Fact: Laser warning systems/active protection is becoming common.
Question: should/can we move away from using laser range finders to generate ballistic solutions?
I have some ideas (below).
Seeking thoughts and or a sanity check from #TankTwitter and or #Physics legends.
Question: should/can we move away from using laser range finders to generate ballistic solutions?
I have some ideas (below).
Seeking thoughts and or a sanity check from #TankTwitter and or #Physics legends.
We know Laser Range Finders work.
They probably also aren’t obsolete yet. But the days of being able to fire the laser without fear of being detected are potentially coming to a close.
So what other options are there?
They probably also aren’t obsolete yet. But the days of being able to fire the laser without fear of being detected are potentially coming to a close.
So what other options are there?
Passive Radar (pt 1/3)
These systems will *likely* become more common. Ranging is literally part of the ‘radar’ acronym so that part is solved.
BUT. Passive radar needs the target to be transmitting/something else to transmit to enable the passive radar to receive.
These systems will *likely* become more common. Ranging is literally part of the ‘radar’ acronym so that part is solved.
BUT. Passive radar needs the target to be transmitting/something else to transmit to enable the passive radar to receive.
Passive Radar (pt 2/3)
This would obviously work a treat if our targets were always transmitting.
But that just isn’t likely (especially when everyone else is also trying to reduce their signature). So…
This would obviously work a treat if our targets were always transmitting.
But that just isn’t likely (especially when everyone else is also trying to reduce their signature). So…
Passive Radar (pt 3/3)
We could use a ‘bistatic radar’ config to solve this issue.
The active station would transmit
The vehicle/weapon system would receive and have a distance to target
Would likely work BUT relies on something transmitting which is then targetable (bad)
We could use a ‘bistatic radar’ config to solve this issue.
The active station would transmit
The vehicle/weapon system would receive and have a distance to target
Would likely work BUT relies on something transmitting which is then targetable (bad)
Angles.
This one is simple (kind of).
Utilise a known distance (between the two sight heads – yes you need two for this to work).
Look at the target and use the angles to determine the distance.
Pro – passive.
Con – How to have both sights looking at the same thing?
This one is simple (kind of).
Utilise a known distance (between the two sight heads – yes you need two for this to work).
Look at the target and use the angles to determine the distance.
Pro – passive.
Con – How to have both sights looking at the same thing?
Choking Targets (digitally)
We know how to use stadia reticules to ‘choke’ targets to determine range to target (or close enough).
Why can’t we do it digitally? It's 2020 after all...
We know how to use stadia reticules to ‘choke’ targets to determine range to target (or close enough).
Why can’t we do it digitally? It's 2020 after all...
Fire control systems are already clever (and will get smarter).
If we input known vehicle/target dimensions into the system and compute that against what each vehicle would therefore look like at varying magnifications, we should be able to get a range (I genuinely don't know)
If we input known vehicle/target dimensions into the system and compute that against what each vehicle would therefore look like at varying magnifications, we should be able to get a range (I genuinely don't know)
Anyways, that’s what’s been keeping me up this week. Interested in thoughts/opinions..
Fin
Fin
