Starfleet Jedi

I have just written a new page on the Open Database:
http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php?title=Jamming

So with that in mind, what do we know about Star Trek ECM? I do recall that the strong subspace fields can have the effect similar to the jamming, but not much in terms of details.

P.S. I thought about posting it in the Open Database subsection, but concluded that it might be better suited as a general discussion.

Thanks for taking the time to create a new article, Picard. However, there are some issues with it, namely that you need to have examples of jamming not just in Star Trek, but also other franchises as well where possible. So you might want to divide that up into sections devoted to jamming in Star Trek, Star Wars, Stargate, etc.
-Mike

Off the top of my head, there's AR-558 (and I haven't looked at the article given Mike's review, so if you covered that my apologies).

We know that Dominion ships on normal patrols in their own territory can be detected by a runabout at a good distance (in the Teplan Blight episode of DS9), so the occasions where they just sort of pop up could be taken as ECM-related . . . though that might be a stretch.

The problem with jamming usually is that the act of jamming clues the enemy to your presence, in the real world. You basically get soup for signal and you know that something's amiss.

In Star Wars, though, jamming usually seems to nullify your opponent's capacity to sense things altogether, or at least your specific thing, which is a slightly different ball of wax. Examples include the status of the DS2 shield and the boarding of a listening post in TCW . . . Duel of the Droids, maybe? The one where R2 is taken by a Trandoshen scavenger and the droid Goldie tries to kill everyone. They jam the scanners so the listening post can't detect the ship, but in both cases nobody realizes there is jamming. In the DS2 example they only realize they can't detect anything they want to detect in relation to the shield.

Anyway, It's more like a cloak, almost, of specific things, rather than a jammer. I haven't delved into it further, but there is some more detail given in the ANH novel as I recall. I'll try to check on it soon.

I would suggest that the speculation be removed

http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php?title=Jamming wrote: Additional point of interest is that keeping close to the enemy apparently makes it harder for the enemy to gan a weapons lock, providing an incentive for a very short-range combat even if ECM is disregarded.

Given ECM was used in TOS, I doubt it is an issue in the way you suggest.
TOS: Tomorrow is Yesterday
SPOCK: We've achieved a stable orbit out of Earth's atmosphere. Our deflectors are operative, enough to prevent our being picked up again as a UFO. And Mister Scott wishes to speak to you about the engines.

Voyager does the same trick
Voy: Future's End Part 1
JANEWAY: Maintain a high orbit and modulate the shields to scatter their radar. We don't want to alarm the natives.
+++++TORRES: Interferometric dispersion is online. That should take care of any radar detection. And I've configured the shields to disguise our visual profile. Unless somebody gets right on top of us, we should look like a small twentieth century aircraft.

It is standard practice to decloak at a distance between .5 kilometers to 3 kilometers.
TNG: Hero Worship
LAFORGE: No, sir. Torsional stress levels point to a disrupter-style weapon. 

DATA: Fracture points indicate that the energy burst came from a range of less than three thousand metres. 

PICARD: But that's a strategy consistent with a cloaked vessel. Romulan. Or Klingon. But we're quite a distance from either of their territories.

DS9: The Die is Cast
SISKO: Attack pattern omega four. Full impulse power. Hold your fire until we're within five hundred metres. 

KIRA: We might get pretty singed at that range. 

SISKO: Not as singed as they're going to get. Engage.

http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php?title=Jamming wrote:Similarly, maneuvering makes it harder to achieve and maintain targeting lock, not unlike the modern fighter aircraft. Combination of these factors is more than enough to explain the prevalence of the visual range combat in the TNG era.

Have you ever tried to shoot something that is trying to dodge at close range? The slightest movement of the target will make you miss, but the opposite is some what true at longer ranges, and we are talking about ships that have an average acceleration of about 1000 kps and top out at about 1c if not more with their sub-light drives.

Star Trek: First Contact
[Phoenix cockpit]

LAFORGE: Plasma injectors are on-line. Everything's looking good. I think we're ready.

RIKER: They should be out there right now. We better break the warp barrier in the next five minutes if we're going to get their attention.

LAFORGE: Main cells are charged and ready.

RIKER: Let's do it.

COCHRANE: Engage.

LAFORGE: Warp field is looking good. Structural integrity is holding.

RIKER: Speed, twenty thousand kilometres per second.

COCHRANE: Sweet Jesus!

(Cochrane has spotted the Enterprise in orbit)

RIKER: Relax, Doctor. I'm sure they're just here to give us a send-off.

[Enterprise-E engineering]

(Picard is on the Borg bio-bed)

DATA: I am bringing the external sensors on-line.

(the Phoenix appears on the viewscreen)

[Phoenix cockpit]

RIKER: Thirty seconds to warp threshold. ...Approaching light-speed.

COCHRANE: We're at critical velocity.


Then you have dramatic visuals which are not meant to be what is actually happening to the characters.

On top of that you have visuals that outright contradict what the characters say is happening.

http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php?title=Jamming wrote: Even today, countermeasures and inherent inability of the long-range missiles to engage agile targets make long-range combat an exception rather than a rule. As it can be seen here, longest-ranged known BVR kill happened at around 30 kilometers, compared to maximum range of BVR missiles which was over 50 km. All cases of the beyond visual range combat have also been against the opponent with no ECM.

The maximum ranges in Star Trek are measured in A.U. if not light years.

Star Trek: The Motion Picture
KLINGON CAPTAIN: (In Klingonese) Tactical.

(the battle cruisers overfly the Cloud)

KLINGON CAPTAIN: (In Klingonese) Visual.

(the Cloud on the viewscreen)

KLINGON CAPTAIN: (In Klingonese) Tactical. Stand by on torpedoes. ...Ready. ...Fire!

(the battle cruisers fire photon torpedoes at the Cloud)

KLINGON CAPTAIN: (In Klingonese) Evasive!

+++++

BRANCH (on viewer): Enterprise, the Cloud is definitely a power field of some kind. Measures, my God, over two A.U.'s in diameter. Must be something incredible inside there generating it. We're transmitting linguacode friendship messages on all frequencies. No response.

Lucky wrote:I would suggest that the speculation be removed

What you quoted is not exactly a speculation but observation, it is just that it's not directly stated in the episode.

Given ECM was used in TOS, I doubt it is an issue in the way you suggest.

What does it have to do with keeping close or not? Closer the ships is to the enemy, any distance travelled means greater angular difference.

Picard wrote: What you quoted is not exactly a speculation but observation, it is just that it's not directly stated in the episode.

The statement is not directly related to anything below it in the post. There is simply no place for random off topic speculation in a "factual" article. You are talking about ECM, and not weapon ranges.

If I'm quoting something then I will put the related statement below the quote.

+++++

Your speculation as to why close combat happens ignores the fact it happened in TOS under the same circumstances as TNG. Romulans decloak, and (get ready to) fire. There isn't anything that I'm aware of that shows ECM increased in effectiveness relative to sensor technology between TOS and TNG.

Combat ranges are chosen based on a wide variety of variables that we the viewer are often not given,. and we know that the visual effects often do not show what is actually happening.

Picard wrote: What does it have to do with keeping close or not? Closer the ships is to the enemy, any distance travelled means greater angular difference.

They don't keep close any more then they did in TOS. Most of the VR "fighting" in TNG happens do to a cloaked ship appearing a couple of kilometers away, or the Federation not wanting try a peaceful resolution first.

"The Wounded" shows how the UFP likes to fight, and the Cardassians had some rather effective ECM in that episode.

Deep Space Nine suffers from a number of problems with its Visual Effects, or are you going to claim the characters don't know what is going on when they can look out a window, and no one used shields even though they said they did.

I can prove that the visual effects do not always show what is really happening for a number of reasons.

http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php?title=Jamming wrote:
Even today, countermeasures and inherent inability of the long-range missiles to engage agile targets make long-range combat an exception rather than a rule. As it can be seen here, longest-ranged known BVR kill happened at around 30 kilometers, compared to maximum range of BVR missiles which was over 50 km. All cases of the beyond visual range combat have also been against the opponent with no ECM.

This does not belong in the Star Trek section. It belongs in the general Jamming section at the top of the page because it pertains to jamming in general.

http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php?title=Jamming wrote:
Jamming is first seen in the New Hope, during the battle of the first Death Star. Imperial defenders jam all Rebel sensors, meaning that Rebel pilots have to use the visual cues to detect the incoming Tie fighters. Similar situation is in the Return of the Jedi, when Rebel ships do not detect the shield around the Second Death Star, and only detect the Imperial Navy visually. In all cases, jamming itself is undetectable and can only be deduced to be in effect by observing its consequences.

The grammar seems off to me. I'd suggest you have someone better at proofreading then myself go over it.

+++++

We don't know how the Imperial Fleet at Endor got where it did without being noticed by the Rebel Fleet. It is possible the Imperial Fleet was a short hyperspace jump away waiting for the order to jump into the system.

http://starfleetjedi.net/wiki/index.php?title=Jamming wrote:
Simplest explanation is that (as implied by a spherical domes on Imperial Star Destroyers as well as shape of the X-wing's nose) a primary Star Wars sensor is radar. A technique called active cancellation (used by Dassault Rafale's SPECTRA defense suite) can be used to jam the enemy's radar without revealing that jamming is going on, and is thus the most logical choice for Star Wars jamming technique.

Again you have mixed unfounded speculation with "fact". I suggest you remove anything that you can not verify. Even if it is reasonable speculation such as the placement of sensors in a star fighter you need you still need to have something official backing it up even if you may be correct about certain things.

Remember, one of the big criticisms of Star Wars pages on wikis is people basically making stuff up because it sounds right to them. This is the kind of thought that got the ICS written. Don't make assumptions!!

+++++

Fighters on Earth have for many years now put the radar in the nose. It seems odd you automatically assume an X-wing's sensor must be like a SPECTRA system.

+++++

We know from Star Wars: The Clone Wars that Dak used sonar and radar for interplanetary sensors. Season 4

The episode Cat and Mouse shows us cloaking and ECM in Star Wars. Anikin uses flares to escape heat seeking missiles for example, and they use undefined abut short range magnetic field sensors to find Anikin's cloaked ship.

+++++

The large globes on Imperial Star Destroyers and Super Star Destroyers are shield generators going by everything I've seen, and that ranges from the EU to the movies.