3 ms·

I like to point at the signal fire in lord of the rings. Absurdly elaborate communication system that can only one shot a single bit. But it's far far faster th

by jfoutz 5y ago

I like to point at the signal fire in lord of the rings. Absurdly elaborate communication system that can only one shot a single bit. But it's far far faster than any alternative. And if both sides understand the meaning of the message, it could be worth it. I could see a regular pulse being a useful monitoring system for (whatever they care about). no pulse, send help.

spoonjim 5y ago
You don’t have to use a fictional example of a signal fire... it was used in ancient China to send exactly this message: “Send the army”
- jfoutz 5y ago
  Neat! I didn't know, thank you!
jjk166 5y ago
Although the beacon system (technically a form of semaphore) could likely have been much better optimized. For example, if a single pyre went unattended or was otherwise unable to light their fire (for example say an orc band attacked it), the whole system would fail, and there would be no way of knowing that it had failed. Consider also the possibility that one of the teams may have been able to light their fire, but for fear of drawing enemy attention to themselves, choose not to. Same effect. A more failsafe option would be to have the fires constantly burning with the light being cut off as the signal bit. This could be accomplished quickly and easily by having some shutter that drops down and blocks the fire's light. If one of the stations were abandoned or damaged, its fire would go out, alerting the network that something was amiss. This also means that the cowards who don't want to alert orcs to their position need only stop tending their station when in danger, and they are free to flee. Of course once you have some shutter in place to quickly block out light, you can presumably raise and lower the shutter. With an appropriate protocol, you can essentially achieve a visual telegraph. If each station maintains two fires, you can achieve bi-directional communication. This is also good for eliminating false positives for the main alert function if one fire just goes out for some reason. It's interesting that real life semaphore systems like Phryctoria or the Byzantine Beacons did not implement fail-safe methods.
- AlotOfReading 5y ago
  Logistically, fail-safes are expensive. Keeping a fire burning for days and years takes a lot of firewood, which in turn requires manpower. Having two fires also places limitations on the distance they can be due to the angular resolution of the human eye. That'd be anywhere from 5-10 miles on basic assumptions. A signal fire can be seen from farther if you have the elevation and a smoke signal doesn't even require that (+ carries more information).

by jfoutz 5y ago

spoonjim 5y ago

You don’t have to use a fictional example of a signal fire... it was used in ancient China to send exactly this message: “Send the army”

jfoutz 5y ago
Neat! I didn't know, thank you!

jjk166 5y ago

Although the beacon system (technically a form of semaphore) could likely have been much better optimized. For example, if a single pyre went unattended or was otherwise unable to light their fire (for example say an orc band attacked it), the whole system would fail, and there would be no way of knowing that it had failed. Consider also the possibility that one of the teams may have been able to light their fire, but for fear of drawing enemy attention to themselves, choose not to. Same effect. A more failsafe option would be to have the fires constantly burning with the light being cut off as the signal bit. This could be accomplished quickly and easily by having some shutter that drops down and blocks the fire's light. If one of the stations were abandoned or damaged, its fire would go out, alerting the network that something was amiss. This also means that the cowards who don't want to alert orcs to their position need only stop tending their station when in danger, and they are free to flee. Of course once you have some shutter in place to quickly block out light, you can presumably raise and lower the shutter. With an appropriate protocol, you can essentially achieve a visual telegraph. If each station maintains two fires, you can achieve bi-directional communication. This is also good for eliminating false positives for the main alert function if one fire just goes out for some reason. It's interesting that real life semaphore systems like Phryctoria or the Byzantine Beacons did not implement fail-safe methods.

AlotOfReading 5y ago
Logistically, fail-safes are expensive. Keeping a fire burning for days and years takes a lot of firewood, which in turn requires manpower. Having two fires also places limitations on the distance they can be due to the angular resolution of the human eye. That'd be anywhere from 5-10 miles on basic assumptions. A signal fire can be seen from farther if you have the elevation and a smoke signal doesn't even require that (+ carries more information).