On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:11 AM, Ralph Shumaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Karl Cunningham wrote:
> > On 3/24/2008 3:28 PM, James G. Sack (jim) wrote:
> >> Mark Schoonover wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 2:37 PM, James G. Sack (jim)
> >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Tracy R Reed wrote:
> >>>>> Neil Schneider wrote:
> >>>>>> Mark Schoonover wrote:
> >>>>>> Some dude did a war flight - similar to a wardrive
> >>>>>>> - in a small plane over San Diego and logged in the thousands.
> That
> >>>>>>> was a
> >>>>>>> few years ago.
> >>>>>> That would be our own Tracy Reed.
> >>>>> Indeed it would!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have been considering reprising this experiment. If anyone has the
> >>>>> equipment and wants to put together a proper scientific experiment
> >>>>> and
> >>>>> do something unique (triangulate the actual location of the AP,
> >>>>> acquire
> >>>>> useful data about the network involved, etc) I would be willing to
> >>>>> give
> >>>>> it another go. We could even fly the same path as before and
> >>>>> compare the
> >>>>> data.
> >>>>>
> >>>> I wonder what kind of antenna you would want/need for this?
> >>>>
> >>> I don't know. I've done direction finding work before, but only from
> >>> a fixed
> >>> location. DFing from a plane would be very challenging to say the
> >>> least...
> >>> Normally you'd use some kind of Adcock array for VHF or UHF, but not
> >>> sure in
> >>> the microwave bands.
> >>>
> >>> There is some info tho:
> >>>
> http://www.scitechpublishing.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=158
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> Wouldn't a ordinary omni with hopefully not too thick (and not too
> thin)
> >> a donut pattern do the job, even? Have to have readings from 2
> reception
> >> points, of course (plus altitude). Assuming a flat earth makes it
> >> easier, too. ;-)
> >>
> >> Seems like a lot of things need to be done at once, though:
> >>  pick a channel
> >>  pick a source
> >>  try to quickly maximize the source signal
> >>   and record direction and altitude
> >>  do fast enough to be able to sample all channels, see strong signals
> >>
> >> Are there programs to help with this? Hardware?
> >
> > Could have a script that does continuous iwlist scanning. My
> > recollection is that a scan takes a second or two to complete, but I
> > don't know if that varies with number of APs found. Record the MAC
> > address and signal strength for all APs seen during each scan, along
> > with GPS coordinates (NMEA-183 text from serial port of GPS). Fly a
> > parallel search pattern. Then (challenge here) post-process to
> > correlate data and put positions to MAC addresses.
> >
> > When an AP is seen on more than one search leg, you should be able to
> > determine a location based on signal strength in those legs. Where an
> > AP is seen only on one leg, you can't do as well.
> >
> > Could be tested by flying patterns over (or driving by) one's own or
> > other known APs. Could possibly 'normalize' the antenna pattern of the
> > receiver.
> >
> > This ignores the radiation pattern of AP's antennas, but I dunno what
> > you could do about that in any case.
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
>
> A single point receiver has no depth perception, like having only one
> eye open.
>
> Having two eyes open increases depth perception and the further apart
> the eyes are, the farther depth can be perceived.
>
> Affixed to the plane, this would mean two receivers at either nose and
> tail, or even better, at either wing tip.  I have no idea how this could
> be done safely.
>
> But you could get a *much* larger span if one of the antennae could be
> "dragged" behind the airplane like one of those banners that's usually
> much bigger than the plane and following way behind.
>
> For triangulation, perhaps 3 (each wing tip and a drag-behind) could be
> used simultaneously.
>
> A GPS device would allow instantaneous position information for the
> aircraft itself.  That and direction of travel with triangulation would
> allow you to fairly well pinpoint the WAPs on the ground (or elsewhere).
>
> How did the military triangulate enemy radio signals in WWII? (when
> their equipment was far more primitive than even what the CB home user
> has today)
>
>
>
> --
> Ralph
>

I don't know  how the military DFed microwave signals. I worked down in
Imperial Beach in the lat eighties, but we did high frequency DF. That's
what the big antenna is down by the beach. From what I know, it's not in use
anymore. That system worked by looking at the phase of the signal as it
crossed all the antennas, and could provide a bearing. Many of these sites
used to be located all over the world, and we could triangulate to get an
approximate location.

A quarter wave antenna on 2.4 Ghz is approx 31.25 mm, the antennas wouldn't
have to be too far apart to work...

-- 
Mark Schoonover, CMDBA
http://www.linkedin.com/in/markschoonover
http://marksitblog.blogspot.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list

Reply via email to