Range estimation training and practice: A state of the art review.

Thompson, Thomas J.

doi:10.1037/e449192004-001

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 13 publications

(33 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For the purposes of comparison, a larger bracket of plus or minus 20 percent of each target range was established for assessing the performance of the observers under both procedures. This bracket is one frequently reported in range estimation literature (Thompson, 1982). As expected, the relatively better performance of the Multiple Choice group is maintained.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Development of a Stadiametric Ranging Device for the M203 Grenade Launcher

Morey¹,

Schendel²,

Heller³

1986

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research sought to Improve performance on the M203 grenade launcher through the"'development of a simple, low-cost range estimation device using stadiametric principles. Experiment 1 established the baseline unaided range estimation capability of grenadiers who were newly weapon qualified. Experiment 2 was a pilot test of a prototype stadiametric ranging device that used hole sizes scaled to each of 10 man-sized targets located between 50 and 350m from the firer. On the basis of systematic perceptual errors associated with the original device, corrections to the hole sizes were calculated (Continued) DO/, FORM AN 7S 1473 EDITION OF • NOV SS IS OBSOLETE UNCLASSIFIED ± SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (Whon Dolo Entorod) WoV.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 78%

“…These tolerances appear well beyond the ability of newly trained grenadiers or soldiers who fire the M203 at infrequent intervals. Moreover, current Army policy has not emphasized known methods of unaided eye range estimation in a broad range of weapons and tactical training situations (Thompson, 1982).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of a Stadiametric Ranging Device for the M203 Grenade Launcher

Morey¹,

Schendel²,

Heller³

1986

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The positions of drone shooters are assumed to be obtained via Human Intelligence (HUMINT) network 1 or by soldiers who are trained to visually estimate target locations [26] and report to DBSs. Because soldiers report the positions relative to their locations, the same error margin is applied to real positions of drone shooters.…”

Section: System Model and Assumptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurement based threat aware drone base station deployment

Akarsu¹,

Girici²

2020

Turk J Elec Eng & Comp Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unmanned aerial vehicles are gaining importance with many civilian and military applications. Especially the surveillance, search/rescue, and military operations may have to be carried out in extremely constrained environments. In such scenarios, drone base stations (DBSs) have to provide communication services to the people at the ground. The ground users may have no access to the global positioning system (GPS); therefore, their locations have to be estimated using alternative techniques. Besides there may be threats in the environment, such as shooters. In this work, we address the problem of optimal DBS deployment under the aforementioned constraints. We propose a novel DBS deployment algorithm that uses estimated positions of ground users and threats. The proposed algorithm is based on receiver signal strength-based maximum likelihood estimate of user locations and K-means clustering supported heuristic that takes into account the positions of threats. Numerical results show that proposed algorithm performs close to the computation intensive near-optimal algorithm and strikes a good trade-off between the number of unserved users and the probability of DBSs not being hit.

show abstract

“…Ranging error affects the superelevation applied to the trajectory, which in turn affects the miss distance in the vertical direction. There are many methods of rangefinding (7,51), of which we shall highlight two common ones.…”

Section: Ranging Errormentioning

confidence: 99%

An Introduction to the Sources of Delivery Error for Direct-Fire Ballistic Projectiles

Strohm¹

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

show abstract

Range estimation training and practice: A state of the art review.

Cited by 4 publications

References 13 publications

Development of a Stadiametric Ranging Device for the M203 Grenade Launcher

Development of a Stadiametric Ranging Device for the M203 Grenade Launcher

Measurement based threat aware drone base station deployment

An Introduction to the Sources of Delivery Error for Direct-Fire Ballistic Projectiles

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About