Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
The Electronic Battlefield Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Triangulation / Direction Finding
Yimmy    11/22/2006 1:18:17 PM
Firstly, I am just infantry and have never been on any signals courses or otherwise been privy to possibly classified informtion, so don't see anything wrong with discussing this here. Everyone has heard of being "DF'd" by the enemy and having lots of nasties thrown at them as a result, while DF of course stands for Direction Finding. Now, I was arguing with a signaller friend of mine about it. Obviously him being a signaller I am at a disadvantage, but I am certain I am right. To triangulate an enemy radio broadcast, you need two landrovers (or other radio reciever set-ups) don't you? He was arguing that you need three recievers to locate the enemy. I am sure it is two, as if both recievers know each-others location, and both detect the enemy bradcast and find its direction, they form a triangle don't they? This being with two point of the triangle the two recivers, and one corner the enemy broadcast. Knowing two angles (through knowing their locations and the direcion of the enemy), and knowing one side (being the distance between the two recievers), allows them to find the other two sides (and therefore distance to the enemy). Knowing where they are, and the direction and distance to the enemy, they can plot the enemies location. Right?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest

Pages: 1 2
Yimmy       11/22/2006 6:28:12 PM
Never mind I got my answer.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S       11/22/2006 7:35:36 PM
Well???  What the h..ll was it??
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       11/22/2006 8:37:10 PM
My signals friend asked a signals friend who consulted his manual.... so I don't really think I can say how it's done in the Brit army.
 
My thinking two recievers were used was based on trigonometry and searching google, but that was concerning a frequency band rather than a release transmission point.
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S       11/24/2006 8:57:57 AM
In the artillery we had to learn how to analyze shell craters to find the direction the projectile had been fired from.  Several shell craters a few hundred meters apart could give you a good triangulation fix on a cannons location.  However it was not absolutly necessary to triangulate.  After plotting the first azimuth obtained on the map we could inspect along the line and reduce the likely locations for the cannon down to a few possibilities.  Sometimes suuch a single azimuth map spot was enough to justify a counter battery mission.
 
Quote    Reply

Mike From Brielle       11/30/2006 5:43:33 PM
If you had Marconni antennas and simple recievers you'd probably need three. If you had circular antennas you could probably use two or even one if you can move and the transmitter is fixed. This is WWII stuff.
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       11/30/2006 11:58:54 PM

Knowing two angles (through knowing their locations and the direcion of the enemy), and knowing one side (being the distance between the two recievers), allows them to find the other two sides (and therefore distance to the enemy). Knowing where they are, and the direction and distance to the enemy, they can plot the enemies location.

Right?

I don't know why three appears to be necessary rather than just two, but several of the passive detection systems/multi-static radar systems produced by countries like the Czech Republic, Russia, and China use three receiving stations to triangulate a fix on the target.
 
Quote    Reply

Carl S       12/1/2006 3:24:25 PM
Three antennas because redundacy is good?  
 
Quote    Reply

displacedjim       12/1/2006 6:20:58 PM

Three antennas because redundacy is good?  

My guess is that there is a significant increase in accuracy and precision using three line-of-bearing and time-difference-ofd-arrival measurements rather than two.

 
Quote    Reply

HIPAR    Two might do   12/2/2006 2:36:03 PM
Two bearings from two know locations are the minimum requirements.  If you plot three and they all cross at the same point, then you can be reasonably certain you have located the emitter accurately.  But, I practice the lines of position will form a small triangle where they converge.  The size of the triangle may be use to estimate accuracy.  DFing is often complicated by multipath receptions so many additional bearings might be obtained to refine the measurement.

---  CHAS

 
Quote    Reply

ShinyTop       12/9/2006 7:49:46 PM
Remembering my early Signal training, 1967, some radios used to DF got almost as strong a signal 180 degress and on target.  So two could be used with some accuracy in a normal battlefield situation.  In a guerilla warfare situation 3 were necessary for an accurate fix unless uperators were good and experienced.  I doubt if the situation is the same today.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy