Star Wars cloak detection capabilities

[bilateralrope]

Even if Maul's cloak was double blind, Maul can still use the force instead of the ships sensors so he wont be blinded by it

[Ghost Rider]

I would like to point out that CANON has a cloak that's not a double blind for anyone advocating this. It's called Darth Maul's vessel.

In fact only Zahn created the double blind cloak.

It's been ages since I read the books, but IIRC Zahn didn't create the cloaks, just used existing cloaking technology?

And is there canon evidence that Mauls cloak doesn't suffer from the same limitation? I'm not arguing that it does, I'm asking because I've seen mention of the Sith vessel having a cloak but none on how it functioned.

Actually yes they do, they mention throughout variety of official sources that the Stygian cloaking field was not a double blind.

And Zahn created the double blind since nowhere in canon did they mention it having such a weakness...in fact canon only mentions the cloak in ESB.

[PayBack]

OK thanks.

lmao sorry I was half asleep there.. Zahns the fucking author not a charactor.. I don't know where my head was at.. yes of course he created it.

[Elheru Aran]

You probably confused it with Zaarin. Or Zsinj. Or some Z-name from the EU.

[AK_Jedi]

The essential chronology says that only the stygian cloaks are not double blind, and the crystals ran out sometime during the prequel area.

[Connor MacLeod]

Note that the "double-blind" cloak is something of an absurdity. As we see in the later "Hand of Thrawn" duology, objects (such as weapons fire - or at least certain kinds of weapons fire, as well as TIE fighters) can pass safely in and out of the "double-blind" cloaks without being interdicted.

If massless TL fire can pass out (assuming these ARE the massless energy weapons variants,, that is) it might also be possible for active emissions to pass out (although doing so would basically give you away, and I'm not convinced that those wer massless beams firing: Zahn always struck me as going with the "particle" theory for blasters..)

Anyhow, this means that the cloak is only "double-blind" so long as the sensors and the like do not extend beyond the field. Cameras and passive sensors (and active sensors, if you disregard the fact they'd give you away) extended through the shields shoudl logically function (And given the freighter that Thrawn slipped into Bilbringi, or the cloaked Carracks, the cloaking effect does not have to extend far from the hull neccesarily.) if mounted on extendable struts.

Or, if for some reason you could not alter the size or shape of the cloaking field, then you just use tractor beams to manuver/hold/extend out some sort of probe or drone partly out of the shield and let it serve as the sensor platform. (according to BTM, ISD's have "dozens" of Tractor beams, presumably independent of the 10 combat-scale "ship-capturing" versions.)


Of course, one must also realize that "cloaking" technology is not just a single kind of device (or even two) there are quite a few different kinds of cloaking technologies (the kinds mentioned in the ISB, in the EGW&T, the Zahn cloak, Maul's cloak, Slave-1's cloaking system, the "camoflage shields" used on Imperial Naval vessels in "Lando Calrissian and the StarCave of ThonBoka, etc..)

[Lord Revan]

well at least one type of cloaks don't turn the ship invisible to the naked eye (Goto's ship in KOTOR2)

[Connor MacLeod]

Neither did the freighter Thrawn snuck into Bilbringi. That cloak (like the ISB one) seems to rely on multiple inter-related technologies/systems in order to achieve its cloaking. (unlike the magic Sith Crystal cloaking..)

[Batman]

Neither did the freighter Thrawn snuck into Bilbringi.

That's because the freighter wasn't cloaked. Its cargo hold was.