UAPs in Command: A serious thought experiment

[HalfLifeExpert]

Now I know that the question of UAPs is a controversial one, but with the US Military in recent years having admitted to taking them somewhat seriously for the first time in several decades, I think it could be worth at least thinking about how they could conceivably be represented in Command.

They could be used both as a fun "sky clutter" thing in some scenarios, or they could be used in a semi-serious way of experimenting with attempting intercepts on them.

The problem, of course, is having "realistic" DB entries when so little is known about what these things are. I'm not here to make a case on their origins or exactly how they work, but I personally think there's enough to say that there's definitely something in the skies that military forces have been detecting and encountering since 1945 at least.

So I think there could be enough basic attributes to make "generic" DB entries of a handful of types based on the long history of reports by pilots

Such attributes would be things like:

-General size (ranging from missile/small UAV size up to maybe comparable to a C-5 Galaxy)

-Detectability (This would be what sensors can detect the object in question, visual, IR and/or radar)

-Speed & maneuverability (This could be the most challenging part in the Command engine, as many classic reports claim extremely high speed, very tight maneuvers, and ability to come to a stop and hover on a dime)

I don't think it's really worth trying to give these things weapons, as this would be more experimental with engaging the mystery rather than actual kinetic combat. I'm not aware of any credible instances of actual kinetic skirmishes with these things where the object apparently opened fire. That said, I could see potential value in these things having some kind of ECM, due to reports of radar/electronic interference, such as with the 1976 Tehran incident.

Thoughts? Would this be something you'd be interested in at some point? It would be something new and different to have in our toybox to play around with.

[SunlitZelkova]

I think what you said in another thread about adding them as "biologics in the sky" alongside flocks of birds and other objects that can generate unwanted radar clutter would make sense. The addition of commercial and civilian aircraft to the game already fulfill that kind of role, so more could be added in the same way things like lost shipping containers and flotsam were eventually added as sea clutter. Even planets and stars could be added, I recall hearing a story from a vet here whose ship, while sailing in the Tasman Sea, misidentified Venus as a helicopter "shadowing" them for a good few hours.

I don't think the characteristics would need to be modeled too closely, in fact the massive speeds they fly at might not be necessary either. Just putting the speed one step above the fastest aircraft in the game (which I assume is the hypothetical Aurora spyplane in the DB3000) and so making it impossible to catch would suffice, while the other characteristics could just fulfill generic attributes (one with stealth that is primarily visual, one without stealth that is primarily detectable by radar, etc.). The physical size and shape wouldn't particularly matter, because they often appear as balls of light anyways, and it is impossible for units to report "shape" and size when making a contact report: the main thing that matter is the unit's signature, which tends to be weird and doesn't align with physical appearance anyways. All of them would have ECM, that would be optionally activated based on the mission or unit doctrine.