Can radar alone classify a target?

[TBLackey]

Sure radar can detect a target, but in CMO does a radar signature (without visual, infrared, sonar or ELINT to help) enable the detection source to classify the target?

[kahta]

It depends on the sensor

[TBLackey]

Ok great, could you expand a bit more?

[thewood1]

Non Cooperative Target Recognition

From the manual page 302:

NCTR: Certain radars have a “non-cooperative target
recognition” function. As of V2, the database entry for a unit will,
on its sensors list, contain a note if the radar has NCTR capability
or not.

[Mickeys91]

Ok great, could you expand a bit more?

He could. But it depends

[14yellow14]

• NCTR (Non-Cooperative Target Recognition) for select radar systems has been added, enabling active type/class-identification of air targets. See here for introduction to the technology: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radar_MASI ... ecognition

NCTR as modeled in Command is broken into two techniques:
– JEM: Jet engine modulation (aka fan blade counting). This is simpler to process and more widespread but works only within a frontal arc of 15 degress offset from the target’s front (so that the fan blades are visible to the radar).
– NBILST: Narrow-beam Interleaved Search & Track (aka synthetic pseudo-imaging). This is far more demanding computationally and is possible only with phased-array radars, but can work regardless of target aspect.

Interestingly enough, even some quite old radar systems (like Square Pair on SA-5 batteries) have an NCTR ability. However, because of its manual/semi-automated nature (the operator literally looks on raw radar return modulation data on an oscilloscope) the classification time varies highly with operator proficiency. In modern systems the highly automated nature of the process (point the radar at the target and wait) means that crew skill is irrelevant.
When a target is classified using NCTR a relevant message is added to the message log.

https://command.matrixgames.com/?page_id=2711

[thewood1]

Ok great, could you expand a bit more?

So did we do enough work for you now?

[TBLackey]

You did great, I'll be sure to commend you in your annual performance review.

For ground/surface targets, the other piece of the puzzle is the sensor must have the property "can classify ground targets".

I asked the question because my Super Hornet era carrier group couldn't classify enemy ships without doing a visual flyby. It seems it wasn't until the F-35C that a US carrier group was capable of doing radar-only ship classification.

[thewood1]

Might have been good to expand with that info at the beginning.

[TBLackey]

The nuances I didn't grasp before I asked the question?

The things I don't know would fill up multiple books, certainly longer than a forum post.

[tylerblakebrandon]

You did great, I'll be sure to commend you in your annual performance review.

For ground/surface targets, the other piece of the puzzle is the sensor must have the property "can classify ground targets".

I asked the question because my Super Hornet era carrier group couldn't classify enemy ships without doing a visual flyby. It seems it wasn't until the F-35C that a US carrier group was capable of doing radar-only ship classification.

If your in the era of the S-3B then they could do it.

[Dimitris]

You did great, I'll be sure to commend you in your annual performance review.

For ground/surface targets, the other piece of the puzzle is the sensor must have the property "can classify ground targets".

I asked the question because my Super Hornet era carrier group couldn't classify enemy ships without doing a visual flyby. It seems it wasn't until the F-35C that a US carrier group was capable of doing radar-only ship classification.

Radars that have the "synthetic aperture radar" flag are able to image and identify ground targets, though not at maximum range.

[Nikel]

This recent article is of interest.

Jiangkun Gong, Jun Yan, Deyong Kong, Deren Li. An introduction to radar Automatic Target Recognition (ATR) technology in ground-based radar systems.


https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2310/2310.14769.pdf

[FrangibleCover]

It would be nice to have a database flag for NCTR-Oscilloscope Staring. I believe it works differently to JEM and relies more on the general size and shape of the return than on counting fan blades, as well as the strong link between proficiency and speed/possibility of acquisition and the fact that it can only identify one target at a time. I also wonder how JEM interacts with prop aircraft and helicopters - presumably one can count blades and get an ID from almost any angle.

[Dimitris]

It would be nice to have a database flag for NCTR-Oscilloscope Staring. I believe it works differently to JEM and relies more on the general size and shape of the return than on counting fan blades, as well as the strong link between proficiency and speed/possibility of acquisition and the fact that it can only identify one target at a time. I also wonder how JEM interacts with prop aircraft and helicopters - presumably one can count blades and get an ID from almost any angle.

This is already modelled to an extent. For older radar sets that have the NCTR flag (the SA-5's Square Pair is a good example) the time & range for target class/ID is HIGHLY dependent on crew proficiency: newbies will take forever if at all, aces will have a gut feel near-instantly. From the 1980s onwards the process becomes an automatic hands-off affair so crew skill stops being a factor.