Tracking ships

Which rules on jump tracking? So far, we have seen three different rules for "jump tracking" in this thread alone.
I draw your attention to Grognardia's post. Others have suggested you can do it by process of elimination, which is obviously also possible, but for that you don't need special software.
 
Deep Space Explorer's Handbook. page 22 under the Gravitational Analysis Suite.

"A search and plot requires a number of hours equal to 1Dx10, multiplied by the distance, in parsecs, being searched."

Plot is its location. You got this location by using the sensor data of the ship performing the jump.
I don't think there is a question as to the existence of a ship exiting a jump point, or the location its exit. But there is nothing to see after it exits and moves from that point. It doesn't say that you ca see the ship enter a jump point from that distance.
 
Deep Space Explorer's Handbook. page 22 under the Gravitational Analysis Suite.

"A search and plot requires a number of hours equal to 1Dx10, multiplied by the distance, in parsecs, being searched."

Plot is its location. You got this location by using the sensor data of the ship performing the jump.
I repeat: You can put crazy interpretations on the words in the rules to come up with crazy results if you want something to complain about. I'll stick with reasonable interpretations, so that I don't have to get upset about it breaking my game.

But even if you could detect the labels on the Captain's underpants at that distance, it is totally irrelevant from the perspective of chasing someone down. The ship jumped away years ago. They could be on the other side of the Imperium by now.

Gravitics analysis suite jump detection is really useful for exploration and survey ships, and no one else. You can see if there is a jump capable civilization in a certain direction, and maybe also judge its level of trade and presumably also then economy from a distance. It is not really about finding specific ships.
 
@MasterGwydion I do have to revise my statement a little and apologize. Readying the first line of the Gravitational Analysis Suite says this "A gravitational analysis suite permits the detection and analysis of extremely weak gravitic phenomena. It can be used to predict the presence of objects in deep space or track gravity waves caused by jump entry and breakout."

So it does see a ship entering a jump as well.

However I still stand that you do not witness it with close enough detail to trace a jump.
 
Side thought along the same topic. I need some math help because I don't think that my math is mathing correctly today. A Gravitational Analysis Suite can also automatically detect comets at 0.1 parsecs. An average comet is 6km wide. If an object appeared to be the same size in arcseconds, but 6km diameter one is 3,090,000,000,000km away and the other is 5,000,000km away, how big is the nearer object? I am trying to determine how small of an object can be detected at the start of the longest sensor bracket in the HG rulebook by a GAS.

Can anyone help with the math?
 
@MasterGwydion I do have to revise my statement a little and apologize. Readying the first line of the Gravitational Analysis Suite says this "A gravitational analysis suite permits the detection and analysis of extremely weak gravitic phenomena. It can be used to predict the presence of objects in deep space or track gravity waves caused by jump entry and breakout."

So it does see a ship entering a jump as well.

However I still stand that you do not witness it with close enough detail to trace a jump.
What is considered enough detail? Does it say anywhere?

This range is the automatic detection range, not the maximum detection range.
 
I repeat: You can put crazy interpretations on the words in the rules to come up with crazy results if you want something to complain about. I'll stick with reasonable interpretations, so that I don't have to get upset about it breaking my game.

But even if you could detect the labels on the Captain's underpants at that distance, it is totally irrelevant from the perspective of chasing someone down. The ship jumped away years ago. They could be on the other side of the Imperium by now.
Doesn't matter if they could be on the other size of the Imperium or not. You are saying that the information isn't useful, and at those distances, I agree with you. What I am saying is that the information exists. You are not arguing the same thing as I am.
Gravitics analysis suite jump detection is really useful for exploration and survey ships, and no one else. You can see if there is a jump capable civilization in a certain direction, and maybe also judge its level of trade and presumably also then economy from a distance. It is not really about finding specific ships.
and a telescope is for looking at stars and planets, but it works just fine to spy on the distant neighbors in the barrio. We put ours on the end of the dock and watch the crocs sun themselves on the beach one island over, about a kilometer away. It is not what the telescope was built for, but it is usable for this.
 
@MasterGwydion I do have to revise my statement a little and apologize. Readying the first line of the Gravitational Analysis Suite says this "A gravitational analysis suite permits the detection and analysis of extremely weak gravitic phenomena. It can be used to predict the presence of objects in deep space or track gravity waves caused by jump entry and breakout."

So it does see a ship entering a jump as well.

However I still stand that you do not witness it with close enough detail to trace a jump.
No worries. We all misread stuff once in a while, me more than most, so corrections and criticism are welcome :P
 
Side thought along the same topic. I need some math help because I don't think that my math is mathing correctly today. A Gravitational Analysis Suite can also automatically detect comets at 0.1 parsecs. An average comet is 6km wide. If an object appeared to be the same size in arcseconds, but 6km diameter one is 3,090,000,000,000km away and the other is 5,000,000km away, how big is the nearer object? I am trying to determine how small of an object can be detected at the start of the longest sensor bracket in the HG rulebook by a GAS.

Can anyone help with the math?
That is difficult to say, because the closer you get that more interference, I would expect. Also like the Hubble Telescope it is to sensitive to be use on very close objects, and very close in space terms could still be millions of km. Just my opinion no rules to back it up.
 
Just out of curiosity... Why does jump tracking even work? Seems to me like watching a plane take off from the airport and magically knowing where it is going. I don't care how well you know the capabilities of the aircraft or how closely you monitor its take-off, that will tell you nothing about where the plane is going.
A ship in jump space cannot turn. If the bubble/entrance forms in the direction of the jump, then detecting the exotic particles (nudges Sig) spewing out may provide the needed clue.
 
IMTU, this is something that space navies practice a lot, that private groups rarely do. The Imperial Navy is, of course, extremely interested in figuring out where reinforcements might have come from or where fleeing ships might be going to, and so have developed some programs. But as GM, I like to keep things interesting and in Real Life, tracking things you can't see is very problematic. They have extremely good programs that can give you a trajectory and general distance traveled based on energy input, but there's a minimum necessary energy to enter jumpspace and I have energy requirements scale logarithmically; so, the difference between Jump-1 and Jump-0 is very small in energy and can be difficult to detect, while the difference in energy between J-3 and J-4 is much higher. But you can at least get an idea of their next target.

However, the Navy then also has a reason to develop counter-technologies; but they can only counter what they can understand. So, IN ships of a certain age and younger always have "jump screen" tech, which fluctuates the emissions to make it look like more energy is being expended in jump, and it does it by a random variable amount so that it's difficult to develop an algorithm that can counter it.

But, for instance, the Consular Navy generally doesn't use tracking technology, as they try to read the minds of the guy giving the jump order or the navigator or the ensign entering the jump information or whatever. They are more interested in developing technologies to counter anti-psionic measures, as that would be more useful in the long run. And everybody has limited resources to use to solve these problems.
 
Side thought along the same topic. I need some math help because I don't think that my math is mathing correctly today. A Gravitational Analysis Suite can also automatically detect comets at 0.1 parsecs. An average comet is 6km wide. If an object appeared to be the same size in arcseconds, but 6km diameter one is 3,090,000,000,000km away and the other is 5,000,000km away, how big is the nearer object? I am trying to determine how small of an object can be detected at the start of the longest sensor bracket in the HG rulebook by a GAS.

Can anyone help with the math?
Use radius to give yourself a right triangle. The ratio of the opposite (radius) to adjacent (distance) is constant.
Basically, 5/3 of a million times smaller than 3. So millimeters. The sort of dust grains you'd need to filter out in order to detect a comet at 0.1 parsecs.
 
A ship in jump space cannot turn. If the bubble/entrance forms in the direction of the jump, then detecting the exotic particles (nudges Sig) spewing out may provide the needed clue.
It can, not turn and still not follow a straight line. For all we know when you enter jumpspace you are entering a "current" that drops you off at your destination. (unless it states somewhere that jumpspace has no currents, but we know it has shoals and deeps...) You may never steer your innertube while floating down the river, but you aren't going in a straight line either.
 
Use radius to give yourself a right triangle. The ratio of the opposite (radius) to adjacent (distance) is constant.
Basically, 5/3 of a million times smaller than 3. So millimeters. The sort of dust grains you'd need to filter out in order to detect a comet at 0.1 parsecs.
are there local gravitational fluctuations that small that have to be filtered out? That is way beyond Our level of science, so who knows. Maybe there is background interference in gravity the same way there is in the EM spectrum.

Are you sure it is millimeters? I got just less than a meter when I did the math. :(
 
It can, not turn and still not follow a straight line. For all we know when you enter jumpspace you are entering a "current" that drops you off at your destination. (unless it states somewhere that jumpspace has no currents, but we know it has shoals and deeps...) You may never steer your innertube while floating down the river, but you aren't going in a straight line either.
Nothing I've read hints at that kind of behavior. If you want to do that in your universe, cool, but you're adding speculation to the discussion, not facts or rules in evidence.
 
It can, not turn and still not follow a straight line. For all we know when you enter jumpspace you are entering a "current" that drops you off at your destination. (unless it states somewhere that jumpspace has no currents, but we know it has shoals and deeps...) You may never steer your innertube while floating down the river, but you aren't going in a straight line either.
Nonetheless, if YOU can predict your destination, someone else can as well.
 
Back
Top