approaches visual ranges, don’t neglect that you ought not to see the waterline of the ship you’re getting a load of. A considerable number of times at those extents you could just see part of the freeboard on a great load send, but it’s still enough to tell what it is. At even longer goes you may just see the bridge or masts on a large vessel, but you know that something is there. In both these cases it looks sort of cool on account of the ship appear to be ‘floating’ above the water a little. The 1-2nm for current visual location obviously has something off with it. Concerning Radar, I think there's a comparative issue; as with visual based you ought not to hit the waterline to get detection. Clearly freeboard is a superb reflector, but so are most superstructures and mast. So possibly the game is not taking the height of the target into account genuinely, excluding for RCS calculations. This is where the difference between a military numerous hundred kW system and a non military person 30kW one might as well show up; the non military person system may not have the capacity to get a robust enough profit return from the poles or top of the superstructure on a target or may filter it as clutter, while a military system could, meaning longer extends. Also, the curvature appears to be underestimated, specifically regarding north Atlantic conditions which for the most part effect in additional deflection unpaid to the temperature inclinations.

Similar Threads

  1. Different Units in Naval War: Arctic Circle
    By Rashid in forum Video Games
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 17-05-2012, 12:22 PM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-04-2012, 12:20 PM
  3. What do you know about Naval War Arctic Circle?
    By Halle in forum Video Games
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 19-04-2012, 05:20 AM
  4. Naval War Arctic Circle has lot of delusion
    By Nidra in forum Video Games
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 18-04-2012, 03:07 AM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 17-04-2012, 07:42 AM

Tags for this Thread


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Page generated in 1,716,881,884.45965 seconds with 17 queries