Forums of the Megaverse®

I talking the missile counter measure. Not agricultural term used for the bracts and casings of cereal grain that are harvested along with the grain. How do you use it in games? What are your house rules? Since i can't find Any cannon. (It might be in Robotec But i don't have those books.) This would lead to some (I think) neat addition to combat in rifts. It would definitely keep people from blowing all there missiles at a target in a dog-fight. So what does everyone think?

At first I thought you were talking about the rash you get from not cleaning the inside of your environmental armor after falling your HF save...

I assign missiles a 65% Sensory roll. If countermeasures are used, then ech gives a -10% to that roll.
One chaff = 55% roll
All eight = Damn near impossible, but now vulnerable to future attacks.

Usually keep this rule "behind the screen" to keep things interesting

Also, dumping chaff or flares takes the place of shooting it down. Either one or the other, not both.

Yeah...I played in a game where the GM did something similar.
We (the players) were trying to instigate a war between the CS and Triax.
Didn't work so well...after a few botched rolls and mutterings of "I didn't think of that..." we found ourselves being chased over the atlantic by real fighters...whose missiles had a 98% accuracy system. All but one of us died over the atlantic, the one who didn't was devil-ray food...he died IN the atlantic

It depends on the houserules about missiles, whether
the "chaff" technology works or not, and if so, to what
degree...

For my part, I prefer more active defenses, like
CIWS, claymore mines, and counter-launcher missiles
(or airburst grenades/shells).

Adios
KLM

See the WB5. The interceptor fighter have chaff dispensers.

I don't see how chaff alone would work well in some situations.
It seems that "guided" missiles (especially the smart ones) are going to be using more than just active radar, such as image recognition, thermal imaging, anti-radiation, etc. With all the tech there is, it seems like it would be possible for missiles to be packing multiple sensors to make it harder to defeat them.
It would explain why there is a 25% chance of the chaff systems in WB5 will have no effect on the missiles at all.


For me, there isn't just chaff, but also flares, and in some cases, a 'decoy' designed to 'detect' radar signals and send out false returns to confuse missiles (and other radars) as to which is the real target, and to also send out radar signals to draw away anti-radiation capable missiles.

I bring up the last bit because I think even today some of the newer missiles actually track the radar emissions of enemy jets so that they can 'intercept' the jets course enough to switch to active radar when it is close enough. This not only gives it much better range than its radar alone could effectively allow, but also makes it a very handy fire and forget weapon, since the launching jet doesn't even need to have an active radar once the missile is fired.

Overall, I feel that jets should be packing chaff and flares, and not just chaff.
Especially since you don't need a several million credit jet shot down by some bozos with a few several thousand credit shoulder launched heat seeking missiles.

R Ditto wrote:Especially since you don't need a several million credit jet shot down by some bozos with a few several thousand credit shoulder launched heat seeking missiles.

You forget that the majority of the Ground-to-Air missiles of today are going to be laser guided so the chaff and flares would mean nothing at all to the missile.

That means that this several million jet is going to the graveyard no matter what.

Nightmaster wrote: You forget that the majority of the Ground-to-Air missiles of today are going to be laser guided so the chaff and flares would mean nothing at all to the missile.

Excuse me?

Air to ground... Well, more or less, thought there is
a transition to GPS.

But SAM?!

ADios
KLM

Yeah you'd hafta be pretty quick to "paint" a flying target from the ground and keep it "painted" till impact
Laser guidance is used for stationary targets, or slow movers.
Most of todays SAM's use Radar images and a prox fuse with a frag warhead so they only have to get close.
A to A ordinance uses infra-red, thermal (rare) but mostly radar imagery as well, also with a powerful frag warhead on a prox fuse. I dunno how many of them have impact fuses. But with look-down-shoot-down radar, lasers are not the SAM or AtoA guidance system of choice.

As far as I know, the only standard SAM, which uses
laser guidance is the ADATS, and maybe the Blowpipe,
if it is still in service.

Most portable SAMs are infrared, with infrared imaging
(flares are almost useless) is slowly becoming standard.

Larger SAMs are using active or semiactive radar,
since they expected to be fired throught mist
or clouds - which frankly blocks laser or heat.

However some SAMs can have multiple guidance
(ie radar AND imaging infrared - just to make someone's
day).

So, drop some trash and hope... that your active
point defense kills the incoming missile.

Adios
KLM

Nope. Chaff is alufoil designed to create a juicy radar target,
flare is a magnesium torch, used as a tempting bait for
heat-seekers.

Same purpose, different threat.

Mind you, a lot changed in them since the first, simple forms
presented above.

Adios
KLM

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/equip/index.html

Check countermeasures section.

Adios
KLM

Chaff works against Radar guided missiles

Flares work against IR guided missiles.

My house rule?

Chaff/Flare decoys: Chaff/Flare decoys can be used to confuse enemy missiles volleys so that the PC can dodge the volley. Chaff decoys confuse radar images to divert radar-guided missiles, while flare decoys provide a brilliant infrared images to try and draw heat seeking missiles away. The bonuses are not cross-cumulative, though; you cannot confuse a heat-seeking missile with a chaff decoy. For this reason each time chaff/flares are used one of each type is ejected. Each decoy will allow the PC to dodge one additional missile above the max number they can dodge as well as add +2 to the dodge roll.

Darkmax wrote:I've never seen such a countermeasure before. I wonder how much it weighs or how big it is...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countermeasure

Blight wrote:I talking the missile counter measure. Not agricultural term used for the bracts and casings of cereal grain that are harvested along with the grain. How do you use it in games? What are your house rules? Since i can't find Any cannon. (It might be in Robotec But i don't have those books.) This would lead to some (I think) neat addition to combat in rifts. It would definitely keep people from blowing all there missiles at a target in a dog-fight. So what does everyone think?

It would likely just add to the dodge or is already counted in it... maybe. Doubt that it is in RT though because they never used any, prefer to dodge the missiles with wild acrobatics or blow up.

I'd just keep it simple and assume anything like that is factored into the dodge bonus of the craft.

If I wanted to add any more bonuses specifically from chaff and the like then I'd still just add it into the dodge somehow.

Combat is quite long enough, with quite enough rolls and counter rolls without adding any more!

Darkmax wrote:yeah, but there are times you just want to trap your enemy.....

Uh... how does chaff trap your enemy?

Are there not rules for Chaff use in Rifts: Triax & the NGR WB? I seem to recall them being present on atleast one aircraft. The payload was low though.

Darkmax wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Darkmax wrote:yeah, but there are times you just want to trap your enemy.....

Uh... how does chaff trap your enemy?

By using your craft or the chaffs are a lure.

Chaff doesn't stay boyant in the air long enough to fool aircraft not to mention:
1) when they got close enought to perform a dog fight they'd notice
2) chaff become stationary and won't fly formation

You'd need a drone to do that.

For reference I'm a Ground Radar Technician in the USAF AFSC 2E071 Staff Sergeant

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Darkmax wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Darkmax wrote:yeah, but there are times you just want to trap your enemy.....

Uh... how does chaff trap your enemy?

By using your craft or the chaffs are a lure.

Chaff doesn't stay boyant in the air long enough to fool aircraft not to mention:
1) when they got close enought to perform a dog fight they'd notice
2) chaff become stationary and won't fly formation

You'd need a drone to do that.

Or a towed decoy...

Adios
KLM

Nope, I think more than 80% of the guys who ever
got shot down in an aircraft did not know who shot
them at the first place.

Then maybe we can play decoys, but I would
assign this task to drones - except I am sure
that I can keep out of weapon range. Shields,
chaff/flare, ECM, point defense aside...

Adios
KLM
your armchair experte

Not really.

Today jet engines (remember: those are SDC)
are designed to withstand "eating" of small
birds.

The "traditional" chaff is a rather thin aluminium foil...

And there is the problem is hitting the intake - not likely.
Kinda like trying to kill a "tail" with hand grenades
thrown out of the window. Yeah, right...

Adios
KLM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_%28film%29

Not neccesarily.

The above wikipedia article states them as explosives.

What is more..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSh-23

This autocannon, mounted as a tailgun in bombers
is used for firing countermeasures - it might
even be the Firefox's defense.

Adios
KLM

Well... maybe one in a million chance.

Adios
KLM

Sometimes aircraft do crash without even a golfball

But yeah, even if today turbines are rather bird resistant
carrier and airfield crew still take measures to keep the
runway clear of stuff.
-----------------

Back to that Firefox, I saw that scene in the movie, and
it was not chaff, but rather flare - and in the wikipedia
it is mentioned as more like aerial mines.

Whatever... It is reallllly tricky to hit the intake with
a free falling decoy, whatever it might be. Not impossible,
just improbable.

Adios
KLM

KLM wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Darkmax wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Darkmax wrote:yeah, but there are times you just want to trap your enemy.....

Uh... how does chaff trap your enemy?

By using your craft or the chaffs are a lure.

Chaff doesn't stay boyant in the air long enough to fool aircraft not to mention:
1) when they got close enought to perform a dog fight they'd notice
2) chaff become stationary and won't fly formation

You'd need a drone to do that.

Or a towed decoy...

Adios
KLM

A towed decoy would reduce the speed of the aircraft plus you couldn't use it to "trap" an opponent unless there going to go after multiple aircraft rather than the lone aircraft.

Darkmax wrote:I mean when you are being the lure and your comrades or wingman does the tag...... You guys really think dogfighting is done individually?....

No it isn't but chaff still can't be used in a dogfight the aircraft are too close and most dogfight missiles are IR and short range.

Darkmax wrote:wouldn't a chaff cause great havoc in an engine?.....

not great havoc. A bird strike in an engine is unlikely to make it not work. Chaff is essentially the tinfoil candy wrappers if it was heavy enough to cause damage it wouldn't "float" long enough to act as a sufficient RF spoof.

KLM wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_%28film%29

Not neccesarily.

The above wikipedia article states them as explosives.

What is more..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSh-23

This autocannon, mounted as a tailgun in bombers
is used for firing countermeasures - it might
even be the Firefox's defense.

Adios
KLM

Ah wiki... the reliable source

Korentin_Black wrote:I do seem to recall an apocryphal tale from the Book of Heroic Failures (a remarkably English phenomenon) regarding a jet fighter brought down by a golf ball.

That said, I have no way of knowing how much... chaff... that story is, but I just thought I'd share. ^_^

:thwak: bad pun those are my realm... those and multiposts.

Zer0 Kay wrote:

KLM wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_%28film%29

Not neccesarily.

The above wikipedia article states them as explosives.

What is more..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSh-23

This autocannon, mounted as a tailgun in bombers
is used for firing countermeasures - it might
even be the Firefox's defense.

Adios
KLM

Ah wiki... the reliable source

OK, prove it wrong.
In the case of the GSh-23 I actually read it first in a monthly
aerotech/history magazine.

Adios
KLM

KLM wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

KLM wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefox_%28film%29

Not neccesarily.

The above wikipedia article states them as explosives.

What is more..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GSh-23

This autocannon, mounted as a tailgun in bombers
is used for firing countermeasures - it might
even be the Firefox's defense.

Adios
KLM

Ah wiki... the reliable source

OK, prove it wrong.
In the case of the GSh-23 I actually read it first in a monthly
aerotech/history magazine.

Adios
KLM

Didn't say it was wrong I just said that wiki isn't a reliable source. Try using it as a source for a college class and see what happens. Whatever the subject was could be completely correct but since it is able to be edited by anyone it makes it a non scholarly source that is suseptable to incorrect hearsay.

Yepp, but in a case where the cited info is accurate
(like 90+%) making such a remark, from an USAF
radar technician...

Especially, if I didn't take it wrong and we wre
talking about the fact, that the GSh-23 as a tailgun is
used as a countermeasure dispenser - the fact you
probably must be aware.
Adios
KLM

KLM wrote:Yepp, but in a case where the cited info is accurate
(like 90+%) making such a remark, from an USAF
radar technician...

Especially, if I didn't take it wrong and we wre
talking about the fact, that the GSh-23 as a tailgun is
used as a countermeasure dispenser - the fact you
probably must be aware.
Adios
KLM

Why do you do that with the small text. What does me being a RADAR tech have to do with commenting on the fact that Wikipedia is not considered a good source material? You did take it wrong. I wasn't talking about the GSh-23 I was just saying that wiki isn't a good source, that is all.

Small text = not really important.

...since I am not a NE salesman.

Adios
KLM

Darkmax wrote:small texts are not friendly to older individuals....


Aww... don't go attacking each other please.

har dee har har

KLM wrote:Small text = not really important.

...since I am not a NE salesman.

Adios
KLM

NE? Naruni Enterprises?

Exactly.

In case of NE read the small part or you will end
as a slave. And your planet too...

Adios
KLM

Well, for my part, they are playing hard but at least
try to maintain a facade of justice.

This means, they will use a font size and language
comrehendable to the costumer, even their
phrasing is mostly clear.

And they are dependable.

Just do not think you can get away without paying.
If you start missing payments, after a while (a really
short while) you end up under a mountain of debt.

Adios
KLM

KLM wrote:Exactly.

In case of NE read the small part or you will end
as a slave. And your planet too...

Adios
KLM

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Darkmax wrote:if NE uses small prints, you might not even think it is a small print. Perhaps you'll just think it a line.....

Forget that there small print is all in the letter head and looks like art that extends like ivy vines down the sides of the page. Many macho men at arms has considered there contracts quite gay looking... until they were late on a payment and shown that the contract quite clearly states... (of course the NE would have to do this in a room where everything is cut in half with an electron microscope instead of a half magnifying glass and they'd have to use lots of etcettera, etcetteras... can you imagine the old Willy Wonka with Naruni in a weapons factory? Almost everything is Lethable... or is that shootable in here? )

KLM wrote:Well, for my part, they are playing hard but at least
try to maintain a facade of justice.

This means, they will use a font size and language
comrehendable to the costumer, even their
phrasing is mostly clear.

And they are dependable.

Just do not think you can get away without paying.
If you start missing payments, after a while (a really
short while) you end up under a mountain of debt.

Adios
KLM

WHHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAT??? They're led by Alien Intelligneces, how would they ever be that nice? sorry still have images of "Naruni Wonka and the Weapons Factory"

They are allowed to deal with CCW members in the 3 Galaxies,
and even the UWW - both power blocks expressly forbid the
worship of alien intelligences who aren't "behaving" - so the
NE deals much like a modern day MNC.

Well, in RIFTS Earth, they might deal like a MNC in a
thirld world, civil war ridden country, novelised by William
Gibson, yet the material I read till this time, does not suggest
any significant NE Debt Collectors' presence on RIFTS Earth...

So, the company as such have an "aberrant evil" aligment.

Adios
KLM

Sploogs are a bit different.

We have at least one "canon" Sploog, who runs an
extradimensional market in Center, who - at least in
the 3 Galaxies - runs his business as a MNC.

But there are 5 others (4 in the 3G and Lord Splynn)
who run their business as an AI should run it, you know,
slaves, blood sports, etc.

Adios
KLM

No, NE is a MNC. More exactly a Multi-Dimensional Corp.

Sploogs are more like multi-dimensional warlords. Each,
with his/her own agenda. Kinda like each of their
Dominions are a mafia Family...

...thought as far as we know, no Sploog has killed
another, not even by proxy. True Narunies are hinted to
do it... sometimes.

Adios
KLM

Darkmax wrote:dude... a MNC or a MDC (?) is still a business.

Err... I agree: NE is a business, since it is clearly profit
oriented. OK, it invests a good deal into aggressive
marketing and eliminating concurrents - but hey,
we can show contemporary examples for it.
(Well, maybe not for assassinations )

However: Sploogs are not "just" profit oriented.
They are about to dominate as much sentient beings
as they can. So, they are... Well, maybe there is
a verrrrrry twisted and distant similarity to the
early corporations... Like the British East India Company .

Adios
KLM

KLM wrote:

Darkmax wrote:dude... a MNC or a MDC (?) is still a business.

Err... I agree: NE is a business, since it is clearly profit
oriented. OK, it invests a good deal into aggressive
marketing and eliminating concurrents - but hey,
we can show contemporary examples for it.
(Well, maybe not for assassinations )

However: Sploogs are not "just" profit oriented.
They are about to dominate as much sentient beings
as they can. So, they are... Well, maybe there is
a verrrrrry twisted and distant similarity to the
early corporations... Like the British East India Company .

Adios
KLM

So who is Jack Sparrow? And who will play the more manly version of Orlando Bloom? You know Kira Knightly (as from ask a ninja http://www.askaninja.com/episodes?page=2