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.

You have a scale problem.  At wi-fi frequencies, the wavelength is
like 5 inches.

>
>  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)

The "high frequency" triangulated by ship-mounted HF/DF receivers for
U-boat location was seldom greater than 15 MHz.  That's the 20-meter
band in ham radio nomenclature.

You can read an extensive technical description of WWII vintage HF/DF
by following the references in
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huff-Duff>.

    carl
-- 
 carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]


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

Reply via email to