Matrix Games Forums

She can go fast enough to make a real difference in target datum at more than 100nm. That's the reason the weapon would carry a nuclear warhead- It can only maneuver so much to hit something at very long range, and it's likely that their terminal radar is not capable of getting a solid fix on a single target at such an extreme range. Like I said, I wouldn't worry. When they start producing ACTUAL video of a DF-21 RV hitting a moving target at sea at nominal range, then I'll be a lot less skeptical.

Your not the first Navy Veteran to have claimed that sort of speed from a carrier, I've heard that from others who served on the Nuclear Carriers, apparently they can get up to speed fast, and it gets really impressive when they make a high speed turn [;)]. Thank you for your service to our country btw. It's appreciated.

I worked at a very large U.S. defense contractor for a few years, so I've had my hands on some BMD stuff, as well as a lot of experience with Night vision and Thermal imaging systems for ships, and satellite surveillance systems.

Key here is to go with published public reports so I make sure not to claim anything unless we have readily available public info to back it up, I don't want to risk real human lives by having my virtual systems using real info that can be compromised by real enemies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4KnCqcTEOU "Well over 30 knots" while doing high speed tight turns is good enough for me, and look at that tight wake at 2:18. [:)]

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

ORIGINAL: NakedWeasel
I wont get into exactly how fast a nuclear carrier can go, but, I will say, that when she's out in the deep blue and she's making flank you can water ski behind her, and she will eventually out run her escorts. 35+ knots without breaking a sweat.

Some sources disagree: . . .

I got to tour Weasel's ship in 1998. I was told by crew members that it was common knowledge to them the maximum speed of the CVN was considerably higher than 30 knots. I won't say exactly what they told me but suffice to say, only the LCS would be able to keep up.

Of course, I'm just a gullible tourist and what was told to me was informal.

Great thread by the way.

Thanks to whomever allowed me to post links!!

A simulator like Command really allows you to see the bigger picture and see how some of these units work with other offboard sensors and systems, a lot of the time in other simulators large portions of the rest of the battlefield aren't adressed, so you don't get a complete picture of how things might happen in a real world scenario.

Take the info below for example:

http://www.fas.org/spp/military/program/sigint/androart.htm

Large-scale combat US operations were supported by the satellite system for the first time during the war with Iraq in 1990-1991. Despite the very long periods of operation of the satellites (some of the Chalet satellites had at that time been in orbit 11 or 12 years), at the time of the conflict they were put on a round-the clock schedule. The task of intercepting Iraqi radio conversations from space was made easier by the fact that they were for the most part using Soviet communications equipment of the sort the satellites had been designed against.

As a result of retargeting space-based SIGINT apparatus on the Iraqi radio nets, the volume of intercepted information significantly surpassed NSA's processing capability. Consequently the American command was forced to take urgent measures to increase the number of Arabic translators.

Along with carrying out the mission of strategic reconnaissance against Iraqi military C2 radio nets, the United States made special efforts to intercept information of tactical significance (e.g., the fact of airplanes taking off or the movement of tanks as revealed by the radio conversations of the crews) and to deliver it rapidly to users in the theater.

The missions carried out by space-based SIGINT systems expand as satellite hardware is modernized consist of the following:

- intercept and decryption of governmental, military and diplomatic communications transmitted by radio
intercept of ESM (RES) signals which characterize the operating modes of the higher command organizations, installations of air defense, ABM and missile forces, and also the combat readiness of foreign armed forces
reception of telemetry signals during ballistic missile tests
relay of radio messages from CIA agents in foreign countries.
According to data in the foreign press, the band of radio frequencies which can be intercepted by SIGINT satellites stretches from 100 MHz to 25 GHz. This, however, is difficult to realize in practice as there would have to be a collection of large-scale antennas of differing forms on a satellite. The satellites probably employ the widely used modular principle for combining equipment to carry out specific reconnaissance missions. This is indicated by the simultaneous deployment on orbit of several different groupings of SIGINT satellites (Rhyolite and Chalet, Vortex and Aquacade), which conduct reconnaissance in different parts of the radio spectrum.

So going by the above, you can see how satellites can give considerable amounts of intel on the placement and type of SAM systems, radio communications by opfor ground forces and their plans, etc, using public info that's over 20 years old.

And if you don't want to destroy the enemies satellite system, there's tools for that too.

http://www.rense.com/general59/jam.htm

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Air Force quietly has put into service a new weapon designed to jam enemy satellite communications, a significant step toward U.S. control of space.

The so-called Counter Communications System was declared operational late last month at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, the Air Force Space Command said Friday in e-mailed replies to questions from Reuters.

The ground-based jammer uses electromagnetic radio frequency energy to knock out transmissions on a temporary and reversible basis, without frying components, the command said. "A reversible effect ensures that during the time of need, the adversary's space-based capability to threaten our forces is diminished," said Capt. Angie Blair, a spokeswoman. "Following the time of need, the space-based capabilities used by the adversary can return to its original state."

The device appears to have been put into service considerably earlier than had been projected by the Air Force as recently as February. At that time, a long-range planning document, dubbed the Transformation Flight Plan, said such a system would let the United States by 2010 "deny and disrupt an adversary's space-based communications and early warning" of attack. U.S. military control of space is one of four missions spelled out under a national space policy adopted by former president Bill Clinton in 1996.

The goal is to make sure U.S. forces have unhindered access to space and space-based services and to deny an enemy any similar benefits. The U.S. military has experimented with a range of "antisatellite" (ASAT) weapons, including lasers, to knock out enemy craft by destroying them or damaging their sensors.

http://www.spyflight.co.uk/sat%20jam.htm

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/milspace-00q.html



http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/af/af_trans_flightplan_nov03.pdf

In the above link this public 2003 report shows budget info for projects, of interest I found was (Page C-18) "Hypervelocity Rod Bundles"

Page C-12 "Space Based Radio Frequency Energy Weapon"? Page D-10 "satellites containing high-power radio frequency transmitters that possess the capability to disrupt/destory/disable a wide variety of electronics and national-level command and control systems. It would typically be used as a non-kinetic anti-satellite weapon."

Putting it all together and you have a pretty potent force that literally has the high ground.

Then there's the rather shady Space Based Laser program, there's literally not much public info after 1999.

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/45jack_files/03files/Space_Weapons_04_High_Energy_Laser_System.html
https://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/sbl.htm

Going by the info, there was apparently one full size one made.



Parent company info here: http://www.nircm.com/

They apparetnly worked on a laser blinding Bradley that had two units fielded during the 1991 Gulf war.


among other Directed Energy Weapons. http://www.nircm.com/dew.html

ORIGINAL: Primarchx
Also tried the US F-15 ASAT missile, which had an incredibly small engagement envelope and seemed to work, though at the time it crashed the game at the point the sat was hit.

Thanks for the heads up on this; ASAT impact crash fixed in Build 505.

ORIGINAL: AlmightyTallest
Then there's the rather shady Space Based Laser program, there's literally not much public info after 1999.

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/45jack_files/03files/Space_Weapons_04_High_Energy_Laser_System.html
https://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/sbl.htm

Going by the info, there was apparently one full size one made.



Parent company info here: http://www.nircm.com/

One post-2000 reference claims it was essentially put on hold: https://www.armscontrol.org/node/2987
Haven't been able to verify this though.

Some more stuff on DEWs & ASAT / counter-sat systems:

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-DEW-HEL-Analysis.html

http://www.slideshare.net/RUSIEVENTS/ig ... -air-power (Slides 71-72, 79-91).

Thanks for the links Sunburn, some interesting reading materials to go through.

Thanks, D! I thought I had written it up during beta.

ORIGINAL: Sunburn

ORIGINAL: Primarchx
Also tried the US F-15 ASAT missile, which had an incredibly small engagement envelope and seemed to work, though at the time it crashed the game at the point the sat was hit.

Thanks for the heads up on this; ASAT impact crash fixed in Build 505.

One of my early episodes included a ASAT connecting; without a crash (the SAT didn't blow up though). In software dev sometimes when you fix something you break something elsewhere.

I just looked it up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0XhY59H ... Cf&index=4 Episode 2 [:)] about a week after release.