I'm messing with various time period databases.

I know the Radar Cross Section is a doubtful issue, stealth topic aside, but I see very great differences in RCS in WWII DB and the other DBs.

 

As example, P-3 Orion and B-17 Superfortress are planes of very similar size, P-3 in ordinary DB as a RCS of 159, and in WWII DB we find: B-17 RCS=86, and B-29 RCS=88 (And all these planes are with propellors, I know a rotating propellor has a big RCS), Or in smaller planes, P-51 Mustang RCS=70, and the similar size A-37 Dragonfly RCS=137, and I see these are consistent differences between the DBs.

Why these enormous differences ?

 

Also, I don't know if it's a relationated issue, the probability detection in WWII DB radars is higher, in a lot of radars is 70% (and they are old and limitated radars), but in the ordinary or modern DBs the probability detection of not avanced radars (i.e., not SAR, AESA, MTI or similar) is habitually 50%.

The same question as above.

 

I repeat, I know it may be a controversial issue, or it can be only a mishap issue, but ... some comments or answers, please.

 

And Happy Holidays to everyone

Waiting for your comments or answers about RCS, and messing with the DBs.

Some weird ideas about RCS surge in my concentrated mind.

Some personal weird ideas about RCS modifiers:

+1 for each fuselage boom extra (Example P-38 Lightning +1).

+1 for each tail plane extra (Example: Constellation +2, two extra tail governors).

+1 for each upper or low turret (Example: B-17G +2, upper and lower turrets).

+1 for each propeller, a rotating propeller is a big radar target (Example: Me-109 +1, the compressor blades in a jet fighter is radar detectable, but more smaller, and stealthed in F-117 and posterior types).

+1 for each engine pod (Example: B-52 +4, S-3 Viking +2, Mosquito +2 (and another +2 because the two propeller), A-3 Skywarrior +2, B-57 Intruder +0, jet engines integrated in the wing).

+1 for each extra plane (Example: Fokker DR.1 +2, is triplane).

+1 for each radar search antenna (Example: EC-121D +2, upper and lower dome, weather or ranging radars are very small and don’t count, the radar antenna is in effect a very detectable item).

+1 for external stores habitually carried (as almost every modern plane).

-1 for only internal weapons (as MiG-15 or F-86 used without drop tanks).

-1 for blended fuselage and wings (Vulcan, Tu-16, Victor, B-35)

-1 for no tail unit (Mirages, Vulcan, B-35).

-1 for wood/fabric/plastic in construction (basically WWI planes, but also some rarities, as Mosquito, or more exotic types).

If you aren't tinkering with the RCS spreadsheet you might find it enlightening

 

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showfile=28

 

As for where the existing RCS numbers come from other than broadly from the paper annexes (and fine tuned by the tastes of the DB author) I have no idea

If you aren't tinkering with the RCS spreadsheet you might find it enlightening

 

http://harpgamer.com/harpforum/index.php?a...amp;showfile=28

 

As for where the existing RCS numbers come from other than broadly from the paper annexes (and fine tuned by the tastes of the DB author) I have no idea

Thanks you very much, TonyE. I remember the existence of the RCS spreadsheet, and it should be somewhere in my HD, but I was editing RCS for years without it, only "rounding" the RCS to the more similar type/size of platform. But I will see it now another time.

Was only yesterday when he saw the aforementioned discrepances between modern and WWII ( and one of my primary interest is to revamp my old World War One DB for HCE, but I want also RCS in those platforms )

Well, we can wait "other"comments in the next days.

Mrrry Holidays to the Harpoon Comunity ( I hope don't thinking in Harpoon DB editing the next ten hours, at least )

I'm messing with various time period databases.

I know the Radar Cross Section is a doubtful issue, stealth topic aside, but I see very great differences in RCS in WWII DB and the other DBs.

 

As example, P-3 Orion and B-17 Superfortress are planes of very similar size, P-3 in ordinary DB as a RCS of 159, and in WWII DB we find: B-17 RCS=86, and B-29 RCS=88 (And all these planes are with propellors, I know a rotating propellor has a big RCS), Or in smaller planes, P-51 Mustang RCS=70, and the similar size A-37 Dragonfly RCS=137, and I see these are consistent differences between the DBs.

Why these enormous differences ?

 

Also, I don't know if it's a relationated issue, the probability detection in WWII DB radars is higher, in a lot of radars is 70% (and they are old and limitated radars), but in the ordinary or modern DBs the probability detection of not avanced radars (i.e., not SAR, AESA, MTI or similar) is habitually 50%.

The same question as above.

 

I repeat, I know it may be a controversial issue, or it can be only a mishap issue, but ... some comments or answers, please.

 

And Happy Holidays to everyone

 

 

Okay, bear in mind that what I am about to say is nothing more than a simple wild guess; I have NOTHING to do with any of the DBs out there, nor am I a radar engineer. That said, as I recall, a lot of the early radars used much lower frequency, longer wavelength signals than modern sets use. When the signal is in the centimetre or millimetre bands, the target aircraft is many dozens to hundreds of wavelengths across. With an old metre-band set, the same target would only be a few wavelengths across; conceivably, from certain aspects, a small fighter might not be much more than one or two wavelengths. Since resolution ability is related to the ratio of wavelength to target size, (this is why we can't see atoms with an optical microscope: they're smaller than the wavelength of visible light) even a big aircraft might effectively have a lower RCS at the frequencies involved. It is known that one of the biggest issues with stealth aircraft is getting broadband coverage; the techniques that are effective against short wavelength fire control sets are rather less useful for longer wavelength early warning sets. I repeat, however, that I have no particular expertise here. This is just me talking out my hat.

Okay, bear in mind that what I am about to say is nothing more than a simple wild guess; I have NOTHING to do with any of the DBs out there, nor am I a radar engineer. That said, as I recall, a lot of the early radars used much lower frequency, longer wavelength signals than modern sets use. When the signal is in the centimetre or millimetre bands, the target aircraft is many dozens to hundreds of wavelengths across. With an old metre-band set, the same target would only be a few wavelengths across; conceivably, from certain aspects, a small fighter might not be much more than one or two wavelengths. Since resolution ability is related to the ratio of wavelength to target size, (this is why we can't see atoms with an optical microscope: they're smaller than the wavelength of visible light) even a big aircraft might effectively have a lower RCS at the frequencies involved. It is known that one of the biggest issues with stealth aircraft is getting broadband coverage; the techniques that are effective against short wavelength fire control sets are rather less useful for longer wavelength early warning sets. I repeat, however, that I have no particular expertise here. This is just me talking out my hat.

Thanks for the answer and for the new idea, Warhorse64, it's another interesanting focus of the issue. No very modellable in the presente state of HCE (and I also want keep it simple), but I will reckon about it ....

Okay, bear in mind that what I am about to say is nothing more than a simple wild guess; I have NOTHING to do with any of the DBs out there, nor am I a radar engineer. That said, as I recall, a lot of the early radars used much lower frequency, longer wavelength signals than modern sets use. When the signal is in the centimetre or millimetre bands, the target aircraft is many dozens to hundreds of wavelengths across. With an old metre-band set, the same target would only be a few wavelengths across; conceivably, from certain aspects, a small fighter might not be much more than one or two wavelengths. Since resolution ability is related to the ratio of wavelength to target size, (this is why we can't see atoms with an optical microscope: they're smaller than the wavelength of visible light) even a big aircraft might effectively have a lower RCS at the frequencies involved. It is known that one of the biggest issues with stealth aircraft is getting broadband coverage; the techniques that are effective against short wavelength fire control sets are rather less useful for longer wavelength early warning sets. I repeat, however, that I have no particular expertise here. This is just me talking out my hat.

 

Warhorse nailed it, as far as the HCWW goes. The 60% and 70% detection values come from 1st Gen and 2nd Gen radars in the CaS annex.

Ok, thanks for the explanations. Thinking in the problem ... and in the runway lenght issue.