SAM Triangulation

[JaBoG32_Prinzartus]

His triangle is an isosceles triangle (ab=90 degrees, ac=45 degrees, bc=45 degrees), so a=b, while a<>c, nor b<>c.

 

That's what I was thinking. But then, then why is he assuming a=b?! If you fly stright to a radar SAM and turn by 45 degrees, you not know wether your triangle will be an isosceles triangle, that you are "creating" an isosceles triangle. So, that assumption is wrong, IMHO. Am I right?

[PFunk1606688187]

Most probably, IRL, a couple of A-10s would probably be able to do all this automatically, using datalink and displaying the result on the TAD.

Speculation of course, but reasonable in my view.

 

More likely the datalink would be used to have some SEAD aircraft do the hard work of tracking these targets with the result appearing on the TAD for the A-10.

 

This kind of tracking would be largely useless since if we're dealing with a static SAM system then its not moving easily and SEAD would be spending most of its time worrying about it, not the A-10. If it were a mobile system like the SA-8 then you'd see it on the RWR at an azimuth for a few seconds then if you ever had the same system paint you again it would be in a totally different position because people aren't stupid and snipers aren't the only ones who move after revealing themselves.

 

Real life SAMs don't sit there making easy targets of themselves by staying turned on. Real life is far more complicated than this. Real life aircraft systems don't have their software set up to solve these kinds of problems because real life doesn't make this a relevant tactic.

 

You can't get much more unrealistic than the way DCS players interact with DCS SAMs and their DCS SAM behavior. The capabilities of many systems are decently modeled but the behavior is not.

[Kimi_uy]

It's triangulation because to define a position in space you need three independant values. X, Y and Z. In our case Z is overlooked because being the object a SAM implies it is on the ground.

 

And yes, I recomend reading A10s over Kosovo, there you'll see how the deceptión game was played. One hog pilot used to call "mágnum" on the radio to make the serbs think he had shot a HARM and serbs monitoring that freq inmediately shut down their radars.

Yes you would hace SEAD and jamming going on in a proper misión, but i think We are reading this thread because triangulation is a possibility for our non-human-SEAD sim.

[ZaltysZ]

That's what I was thinking. But then, then why is he assuming a=b?! If you fly stright to a radar SAM and turn by 45 degrees, you not know wether your triangle will be an isosceles triangle, that you are "creating" an isosceles triangle. So, that assumption is wrong, IMHO. Am I right?

 

Look at diagram. Imagine that you are have radar straight ahead of you on the path which coincides with edge "c". Let's say, you turn 45 degrees to right from your initial heading and now you are flying on edge "a". Your goal is to measure length of "a" by flying straight until you reach point "C", which will create a nice 45(ac)-45(bc)-90(ab) isosceles triangle and make a=b. It is very easy to know when you reach that point, because radar will slip exactly to your 9 hours. That exact moment radar will be at same distance from you as you have covered from initial turn to the moment radar slipped to your 9 hours, because edges opposite to equal angles are equal (ac=bc, thus a=b).

 

By the way, you can forget flying at constant speed and watching clock. Just create mark points: one at initial turn and one at the moment radar slips to 9 hours, then check the distance between these points.

[Pikey]

Nope! Your calculation leading to 20 miles is just the distance that you have flown since your last turn. Hence "a" is 20 miles. You still have no clue how long "b" is. Am I right?

Sorry to embarrass you, but no. You missed a law of triangles.

A=B on an Isoceles triangle in the diagram, it's just very, very, very old maths.

http://www.mathsisfun.com/right_angle_triangle.html

 

Also go play with submarines a bit. If you think pilots are good at stuff on the fly, try calculating intercepts, that's pretty mental stuff.

[Pikey]

By the way, you can forget flying at constant speed and watching clock. Just create mark points: one at initial turn and one at the moment radar slips to 9 hours, then check the distance between these points.

 

I'm interested in doing that quickly, I considered TGP but its a slant range. How do you measure the distance between two mark points? Especially if its faster than Distance = speed/time, which in most cases we can do instantly in our heads.

 

CDU can do most things, but don't undervalue your own brain. :)

[ZaltysZ]

I'm interested in doing that quickly, I considered TGP but its a slant range. How do you measure the distance between two mark points? Especially if its faster than Distance = speed/time, which in most cases we can do instantly in our heads.

 

CDU can do most things, but don't undervalue your own brain. :)

 

In fact you can avoid using CDU for calculating distance between 2 mark points if you want. As it will take some time until you reach point "C", you can use that time for selecting the first mark point as steer point. Then you will see ever increasing ground distance to it on the HUD while approaching point C, and just note the final reading while being over the point "C". This way you don't have to check time, calculate the distance or keep constant speed/altitude.

[GGTharos]

More likely the datalink would be used to have some SEAD aircraft do the hard work of tracking these targets with the result appearing on the TAD for the A-10.

 

That is correct. You'd be getting SAM locations and threat circles after receiving a datalink message from wild-weasels. Usually those F-16's are equipped with SADL themselves, or a JTIDS->SADL gateway would be available.

 

Real life SAMs don't sit there making easy targets of themselves by staying turned on. Real life is far more complicated than this. Real life aircraft systems don't have their software set up to solve these kinds of problems because real life doesn't make this a relevant tactic.

 

You can't get much more unrealistic than the way DCS players interact with DCS SAMs and their DCS SAM behavior. The capabilities of many systems are decently modeled but the behavior is not.

 

 

Real life aircraft systems can solve these problems in an automated manner, but you have to have the right hardware and software. The RWR already gives you a best guess at direction and distance, but now those are starting to get integrated, and accuracy of such systems is becoming higher - so it'll all start showing up on your TAD etc.

 

But yes, the default SAM behaviors are not realistic and that is what gives people a very wrong idea of what 'SEAD' is.

[baltic_dragon]

I'm interested in doing that quickly, I considered TGP but its a slant range. How do you measure the distance between two mark points? Especially if its faster than Distance = speed/time, which in most cases we can do instantly in our heads.

 

CDU can do most things, but don't undervalue your own brain. :)

 

You can use your TAD. Hook the first mark point, choose hook->curs by pressing OSB 18, then just move your cursor over secomd mark point and read the distance. IMHO that is the easiest way to do it no matter how far from the area you are.

[Pikey]

You can use your TAD. Hook the first mark point, choose hook->curs by pressing OSB 18, then just move your cursor over secomd mark point and read the distance. IMHO that is the easiest way to do it no matter how far from the area you are.

Ah yeah, I forget the hook line reads that static without any more effort.

To be honest the post is all a bit pointless because of all the reasons already stated, it's just an unrealistic exercise, certainly for me.