Hyper-Optic Targeting System

[Batman]

You're right. I was thinking of the Bullpup weapons of Vietnam fame that required a human to guide it to the target. I forgot about Maverick. Would Hellfire be considered an EO weapon considering it is laser guided?

I'd say no but better ask on of the HABites for a more qualified opinion.
EO to my knowledge requires an honest-to-Valen camera to do the targeting.
And the laser-guided Hellfire isn't a passive seeking weaon either. It is semi-active.
A passive laser-guided weapon requires a really weird scenario...

[Sea Skimmer]

Actually, I can't think of ANY modern EO targeted missile that is NOT completely independent.

AGM-142, AGM-130, GBU-15, assuming we just stick to modern weapons.

[Sea Skimmer]

A passive laser-guided weapon requires a really weird scenario...

Well, theoretically you could build a missile to home onto enemy laser emissions, which would be considered passively seeking weapon. Of course, getting a missile seeker to pick out a tiny little beam of laser light would probably require that that enemy laser be lighting up your missile launcher...

[Batman]

Actually, I can't think of ANY modern EO targeted missile that is NOT completely independent.

AGM-142, AGM-130, GBU-15, assuming we just stick to modern weapons.

That's propably why you're in the HAB and I'm not.
Conceeded, conceeded, and conceeded.
I wonder when I'll ever learn to keep my mouth shut.

[Batman]

Cowardly cover-my-ass response: AGM-130 CAN be used independently, so while it can UTILIZE remote control it doesn't NEED it. Same goes for GBU-15 (at least if globalsecurity.org are concidered reliable).

[Sea Skimmer]

Cowardly cover-my-ass response: AGM-130 CAN be used independently, so while it can UTILIZE remote control it doesn't NEED it. Same goes for GBU-15 (at least if globalsecurity.org are concidered reliable).

Unless you fire from a pointlessly close range, all three of the systems need to be locked on after launch by a human controller. The EO trackers simply can't see the target from the normal launch ranges. Technology has provided a solution to that, with autonomous target recognition, the missile is fed an electronic image of what the target should look like on its seeker, and it automatically scans the area for something that matches, and then homes in. However such a system requires good pre strike reconnaissance to work and is vulnerable to decoys and camouflage if the enemy is expecting that sort of weapon. So far only JASSM uses ATR though.

[Prozac the Robert]

Why does the flash have to be omnidirectional? Put a sufficiently powerful laser on the eye of the camera-Poof. One blind camera. An optical flare that you ignite behind, say, a fighter, isn't going to faze the pilot much (and could still be directional).

Aiming a laser at a small camera would not be an easy task at all. Also there would most likely be an array of cameras, so having one or two go blind wouldn't help much. And thats if your laser even gets through shields.

[Batman]

Why does the flash have to be omnidirectional? Put a sufficiently powerful laser on the eye of the camera-Poof. One blind camera. An optical flare that you ignite behind, say, a fighter, isn't going to faze the pilot much (and could still be directional).

Aiming a laser at a small camera would not be an easy task at all. Also there would most likely be an array of cameras, so having one or two go blind wouldn't help much.

So I use a really bright searchlight or a non-omnidirectional flare. Camera(s) still 'jammed'.

And thats if your laser even gets through shields.

If it doesn't, there's no need to. If the shields stop visible light the camera's blind.

[Sea Skimmer]

So I use a really bright searchlight or a non-omnidirectional flare. Camera(s) still 'jammed'.

If you use a searchlight fitted on your ship then its just going to become a target for a computer driven system, which can determine the area of peak brightness in what might light like a bright splotch filling the field of view to a human. It will then aim the ships gun at that spot.

[brianeyci]

If you use a searchlight fitted on your ship then its just going to become a target for a computer driven system, which can determine the area of peak brightness in what might light like a bright splotch filling the field of view to a human. It will then aim the ships gun at that spot.

As an aside, there are large searchlights mounted on the Constitution that we see in the TOS movies (either from the spacedock or from the Enterprise herself). I wonder if those searchlights are just for repair crews to see what they are doing, because lighting up your hull in the middle of battle doesn't make sense to me.

Brian

[Aaron]

As an aside, there are large searchlights mounted on the Constitution that we see in the TOS movies (either from the spacedock or from the Enterprise herself). I wonder if those searchlights are just for repair crews to see what they are doing, because lighting up your hull in the middle of battle doesn't make sense to me.

Brian

Neither does painting a warship white.

[brianeyci]

As an aside, there are large searchlights mounted on the Constitution that we see in the TOS movies (either from the spacedock or from the Enterprise herself). I wonder if those searchlights are just for repair crews to see what they are doing, because lighting up your hull in the middle of battle doesn't make sense to me.

Brian

Neither does painting a warship white.

Nor does painting a warship green, yellow, blue, etc. Sigh. How do we find an in-universe answer to this? Some sort of stupid treaty, where Federation ships have to be painted white and Klingon ships have to be painted green/grey?

Brian

[Aaron]

Nor does painting a warship green, yellow, blue, etc. Sigh. How do we find an in-universe answer to this? Some sort of stupid treaty, where Federation ships have to be painted white and Klingon ships have to be painted green/grey?

Brian

Perhaps, it seems to be a racial preferance. Frankly the warships should all be painted black, so they blend in with space. They'd be harder to target visually.

An out of universe explanation is that it's part of B&B's turning each race into a one trick pony.

[Sea Skimmer]

Neither does painting a warship white.

Actually it does, if you're concerned about nuclear blasts. White paint does a good job of reflecting away a lot of the heat. Its change in color can also give you an idea of how bad the radiation was or is.

[Aaron]

Actually it does, if you're concerned about nuclear blasts. White paint does a good job of reflecting away a lot of the heat. Its change in color can also give you an idea of how bad the radiation was or is.

I stand corrected. Will this same prinicple work against Photon Torpedo's? I'm kinda vague on whether there nuclear weapons.

So could the painting of Fed ships in the TOS movie era indicate that their shields are not up to par? If they have to paint their ships white to reflect some of the heat. I've noticed that the only white ships we see were the Constituition Refit and the Mirandas. Excelsior was blue-gray and the TNG ships seem to have the same basic colour. So it could be telling that the older ships have a white hull.

[Batman]

So could the painting of Fed ships in the TOS movie era indicate that their shields are not up to par? If they have to paint their ships white to reflect some of the heat.

They are in a manner of speaking not 'up to par' to this day. Ever notice how the ship starts taking damage before the shields drop? Apparently there's always some leakage. Reflective paint makes damn good sense.

[Aaron]

They are in a manner of speaking not 'up to par' to this day. Ever notice how the ship starts taking damage before the shields drop? Apparently there's always some leakage. Reflective paint makes damn good sense.

I always chalked that upto shock from the warheads going off next to the hull. But that happens with phaser, and disruptor fire to doesn't it? I wonder why SF would switch from reflective paint to that shitty grey colour then.

[brianeyci]

It may be that there is no reflective paint. The colour might be just the natural colour of their materials. That makes more sense, given that they don't have any notion of camoflage on their soldier's uniforms anyway (redshirts make a conspicious target!).

Brian

[Batman]

They are in a manner of speaking not 'up to par' to this day. Ever notice how the ship starts taking damage before the shields drop? Apparently there's always some leakage. Reflective paint makes damn good sense.

I always chalked that upto shock from the warheads going off next to the hull.

What shock? We're talking about warheads going off in the vacuum of space.
There is no pressure wave. All the ship is hit with is a shitload of radiation.

But that happens with phaser, and disruptor fire to doesn't it?

Yep.

I wonder why SF would switch from reflective paint to that shitty grey colour then.

Well, there's always the TNG 'But we're not a military anymore' excuse, that they don't know about 'let's play it safe just in case' is canon fact (Warp core ejection mechanism or blast doors, anyone?), and they MIGHT have found some treknobabble solution to achieve the reflectivity of white paint without white paint.
Furthermore, I may be hallucinating, but IIRC the only actually WHITE version of the Enterprise was the pre-refit original TOS one. The refit, Ent-A and Reliant IIRC were the same light grey TNG ships are.

[Aaron]

Furthermore, I may be hallucinating, but IIRC the only actually WHITE version of the Enterprise was the pre-refit original TOS one. The refit, Ent-A and Reliant IIRC were the same light grey TNG ships are.

TOS Pre-Refit, she's clearly gray.


Refit, definetly white


Reliant, she seems to be a different colour than Enterprise

[Batman]

Funny how in that last picture the E-nil isn't white, either.
1. If the Reliant i that picture is a different color than 1701 that defeats your assumption that Mirandas are white.
2. I'd prefer some pictures where we cann reasonably assume that lighting is not an issue.
3. Where did that first pic come from? I'm not accusing you of anything, but the extreme clarity of the picture makes me suspect it's not an actual TOS screenshot. No offense intended.

[Batman]

Furthermore, that first picture of the refit E-nil seems overly bright. I'll see if I can find some others but as I suck at this that may take a while.

[Aaron]

I got the images from www.ditl.org. The image of the Pre-Refit Enterprise is from "Trials and Tribulations" so it's CGI.

I'm thinking that the Mutara Nebula's coloring is affecting the ships hull color. That pic of Relient was the only one I could find of it actually in the movie, the others were all model shots.

[Aaron]

Oops I actually got them from: http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/. Sorry about the mix up.

[Aaron]

Here's some more screenshots from http://www.ex-astris-scientia.org/.

She actually looks blue here.


In drydock.


In Space, looks kinda silver.


The Ent-A
[/img]

Enterprise and Excelsior in Spacedock. The colour difference is quite evident.


Another of Reliant


I'll be damned, I was sure that Enterprise and Reliant were white. But they seem to change colour depending on the lighting.