With the current sensor systems, are there plans to link base sensor quality to the efficiency of the additional scanners, eg Cargo Scanners, Wake Scanners and even BDS?
It seems to me that if A-grade sensors enable your gimballed weapons to operate more efficiently, then surely the more sensitive nature of the base sensor package will be of value when using Kill Warrant Scanners, Cargo Scanners and Wake Scanners (and even BDS) as all of these secondary systems will be assessing the thermal and electronic signatures of the target.
Perhaps a slight modifier to scanning times based on base sensor quality?
Secondly, why are there no jammers in play?
Ever since humans developed electronic warfare, there have ALWAYS been jammers, even if they are just white noise.
If you want something more sophisticated, then a jammer package that produces an inverse wavefunction to any active scan being aimed at your ship will modify, distort or even deceive the enemy ship and give them false data.
Options include
White noise jammers - just blocks the active sensor and increases time to get a reading.
Creative jamming - gives the scanner false readings.
This could be in the form of "pretending" that you have a low value cargo - of the same category - eg Silver becomes bauxite.
Electronic overlays to data: cargo manifests appear different - eg your high value passenger becomes a bunch of cheap refugees.
Faked Wakes - modified FSD package creates a fake wake, sending would be pursuers to the wrong star system.
On the flip side these should be countered with a form of data slicer - eg slicer droids that analyse target data for anomalies and decrypt the fake overlay.
All of this takes time and money. Some forms of jammers woudl be illegal if discovered - but a major bonus for smugglers.
It would suggest that systems with high security levels would be able to afford the data slicer packages that detect falsified cargo data, but those of medium or low security would not afford the best packages.
Both data encryption packages and data slicers should come in different levels of programmable complexity - the difference between trying to hack into GCHQ/CIA or just "borrowing" your neighbours wifi code.
It seems to me that if A-grade sensors enable your gimballed weapons to operate more efficiently, then surely the more sensitive nature of the base sensor package will be of value when using Kill Warrant Scanners, Cargo Scanners and Wake Scanners (and even BDS) as all of these secondary systems will be assessing the thermal and electronic signatures of the target.
Perhaps a slight modifier to scanning times based on base sensor quality?
Secondly, why are there no jammers in play?
Ever since humans developed electronic warfare, there have ALWAYS been jammers, even if they are just white noise.
If you want something more sophisticated, then a jammer package that produces an inverse wavefunction to any active scan being aimed at your ship will modify, distort or even deceive the enemy ship and give them false data.
Options include
White noise jammers - just blocks the active sensor and increases time to get a reading.
Creative jamming - gives the scanner false readings.
This could be in the form of "pretending" that you have a low value cargo - of the same category - eg Silver becomes bauxite.
Electronic overlays to data: cargo manifests appear different - eg your high value passenger becomes a bunch of cheap refugees.
Faked Wakes - modified FSD package creates a fake wake, sending would be pursuers to the wrong star system.
On the flip side these should be countered with a form of data slicer - eg slicer droids that analyse target data for anomalies and decrypt the fake overlay.
All of this takes time and money. Some forms of jammers woudl be illegal if discovered - but a major bonus for smugglers.
It would suggest that systems with high security levels would be able to afford the data slicer packages that detect falsified cargo data, but those of medium or low security would not afford the best packages.
Both data encryption packages and data slicers should come in different levels of programmable complexity - the difference between trying to hack into GCHQ/CIA or just "borrowing" your neighbours wifi code.
Last edited:
