PDA

View Full Version : Radar and IFF for BOB



stubby
05-06-2005, 08:48 AM
I know BoB is way the hell out there in terms of being a reality but I wonder how much effort will be put into very critical features of the battle like the entire infrastructure of Fighter Command (ie Observer Corps, WaaFs, communications network, Radar, etc..) and IFF technology? I don't know the answer but how good was the RAF friend or foe technology? These elements appeared to greatly help out the RAF and I'm just curious if Oleg will sacrifice historical accuracy at the expense to give the Jerries a more equal footing. I mean, it was rare that the Jerries were able to use any level of surprise about their attacks once Fighter Command dialed-in the radar technology. As for IFF, I wonder how that would work in a no-icon game. Imagine how irritated the Jerries would be in a no-icon coop if everybody flying Hurries and Spits could easily distinguish between friend or foe based on a radio transmitter while the LW wouldn't have that ability. They would have to rely on the old skool method of proximity and plane recognition. Interesting times like ahead that's for sure.

stubby
05-06-2005, 08:48 AM
I know BoB is way the hell out there in terms of being a reality but I wonder how much effort will be put into very critical features of the battle like the entire infrastructure of Fighter Command (ie Observer Corps, WaaFs, communications network, Radar, etc..) and IFF technology? I don't know the answer but how good was the RAF friend or foe technology? These elements appeared to greatly help out the RAF and I'm just curious if Oleg will sacrifice historical accuracy at the expense to give the Jerries a more equal footing. I mean, it was rare that the Jerries were able to use any level of surprise about their attacks once Fighter Command dialed-in the radar technology. As for IFF, I wonder how that would work in a no-icon game. Imagine how irritated the Jerries would be in a no-icon coop if everybody flying Hurries and Spits could easily distinguish between friend or foe based on a radio transmitter while the LW wouldn't have that ability. They would have to rely on the old skool method of proximity and plane recognition. Interesting times like ahead that's for sure.

Jetbuff
05-06-2005, 03:38 PM
Hmm... I wouldn't call incesseant whining interesting.

fherathras
05-06-2005, 03:41 PM
paragraphs! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

LEXX_Luthor
05-06-2005, 05:35 PM
You won't notice the radar in the game. All BoB radar should do is make it "okay" to make mission files that make sure RAF planes fly near German planes. Of course, that alone is a War Winning advantage, instead of Random mission waypoints that probably miss German route. After that, its the same classic aircraft identification routine--except that RAF pilots know Germans should be in the area (hard to mistake He~111 formation for Britt fighters....and German pilots should know any other planes they see are Britts. This is a Feature of a longer range strategic war unlike roving bands of who knows who's planes over a frontline battlefield.

Dimensionaut_
05-13-2005, 08:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stubby:
I know BoB is way the hell out there in terms of being a reality but I wonder how much effort will be put into very critical features of the battle like the entire infrastructure of Fighter Command (ie Observer Corps, WaaFs, communications network, Radar, etc..) and IFF technology? I don't know the answer but how good was the RAF friend or foe technology? These elements appeared to greatly help out the RAF and I'm just curious if Oleg will sacrifice historical accuracy at the expense to give the Jerries a more equal footing. I mean, it was rare that the Jerries were able to use any level of surprise about their attacks once Fighter Command dialed-in the radar technology. As for IFF, I wonder how that would work in a no-icon game. Imagine how irritated the Jerries would be in a no-icon coop if everybody flying Hurries and Spits could easily distinguish between friend or foe based on a radio transmitter while the LW wouldn't have that ability. They would have to rely on the old skool method of proximity and plane recognition. Interesting times like ahead that's for sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The aircraft themselves had no radar. Only groundcontrol had it. IFF was nothing more then an 'amplifier' of the signal, which made the returned signal stronger then a normal signal.

So ground control saw allied aircraft brighter then enemy aircraft. But how strong a dot was also depends on the shape and size of an aircraft among many other things.

I don't think this IFF worked that great back in 1940. Since once they made a mistake with the wiring of the system. Due to this mistake aircraft flying from west to east appeared on the radar as flying from east to west. Due to this RAF aircraft were thought to be Luftwaffe aircraft. So, a squadron was sent into the air to intercept. 'Oh my... even more enemy aircraft coming in!' Another squadron was sent in. This gave a chain reaction and great panic over a very large attack. Meanwhile the fighters were unable to locate the enemy at the locations where they were directed to.

Since the aircraft themselves did have no radar, it cannot be that RAF players would see icons or whatever for enemy positions. Ground control knew where the enemy was and told them by radio where to head to, so a bit like we allready know.

Viking-S
05-13-2005, 02:35 PM
Rent or buy the movie‚‚ā¨¬Ě The Battle of Britain‚‚ā¨¬Ě it‚‚ā¨ôs got a documentary quality and will show you how the radar and flight guiding/control system worked. Not a foolproof system or guaranteed success despite the early warning and the IFF. I saw it again yesterday and despite the evolution in special effects since it was made it‚‚ā¨ôs still a very good film.

tralkpha
05-13-2005, 03:02 PM
lots of very good wwii radar and iff info here: http://www.vectorsite.net/ttwiz.html

LEXX_Luthor
05-13-2005, 05:40 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif Java this is good...

Java:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Since once they made a mistake with the wiring of the system. Due to this mistake aircraft flying from west to east appeared on the radar as flying from east to west. Due to this RAF aircraft were thought to be Luftwaffe aircraft. So, a squadron was sent into the air to intercept. 'Oh my... even more enemy aircraft coming in!' Another squadron was sent in. This gave a chain reaction and great panic over a very large attack. Meanwhile the fighters were unable to locate the enemy at the locations where they were directed to. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I remember reading that early USA missile warning radar, soon after being turned on, showed thousands of incoming Soviet missiles, but the commander had to make a decision that the system was mistaken. The next day the Soviets launched another 1,000 missile stike, at 24 hours plus 55 minutes. Next day the same thing, 55 minutes later. Turned out to be the rising moon. This was soon Patched, probably in much less than "2 weeks."

VW-IceFire
05-13-2005, 09:53 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stubby:
I know BoB is way the hell out there in terms of being a reality but I wonder how much effort will be put into very critical features of the battle like the entire infrastructure of Fighter Command (ie Observer Corps, WaaFs, communications network, Radar, etc..) and IFF technology? I don't know the answer but how good was the RAF friend or foe technology? These elements appeared to greatly help out the RAF and I'm just curious if Oleg will sacrifice historical accuracy at the expense to give the Jerries a more equal footing. I mean, it was rare that the Jerries were able to use any level of surprise about their attacks once Fighter Command dialed-in the radar technology. As for IFF, I wonder how that would work in a no-icon game. Imagine how irritated the Jerries would be in a no-icon coop if everybody flying Hurries and Spits could easily distinguish between friend or foe based on a radio transmitter while the LW wouldn't have that ability. They would have to rely on the old skool method of proximity and plane recognition. Interesting times like ahead that's for sure. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Make it easier on the eyes...break your ideas into paragraphs. Thanks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As for the benefits to the fighter pilot level...no it really doesn't work that way. IFF was fairly simple and as already explained, a amplification (usually done at a specific time or request by the radar operators) system, was used to identify Allied from Axis targets. Not foolproof.

On the fighter pilot level, radar operators would often point out an estimated number of bandits heading in a particular direction at a rough altitude and then direct them on an appropriate course.

In SP/COOP...this should translate to a voice coming up saying "60+ bandits bearing 130, angels 20, heading north."

Kurfurst__
05-14-2005, 04:14 AM
I am not sure how much diffo IFF would make. First, both the RAF and LW possessed radar technology on fairly equal level, perhaps the LW was a bit more ahead in 1940.

As for IFF, the 'Battlefield' series on the BoB stated that there were a shortage of IFF sets in the RAF during the Battle, they said IIRC that only about 1/3 of the RAF fighters had IFF mounted. For the ground operators it meant they had to guesswork in the majority of cases.

I am not sure if the LW planes had IFF at that period, though they had radar sets and chain well before the war, so it`s likely they had IFF sets on the planes just as well - or perhaps not, but it meant little in offense.

And yes, as others pointed out, onboard IFF could not helped the pilots on the planes directly, it only helped the ground control/radar crews to tell apart friend from foe.

x__CRASH__x
05-14-2005, 11:13 AM
Well, if the brits get a radar net. I want SEAD capability for the LW. I want HARMs on my 109E.

p1ngu666
05-14-2005, 01:02 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by x__CRASH__x:
Well, if the brits get a radar net. I want SEAD capability for the LW. I want HARMs on my 109E. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hurri and spitfire will put HARMS on ur 109, be sure http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

CowboyTodd41
05-15-2005, 12:35 PM
Lol, I can see Stuka pilots salavating at the chance to pull Wild Weasel missions!

stathem
05-15-2005, 12:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
I am not sure how much diffo IFF would make. First, both the RAF and LW possessed radar technology on fairly equal level, <span class="ev_code_RED">perhaps the LW was a bit more ahead in 1940. </span>
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's quite a statement. Can you enlighten us a little further?

BBB_Hyperion
05-15-2005, 01:17 PM
Brits even needed to steal one to improve theirs .)

Lucius_Esox
05-17-2005, 10:31 AM
It wasn't just radar that made the British fighter command network the most effective of it's time.

Superb organisation and tremendous foresight by Dowding into integrating all systems plus excellent tactics used by Park were all major factors.

Pity they put the sector control rooms ABOVE GROUND, and an even bigger pity for the Germans that they didn't realise this.

Philipscdrw
05-17-2005, 03:59 PM
The Blenheim bomber/nightfighter had AI (Airbourne Intercept) radar, and a battery of 4 .303 machineguns to dispatch the bombers. Later in the BoB, they were joined by Defiants, Beaufighters, Havocs (I think) and Mosquitos (eventually).

I hope this side of the battle is modelled in detail, because it's the 'forgotten' aspect of the Battle of Britain! I don't think any of the other sims have attempted to simulate the Observer Corps, for instance. I hope 1C-BoB will do so!

Kurfurst__
05-18-2005, 04:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kurfurst__:
I am not sure how much diffo IFF would make. First, both the RAF and LW possessed radar technology on fairly equal level, <span class="ev_code_RED">perhaps the LW was a bit more ahead in 1940. </span>
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's quite a statement. Can you enlighten us a little further? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well without going into the tiny details,
but the first naval radar set was in fact mounted on a German warship, on the famous 'pocket battleships'. Also, if you compare the radar stations of the Chain Home with it`s 150meter(!!!) high radio towers, and the German Freya radar sets, tha you can see quite a difference... their range was similiar, but the Freya was semi-mobile, used a rotating radar mast give it a 360 degree view around itself(the CH could not report planes once they left behind the shores afaik, being fixed towards the sea).The LW also had a highly mobile radarset the 'Wurzburg', with a parabolic like antenna, mounted on small trailer, and was precise enough to be used to be used as blind fire control German AA guns during the night. Both the Freya and Wurzburg were produced in high numbers even before the war started. AFAIK the Germans examined a leftover British mobile radar set captured at Dunkirk, but they were rather dismissive about it, the set being primitive and unreliable.

Some think the Brits had some monopoly of the radar, fact is that every major power developed it in the 30s... Italians, Russians, Americans, Germans etc, even smaller countries like Hungary had it`s own radar sets. The Germans and Brits had a lead is use perhaps in the early days, with the Germans having a bit of an edge in the technology, the Brits in it`s method of use, but ideas were quickly copied, or just developed pareallel on their own, ie. by 1941 with British air attacks, the Germans had similiar rooms to control the air situation with the help of radar (similiar to the one used today, they had colored lights projected on large, standing glass tables).
It was not until ca 1943 until the Allies took the lead in radar technology with the cavity magnetron, but such examples of it were soon captured and copied by the Germans - the reason why the Brits initially held back such sets to be used over enemy territory.

whiteladder
05-18-2005, 06:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Also, if you compare the radar stations of the Chain Home with it`s 150meter(!!!) high radio towers, and the German Freya radar sets, tha you can see quite a difference... their range was similiar, but the Freya was semi-mobile, used a rotating radar mast give it a 360 degree view around itself(the CH could not report planes once they left behind the shores afaik, being fixed towards the sea).The LW also had a highly mobile radarset the 'Wurzburg', with a parabolic like antenna, mounted on small trailer, and was precise enough to be used to be used as blind fire control German AA guns during the night. Both the Freya and Wurzburg were produced in high numbers even before the war started. AFAIK the Germans examined a leftover British mobile radar set captured at Dunkirk, but they were rather dismissive about it, the set being primitive and unreliable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is easy to dismise British radar, but you don`t give a very balanced coverage here.

A couple of points

Not sure if I would call the 8 Freya sets that were available at the start of the war a high number, and the Wurzburg wasn`t deployed until 1941. Even so the organisation to make use of any information gathered wasn`t really in place until late 1942 onwards.

The only "mobile" radar the British had at the time was the MRU (later the AMES Type 9). The used exactly the same electronics as the the chain home system, but with a smaller 20M mast. This was deloveped into chain home low.

I`m fairly certain that none of these sets were deployed with the BEF due to the security implication of doing so. I`m fairly certain the German didn`t have british radars to examine and compare to their.

Also if they did maybe they shouldn`t have been so dismissive. They may have then developed countermeasure to the system(as the british did to there system.)

As far as the British needing to steal the German equipment to improve their own(OPERATION BITING - BRUNEVAL), Maurice Wilkes is probally best placed to answer that.


Prof Sir Maurice Wilkes who made his name after the war as one of the pioneers of modern computing, and who was Schonland's radar expert in the AORG at that time, felt that the Wurzburg was not a very sophisticated radar and TRE learnt nothing special from it other than they knew exactly how to jam it - which they did very successfully during the D-Day landings.

hop2002
05-18-2005, 08:14 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Well without going into the tiny details,
but the first naval radar set was in fact mounted on a German warship, on the famous 'pocket battleships'. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And Britain had airborne radar flying in 1937, years before the Germans.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Also, if you compare the radar stations of the Chain Home with it`s 150meter(!!!) high radio towers, and the German Freya radar sets, tha you can see quite a difference... their range was similiar </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Their range was not similar. Chain Home had a reliable range of over 130 miles, Freya well under 100 miles.

Of course, the fact that the Chain Home towers were so high meant it could track targets that were below the horizon for Freya, making it's effective range much better.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">but the Freya was semi-mobile, used a rotating radar mast give it a 360 degree view around itself(the CH could not report planes once they left behind the shores afaik, being fixed towards the sea) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There were of course mobile British systems, in fact 5 were supplied to France in 1940.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The LW also had a highly mobile radarset the 'Wurzburg', with a parabolic like antenna, mounted on small trailer, and was precise enough to be used to be used as blind fire control German AA guns during the night. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The British also had gun laying radar in 1940 of course, as well as operational airborne intercept radar (something the Germans didn't have until 1942).

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I`m fairly certain that none of these sets were deployed with the BEF due to the security implication of doing so. I`m fairly certain the German didn`t have british radars to examine and compare to their.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know if the BEF had them, but some were certainly supplied to France before her defeat, and the Germans did capture a British mobile radar, but I don't know whether that was one of those suplied to the French, or one used by the BEF.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Also if they did maybe they shouldn`t have been so dismissive. They may have then developed countermeasure to the system(as the british did to there system.) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It shows the muddled thinking of the Germans that they captured a British radar set, yet still didn't grasp the way it was integrated into an air defence system.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As far as the British needing to steal the German equipment to improve their own(OPERATION BITING - BRUNEVAL) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The purpose wasn't to learn from it, of course, it was to learn about it, and see what it's capabilities were.

(I thought that claim was posted as a joke, but perhaps not)

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And yes, as others pointed out, onboard IFF could not helped the pilots on the planes directly, it only helped the ground control/radar crews to tell apart friend from foe. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Britih integrated IFF into their night fighter radars, something the Germans never did during the war, so for British nightfighters, they could tell which aircraft were friendly.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">IFF was nothing more then an 'amplifier' of the signal, which made the returned signal stronger then a normal signal.

So ground control saw allied aircraft brighter then enemy aircraft. But how strong a dot was also depends on the shape and size of an aircraft among many other things.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's true of the first attempts at IFF, which simply used a reflector, but not the operational systems.

IFF Mk 1, introduced to service in 1939, was a true transponder, emitting a signal when interogated by Chain Home. IFF Mk 2, introduced in 1940, worked in the same way, but was compatible with all British radar transmitters (Chain Home, Chain Home Low, gun laying etc)

p1ngu666
05-18-2005, 08:52 AM
remmber reading in some miltary errors book i had that when the germans got the magnatron or whatever they looked at it briefly, then did nothing for a long time http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

alsho a anti uboat pilot was captured, said their radar, or ship finding devices homed in on the system the uboats where using to jam the british radar.
uboat command belived him, and they stopped using the system http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

csThor
05-18-2005, 09:06 AM
The main difference between the RAF and the Luftwaffe in terms of radar and other devices of electronical warfare was the different mindset of the people in charge.

Many leading figures of the Wehrmacht - starting from Hitler via the OKW "down to" G√¬∂ring and the CO's of the Heer and Kriegsmarine - were extremely suspicious (sometimes even downright hostile) of any new "gadget". For example when the He 178 (first german jet-powerd AC) made its maiden flight in 1939 all Udet (Generalluftzeugmeister = responsible for development/production of combat aircraft) said was a short "Congrats. Now let me sleep."

Same goes for the development and use of radar/jamming technology. The Wehrmacht had a quite inventive department for what we call "Electronical Warfare" today, but their commanders were wary of their "witchery" and dismissed their developments as "kid's toys".
For example when D√¬∂nitz was told that the British had cracked Enigma and were aware of his orders to the submarines, he outright refused to believe a single word as the developers of Enigma had said it couldn't be broken. That kind of "naivety" or even "wilfull incorrigibility" regarding technical innovations was widespread among higher officers. Its fundament may have been their training with the old Imperial German Army which despised any technical branches (there was an ugly saying: "He sank from level to level, finally he became sapper.")

Kurfurst__
05-18-2005, 05:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hop2002:
And Britain had airborne radar flying in 1937, years before the Germans. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

What do you know about German airborne radar? I doubt it would be much.we all well know that even three years later, Britain had no airborne radar in any numbers for it`s night fighters. British fighters had to operate blindly in the night, hoping to bump into a LW bomber, that bombed with the aid of radar guided beams, bombing Britains industry into it`s ashes and the Brits could do nothing about about it.
(years later the British copied the German guidance systems and methods of night bombing for themselves).


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Their range was not similar. Chain Home had a reliable range of over 130 miles, Freya well under 100 miles </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Simply wrong, Freya`s range was well over 100 miles as well. That`s where it got it`s name after all, from Germanic mythology. Later German sets had as much as double or even triple the range.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Of course, the fact that the Chain Home towers were so high meant it could track targets that were below the horizon for Freya, making it's effective range much better. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Funny because as opposed to your claim, the CH failed to detect German Jabo raids that were performed at low level. As for fighter guidence, the Chain Home was effectively useless. The whole Chain Home radar line with it`s monstre 120 meter towers was completely BLIND the very moment the enemy aircraft passed it over. 'Brilliant' system, typical for the Brits. Over the channel, it`s radar, over the Land, it`s the 60 year old sick guys with glasses. Completely useless radar system expect for early warning, lacking the 360 degree rotational dome that the Freya and Wurzburg had from the start; thus it could search 2-3 times the area than the fixed CH antennas. today EVERY single modern radar system followes the layout of the Freya and Wurzburg - funny that nobody is building 120 meter fire magnet towers anymore, despite their 'great advantages' - as per Hop.

The real reason for those high CH towers was that the British radar technology was poor at the time, and the best radar sets they came up for CH could only operate with very long radar waves, which required large antennas and large towers for them. That was their greatest disadvantages, they were fixed for the British isles. The Germans could take their freyas from Norway through Russia to Italy, they had them everywhere.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">but the Freya was semi-mobile, used a rotating radar mast give it a 360 degree view around itself(the CH could not report planes once they left behind the shores afaik, being fixed towards the sea) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">There were of course mobile British systems, in fact 5 were supplied to France in 1940. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Germans captured them (along with the entire gear of the BEF it left behind in the haste http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif) , and found them primitive, and unreliable, in brief, useless.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The British also had gun laying radar in 1940 of course, as well as operational airborne intercept radar (something the Germans didn't have until 1942). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

History tells us the RAF was helpless against German bombers operating in the night, though. If the the Brits had 'operational airborne intercept radar' in 1940 as you claim, why is that the RAF was effectively helpless against German nightbombers during 1940, having no means to find a bomber during the night?

Maybe British leadership was so stupid to let the German bombers roam free... with Churchill at the top, that`s imaginable.Or maybe Hop wants to boast the national glory by depicting still experimental, and rather unreliable sets as operational sets that saw action in hundreds... Hop vs. History, as always.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't know if the BEF had them, but some were certainly supplied to France before her defeat, and the Germans did capture a British mobile radar, but I don't know whether that was one of those suplied to the French, or one used by the BEF. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Considering it was captured it in Dunkerque, it most likely belonged to the BEF; it makes no difference though, it was a British mobile radar set.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Also if they did maybe they shouldn`t have been so dismissive. They may have then developed countermeasure to the system(as the british did to there system.) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It shows the muddled thinking of the Germans that they captured a British radar set, yet still didn't grasp the way it was integrated into an air defence system. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>[/QUOTE]

But of course you are wrong again; first of all, how is one supposed to deduct from the existance of near-useless mobile set that it`s integrated into an air defence system? Germans were well aware that there`s a coordinated air defence system, they had aerial photos of the installation from before the war, and they already had their own : on Sept 4, the RAF tried to bomb a north German naval base. They were picked up well before by a Freya radar by the sea, 109s and 110s were sent to intercept. It was a bloodbath, half the bombers sent were lost. The RAF ceased such attacks soon, until the war ended.
And, the LW successfully jammed the British radar sets through the war. One of the most spectatular examples was during Operation Cereberus, the Channel Dash. Under LW General Martini, the LW gradually jammed the British radar so they didn`t even notice what was happening. Result? An entire German fleet sailed at the noses of the Brits. Those magnificent CH radar towers 'with much longer effective range than the Freya' could not spot an entire fleet, with two battleship sized vessels in it, and the LW cover above it. The Brits had no idea what was happening until post-war.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
The Britih integrated IFF into their night fighter radars, something the Germans never did during the war, so for British nightfighters, they could tell which aircraft were friendly. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Germans on the other hand integrated passive radar systems to their nightfighters, which homed on British IFF and ground mapping radar signals from 50-100 km away. It was sheep vs. wolves, except the sheep had huge 'hit me' sign on them for better guidance for the wolves. The RAF BC lost over 50 000 men.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">IFF Mk 1, introduced to service in 1939, was a true transponder, emitting a signal when interogated by Chain Home. IFF Mk 2, introduced in 1940, worked in the same way, but was compatible with all British radar transmitters (Chain Home, Chain Home Low, gun laying etc) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The British were great developing things, much less good deploying things. As said, only 1/3 of the RAF fighters had IFF in 1940. Same as with the Spitfire, too few of them, the RAF had to do with the older Hurricane.

p1ngu666
05-18-2005, 08:07 PM
dont think the germans had effective radar in aircraft in the early war, considering the losses of raf bombers at night. 3%ish loss rate for aircraft flying 200mphish or less, alone on there own course and time over france and germany etc, there where in danger for longer than german crews over england, and germany had the best flak also.

also, at night the germans would take heavy losses over england, mid war. curiously the tip and run raids at nighttime suffered much higher losses than daytime http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

BC lost a aircraft for every 40 sorties, not stunning http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif
dunno what german bomber losses where, heavy also probably. guy shot down in norway was taken prisoner, he was the only guy from his squadron to survive the war http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

incidently, he thought he was shot down by a spitfire, when the REAL ppl who had shot him down met him (they crash landed on same frozen lake http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif) they didnt say a word. they had shot him down in some **** RN dive bomber fightery thing http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

whiteladder
05-19-2005, 02:46 AM
KurFurst__ arguement seems muddled and confused. As before he seems reluctant to see German failings in this area (Radar, electronic warfare). I doubt anything anybody would write will change his mind, but in the interest of balance.

No one is denying that CH was a dead end technology( in one sense)the British knew that, but by adopting it they were able create a intergrated air defence system in 1940. I don`t have to agrue how effect the system was the Battle of Britain does that ( which the British won remember).

Although his asertion that:

"today EVERY single modern radar system followes the layout of the Freya and Wurzburg - funny that nobody is building 120 meter fire magnet towers anymore, despite their 'great advantages' - as per Hop." is plain wrong.

As OTH radars use exactly this method, either he doesn`t know about OTH or choose the not mention it.

The British knew there was a problem with low level coverage in 1938, that is why they had CHL. Which again while not being perfect was integrated into a system. If the Germans were aware of the flaw they made little use in exploiting it.

He aserts that the system didn`t have a 360 degree coverage, true but the system didn`t need to. The Germans didn`t have the capability to attack from any other direction, apart the one that the system was pointing. So your point is acedemic.

He seems to have no problem in jumping from one time period to another when comparing performances. At the start of the war the range of the Freya was well below 100Km it was only increased as the war progressed.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> LW bomber, that bombed with the aid of radar guided beams, bombing Britains industry into it`s ashes and the Brits could do nothing about about it.
(years later the British copied the German guidance systems and methods of night bombing for themselves).
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again either he doesn`t know much about history or he chooses to ignore it. The British knew about the "beams" guiding German Bombers, there are some very good books about it he should read some.

Many industrial targets bomb by the Germans were open fields because the beams had been bent by the British. Again he should remember who`s cities lay shattered at the end of the war.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The British were great developing things, much less good deploying things. As said, only 1/3 of the RAF fighters had IFF in 1940. Same as with the Spitfire, too few of them, the RAF had to do with the older Hurricane. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought for a moment it should have read "The Germans". The Germans equipment in almost every respect was more advanced, but either was employed incorrectly or in too few numbers.

stathem
05-19-2005, 04:46 AM
X-Gerat was cracked and jammed after a single effective useage - Coventry (2 months after the BoB). It's replacement, Y-Gerat, was jammed almost immeadiatly.

Kurfurst, does it not occur to you, bearing in mind the legendary creative nature of British espionage, (something which the Nazis envied greatly and tried unsuccesfully to copy throughout the whole war) that this captured, FURBAR'd radar set (if it indeed existed) which you keep referring to was planted deliberately to confuse and confound the Germans? The British had a habit of this kind of thing, and it usually worked.