Auto-TMA exploits?

[MarkShot]

My observation is from SC, but I would be surprised if DW was any different. Two apparent cheats/exploits I have noticed with auto-TMA:

(1) For TA, auto-TMA always instantly resolves the ambiguity. {I suppose not a big deal, since only a slight change of course is necessary to do it manually; unless you already have another contact on that bearing already.

(2) When you have overlaid NB contacts on the same bearing such that you cannot get a classification by simply placing the cursor on each generated frequency and assigning a tracker, auto-TMA will either discard assignments for existing contacts or determine that the frequency line belongs to a new and as of yet unrecorded contact. Although this does not solve the classification problem, this is a big aid to at least knowing how many contacts are truly out there in all that noise. In particular, it seems many scenarios are designed to have subs masked by neutral surface traffic on the same bearing.

---

Any comments on #2. Is #2 similar to #1 in that if you don't use auto-TMA, you could easily determine how many contacts are lurking on an LOB? If so, how?

Thanks.

[timmyg00]

Originally Posted by MarkShot

(2) When you have overlaid NB contacts on the same bearing such that you cannot get a classification by simply placing the cursor on each generated frequency and assigning a tracker, auto-TMA will either discard assignments for existing contacts or determine that the frequency line belongs to a new and as of yet unrecorded contact. Although this does not solve the classification problem, this is a big aid to at least knowing how many contacts are truly out there in all that noise. In particular, it seems many scenarios are designed to have subs masked by neutral surface traffic on the same bearing.

This is actually not a function of auto-TMA, just TMA in general; if you already have a tracker assigned to a contact on a given sensor, you cannot assign another to it.

TG