Stealth, What does it do?

[Brian Neumann (OP)]

What does stealth do in version 2.4.  In 2.3 it does not seem to have any function.  It does not reduce either the radar crossection, nor the thermal signature of a ship.  Is this one of those things that has been left behind with the changes to radar and engines?

Brian

[Steve Walmsley]

As you alluded to, Stealth has been left behind a little. In v2.3, the only stealth is thermal reduction for engines. For future versions, I intend to add some special armour types that will be more expensive but reduce the cross-section. I need to remove the existing outdated stealth tech.

Steve

[Arwyn]

Steve,

If your redoing it, then having something that compliments the existing sensor tech would be neat to see.

Off the top of my head;

Thermal Masking (reduction of heat emissions, modulation of engine emissions to reduce signature)

Thermal Baffles (reduction of heat emissions via advanced cooling, heavy and inefficient)

Stealth Engines (built to reduce/mask engine emissions, at the cost of thrust and acceleration)

Advanced Hull Composites (EM absorbent/reductive composites, expensive!)

Stealth Construction techniques (building hulls to reduce/minimize EM cross section, expensive, expensive to repair/refit)

EM Masking (reduction of EM emissions via electronic measures)

EM Jamming (good old brute force sensor jamming, energy intensive {burns fuel}, short range, and a hell of an EM emitter at long range)

I will try and post more when I can.

[Steve Walmsley]

Steve,

If your redoing it, then having something that compliments the existing sensor tech would be neat to see.

Off the top of my head;

Thermal Masking (reduction of heat emissions, modulation of engine emissions to reduce signature)

Thermal Baffles (reduction of heat emissions via advanced cooling, heavy and inefficient)

Stealth Engines (built to reduce/mask engine emissions, at the cost of thrust and acceleration)

Advanced Hull Composites (EM absorbent/reductive composites, expensive!)

Stealth Construction techniques (building hulls to reduce/minimize EM cross section, expensive, expensive to repair/refit)

EM Masking (reduction of EM emissions via electronic measures)

EM Jamming (good old brute force sensor jamming, energy intensive {burns fuel}, short range, and a hell of an EM emitter at long range)

I will try and post more when I can.

At the moment, there is a line of engine tech that increases the cost of an engine but reduces the thermal signature, so that covers one of the above. The EM signature is more difficult because the EM signature is based solely on shield strength. The best way for a ship to be stealthly vs EM sensors is to keep its shields inactive. GPD sensors detect active sensor emissions so as with modern naval warfare, engaging active sensors may give away your position.

Finally, active sensors are based on cross-section so as you suggest above, some type of hull material that absorbs active sensor emissions or a different method of construction that reduces cross-section. I have had a look at the former but not the latter. For the former, I have not yet decided between some type of stealth armour or an additional stealthly coating. The potential issue with stealthy armour is that there are twelve types of armour and if there are several different levels of stealth, we could end up with a LOT of different armour types, although I am not sure if that is really a problem. The alternative is a second 'armour' layer that would offer no protection and require much less hull space that normal armour but would reduce the cross-section and would probably be expensive. There would be a tech line for different levels of this stealth-coating. A different construction method would probably involve reshaping the hull to make it more stealthly but would result in a reduction in internal space.

Steve

[Randy]

You could also have a shield tech that reduces its "EM signal" strength without reducing its effectiveness...

  Thus you could have heavyier shields but look like they are lighter...