On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Grimmund <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Evyn MacDude <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 8:31 PM, William Ewing (via tml list)
>> <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> RADAR: Bam! bearing and range, in digital format for entry into fire
>>> control computer.

>> Sure. Except with radar, you have to wait for the signal to round trip.
>> And your radar transmission gives your position away.

> How so? Your returns travel at the same speed a passive return would.

If you are TRANSMITTING you're actively advertising your position to
anyone listening for radar band signals.

(OK, if you're warmer than interstellar space, you're radiating IR and
thus advertising your position, too. But radar, as an active sensor,
adds another megawatt+ of "HEY, I'M OVER HERE".

Kinda, if you are using a single band Radar, and your target has perfect reception and analysis. And considering the "Perfect" reception that so many of the "There's no Stealth in Space" crowd stipulate, why would radiating be a problem, in that they see you anyways?

My biggest problems with these sorts of Discussions in that the baseline assumptions are never stated, especially when the "Science Says" argument is deployed.

I for one would like to know what the Engagement/Detection envelope are in y'alls head.

Also whether it's a single ship or fleet comparison.

Evyn