|
Post by axe99 on Sept 21, 2018 17:49:30 GMT -6
In my reading, the impression I've got is that jamming and similar countermeasures were quite important by 1944/45. Japan fielded it's first bombers with radar in the first half of 1944 (I can look up when, I think it was Feb/Mar, but that's going from very ropey memory) and Germany were deploying radio-deployed guided bombs and missiles before that. Not only that, but Japan did things like using window/chaff and the like to confuse US CICs into dispersing their CAPs before an incoming strike (Kamikaze or regular), as well as other techniques designed to mess with radar. It was also not uncommon to be a bit careful with radar and instead rely on passive capturing of electronic transmission (German Metox and its successors, for example, or relying on passive instead of active sonar to keep ones' position concealed). The impression I've gotten is that Electronic Warfare/ECM/ECCM were important during the period, but I haven't read a heap about it lately (just examples of the Japanese using it in the Pacific to make their strikes easier) so am afraid I don't have a lot of examples to hand. Also - great post about the importance of information management director .
|
|
|
Post by alexbrunius on Sept 22, 2018 3:30:45 GMT -6
Well, I don't know. Here is a quote from the Naval Mission to Japan in 1946. Seems the Japanese used it, I know the German's used it and I am absolutely certain that US and Great Britain used in the Strategic Bombing of Germany. View AttachmentSo basically the Japanese used it but it made little impact in helping their strikes get through and USA had the capability but didn't need to use it because there was no IJN left to sink by 1945 and even if it had been them detecting an incomming US strike with radar would not help them defend against it. It seems to me that Kamikaze had a 50 times bigger impact than Japanese EW efforts had in getting their strikes to hit home and damage US warships by 1945 so it would make 50 times more sense to include Kamikaze as a feature in the game before including Electronic Warfare.
|
|
miv79
New Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by miv79 on Sept 22, 2018 8:56:59 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by alexbrunius on Sept 22, 2018 10:11:46 GMT -6
Maybe I am missing something but from my reading there is zero information there about Japanese Electronic Warfare ( Defined as prevention or denial of enemy radars ).
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Sept 22, 2018 11:33:20 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by alexbrunius on Sept 22, 2018 14:26:13 GMT -6
Thank you. Although "everything I need to know" seems a bit of an overstatement seeing how the report just have a few sentances dealing with the topic of EW. The report as far as I can tell basically confirms my view that EW had almost zero strategic scale impact on the Naval War in the Pacific.
Japanese Jamming technology was so primitive that the US Navy didn't even notice any jamming was going on before the end of the war.
The reports claim there was some success with Japanese "window" use, but no details in what way except mentioning that the Japanese never managed to make a version capable of confusing 10 cm radar sets which AFAIK was quite common in the US Navy.
It's admitadely hard to judge system efficiency based on the horrible situation Japan was in however, a bit like saying rockets and jets were insignificant inventions just because the Germans lost the war dedpite pioneering them.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Sept 22, 2018 14:30:22 GMT -6
Thank you. Although "everything I need to know" seems a bit of an overstatement seeing how the report just have a few sentances dealing with the topic of EW. The report as far as I can tell basically confirms my view that EW had almost zero strategic scale impact on the Naval War in the Pacific. Japanese Jamming technology was so primitive that the US Navy didn't even notice any jamming was going on before the end of the war. The reports claim there was some success with Japanese "window" use, but no details in what way except mentioning that the Japanese never managed to make a version capable of confusing 10 cm radar sets which AFAIK was quite common in the US Navy. Actually, it is correct because much of the records were destroyed by the firestorm on Tokyo on March 25, 1945 and by the Japanese themselves. The records available and scientist were available to discuss and explain the matter. Most books and websites use this source for their information. BTW, it does state that the Japanese were unsuccessful in developing window for 10cm radar.
|
|
|
Post by alexbrunius on Sept 22, 2018 15:03:36 GMT -6
I do agree that EW could potentially have been important in an alternative historical war within maybe the last 5-10 years the time period RTW2 is set to cover so 1940-50.
However I think it makes the most sense to treat it like RTW1 treated Aircraft and Carriers. Exclude them because they come into play so late that it creats more complications than the value it adds to the game, and because there is no iconic historical event to say otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by ccip on Sept 22, 2018 15:06:03 GMT -6
Yeah, I would not underestimate the impact of ECM in World War II - although it didn't quite have the level of impact on naval operations that it did on strategic bombing. But I think it fits pretty well into the current system - as more of an abstract modifier on chances of detection, false/inaccurate contact reports, and battle generation.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Sept 22, 2018 17:28:09 GMT -6
Electronic warfare is a real cat and mouse game. The enemy begins to jam, and you change receivers like Lin-log or dicke-fix, he changes his jamming so you change your configuration. He drops chaff and you engage your chaff receiver. If you have frequency agility, then he can chase you all over your spectrum. However, time is critical because he starts this as he detects that you have detected him and locked him up. Radars based on the magnetron do not have frequency agility but those based on reflex klystrons, and traveling wave tubes and others, do.
|
|
|
Post by kyle on Sept 23, 2018 10:28:53 GMT -6
There aren't many instances (if any) where ship to ship jamming of radar took place in WW2, at least I can't think of any. There were several where ESM (Electronic Surveillance Measures - Radar direction and identification to more or less summarize it) were used: Bismarck picking or British radar and thinking they're still being shadowed so send a long message back to Germany comes to mind. Several instances where radar was left off in fear of enemy ESM picking it up. Then of course the radio direction finding of comm's (HFDF) got more and more capable over the war. That is more of a strategic impact than tactical but could provide some intelligence along with signal analysis of what you're going to face in battle. Signal analysis is very interesting - good operators could identify the platform even when they couldn't decode the message itself. I was an EW back quite a while ago. Obviously this field intersts me and the baby steps taken during WW2 are very interesting. Naval EW wasn't used to the extent of land/air based - but it was evolving rapidly along with everything else. Brings an interesting idea - while at war technology tends to rapidly evolve. Less so when at peace. Something RTWII could consider modeling.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Sept 24, 2018 15:59:29 GMT -6
Think about the most memorable naval battles of the 20th century. I believe they are Jutland and Midway. We could include Leyte Gulf and Marianna's but seriously, the Japanese never had a chance at either of those. But look at those two battles. Both had one item in common; signal intelligence. Room 40 for Jutland and Station Hypo for Midway. Both of those organizations give their fleet an advantage in coming operation. Regardless of how they eventually turned out, one side did have an advantage and used it to stop their opponents.
|
|
|
Post by forcea1 on Sept 25, 2018 15:36:45 GMT -6
There aren't many instances (if any) where ship to ship jamming of radar took place in WW2, at least I can't think of any. There were several where ESM (Electronic Surveillance Measures - Radar direction and identification to more or less summarize it) were used: Bismarck picking or British radar and thinking they're still being shadowed so send a long message back to Germany comes to mind. Several instances where radar was left off in fear of enemy ESM picking it up. Then of course the radio direction finding of comm's (HFDF) got more and more capable over the war. That is more of a strategic impact than tactical but could provide some intelligence along with signal analysis of what you're going to face in battle. Signal analysis is very interesting - good operators could identify the platform even when they couldn't decode the message itself. I was an EW back quite a while ago. Obviously this field intersts me and the baby steps taken during WW2 are very interesting. Naval EW wasn't used to the extent of land/air based - but it was evolving rapidly along with everything else. Brings an interesting idea - while at war technology tends to rapidly evolve. Less so when at peace. Something RTWII could consider modeling. Ships equipped with 5.25 inch guns sent to the Indian Ocean and Pacific were provided with 200 anti-radar shells (likely chaff) according to Campbell's Naval Weapons of World War Two. British Capital Ships were equipped with Type 91 Jammer which used four FV1 Antennas. It was used unsuccessfully during the battle of North Cape, due being turned the wrong frequency. It was also used by HMS Black Prince in a battle against three torpedo boats in April 1944. It was last used in January 1945 during Operation Spellbound by HMS Bellona against a shore based Giant Würzburg radar when engaging a coastal convoy. Jamming was also used during the Invasion of Sicily, at Salerno and Normandy.An improved Type 91M was also available as well as the Type 650 and 651 radio jammers for use against German guided missiles. Friedman's British Cruisers has a considerable list of Jamming equipment available to the Allies which I may type up tomorrow.
|
|
|
Post by kyle on Sept 26, 2018 18:51:24 GMT -6
Forcea1 - thanks for the info! WW2 was the baby steps of EW. One wonders how things may have evolved if the enemy such as Japan was also advanced in radar. Old pop - knowing you, you've probably read it - but Combined Fleet decoded by John Prados is a good read. It does a good job of relating the signals intelligence and code breaking of the Pacific war.
|
|
|
Post by oldpop2000 on Sept 26, 2018 21:42:07 GMT -6
Forcea1 - thanks for the info! WW2 was the baby steps of EW. One wonders how things may have evolved if the enemy such as Japan was also advanced in radar. Old pop - knowing you, you've probably read it - but Combined Fleet decoded by John Prados is a good read. It does a good job of relating the signals intelligence and code breaking of the Pacific war. Yup, I have it. It is interesting to speculate how radar could have helped. There was a statement by a commander, that the Hiryu had a surface radar however that has never been confirmed and the statement in interrogation could have meant the US surface search system.
|
|