wmd-7 range is so low, is there a reason?

[Harlikwin]

16 minutes ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Modern military GPS is way more accurate than that. A modern pod would have an integrated elevation map, and be able to determine, from ownship GPS location and TGP pointing angle alone, the location and elevation of the target with reasonable accuracy. Not as perfect as we have it in DCS, but it can be done. You do need to lase in order to, say, drop a JDAM, but for simply marking the enemy unit on the map, it's more than good enough. 

WMD7 is not the most advanced pod in the world, in fact, it seems to be sort of a low cost export TGP. It's certainly not quite as capable as, say, ATFLIR.

Depends on when you are talking about. And who has access to it. Early 2000's GPS coupled INS were 5-15meters accurate for ownship positions. With DGPS its better but that all depends if you have access to those signals. 

And well, it all depends on the WMD-7, which I'm not particularly familiar with since there isn't much info on it. 

[uboats]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/291500012574

[Harlikwin]

18 minutes ago, uboats said:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/291500012574

Interesting, is it just the 2 pages or is there more actual info in there?

Also as I understand it China also had Lantirn "copy/equivalent" that preceded this pod right?

Its always been weird to me that this pod has basically a 3rd gen imaging sensor(s), but can't do stuff like stabilize the image at a distance i.e. area track. 

Using the laser for coordinate generation makes perfect sense though.

 

I have seen this language in several places related to the WMD7 though "Automatic tracking targets after identified" which seems to imply it needs some sort of point track lock maybe. Or it could mean it can be stabilized on a target after its detected, which in the case of a building could be quite a ways away.

In terms of zoom the NFOV is comparable to western pods.  Is the sensor resolution actually known? If not I can take a stab at back calculating it from these FOV and the detection range.

 WFOV: 4.3°×5.8°
 NFOV: 1.4°×1.9°

Edited October 13, 2022 by Harlikwin

[Napillo]

There's info that the Aselsan Aselpod is being installed on JF-17s.

Hmm, yea looks like Pakistan got about 1500 of them..

https://quwa.org/2018/07/23/aselsan-confirms-aselpod-integration-on-pakistani-jf-17/

Edited October 13, 2022 by Napillo

[Harlikwin]

14 minutes ago, Napillo said:

There's info that the Aselsan Aselpod is being installed on JF-17s.

Hmm, yea looks like Pakistan got about 1500 of them..

https://quwa.org/2018/07/23/aselsan-confirms-aselpod-integration-on-pakistani-jf-17/

 

What does this have to do with the WMD7?

 

[Napillo]

it's the replacement.

[Harlikwin]

1 hour ago, Napillo said:

it's the replacement.

Jolly good, thanks for your contribution. 

 

[Harlikwin]

Well doing some optics math

With 640x480 sensor and a 1.4x1.9 FOV and a 2x6m target, I'm getting a detect range of ~20km or so i.e. 2.6x4.3 pixels at 20km which is well within the "detect" Johnson Criteria. At 15km its 3.5x5 pixels which is a bit optimistic for "recognition for Johnson criteria. At 10km its 5.2x8.6 pixels which is on the ragged edge for  "recognition", and at 8km its 6.5x10 pixel well within the "recognition" criteria. 

If I bump the sensor to a 1024x768

20km = 4.1x6.9 (detect)

15km = 5.5x9.2 (ragged edge of recognition)

10km = 8.3x13.8 (recognition)

 

For reference this is a common "johnson critera" in terms of number of pixels for a man sized target. 

Detection		3.5x1
Recognition		13x5
Identification		28x8

 

So I guess depending on how optimistic you want to be about the sensor capabilities, and how much the manufacturer is over or understating those capabilites. Its fairly plausible the IR sensor is likely either 640x480 or possible better.