Quote:
Originally Posted by SeaCadt07
I would say the TMA is both too perfect in some ways and not perfect enough in others.
Too perfect
- it's pretty quick to get to 95% if you are proactively driving the problem. Not really realistic in that regard most of the time. And in reality, you will never really know if your solution is that good anyway.
|
Untrue. Proactively driving for a solution is the quickest and best way to obtain a solution. Putting a percentage to it is complete garbage, but as I've mentioned elsewhere, a really on-it Fire Control Team (SONAR, Control, FTs, etc) can create a shooting solution with NO maneuvers in some circumstances.
Quote:
|
- visual contacts are instant 95% solution which is not really true. It takes at least 2-3 observations for even an experienced approach officer.
|
Partially true. You make the assumption that there is no other data to rely on for refinement. If it's the first data at all, you would be correct. For most surface contacts, there is already sonar data and a fire control solution to use for refinement, so a single observation can provide a nearly perfect solution if the periscope operator is any good.
Quote:
Not perfect enough
- Drastic changes to solution anytime you lose contact. Existing solution should just extrapolate out.
- There should be at least a best guess for course much earlier. I was trained to always assume something closing until the data says otherwise, especially right after initial gain.
|
Agree with both of these points. Relative motion is very obvious very early on in any TMA problem... direction of motion should be indicated well before the point it actually does.