Crosshairs over the blue forces.

[Henry J. Cobb]

Given the friendly fire incidents during OIF is it finally time to put
IFF in ground vehicles to prevent blue on blue engagements?

Make sure it's an automatic lock to prevent go pill powered trigger
fingers.

-HJC

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"Henry J. Cobb" > wrote in message
om...
>
> Given the friendly fire incidents during OIF is it finally time to put
> IFF in ground vehicles to prevent blue on blue engagements?
>

I seem to recall a few friendly fire incidents during OIF on vehicles that
did have IFF.

[killfile]

"Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
hlink.net...
>
> "Henry J. Cobb" > wrote in message
> om...
> >
> > Given the friendly fire incidents during OIF is it finally time to put
> > IFF in ground vehicles to prevent blue on blue engagements?
> >
>
> I seem to recall a few friendly fire incidents during OIF on vehicles that
> did have IFF.

The OIF system relied on panels that showed up 'lighter' on thermal imaging
scopes. Not very effective when your vehicle/aircraft doesn't actually have
one...

Matt

[Kevin Brooks]

(Henry J. Cobb) wrote in message >...

> Given the friendly fire incidents during OIF is it finally time to put
> IFF in ground vehicles to prevent blue on blue engagements?

IFF is not going to provide a 100% solution to the problem (remember
that the friendly aircraft engaged by Patriots had IFF
onboard--whether it was working properly or not is another issue).
Then you have to consider how the IFF is to be queried. Besides that,
the US is already implementing a rudimentary ground unit locator
system; look up SINCGARS EPLRS.

>
> Make sure it's an automatic lock to prevent go pill powered trigger
> fingers.
>
> -HJC

The first post you made in this thread was not funny, despite what you
may have thought. This second one at least started out on a reasonable
note, but then you had to blow it with the above.

Brooks

[Thomas Schoene]

Henry J. Cobb wrote:
> Given the friendly fire incidents during OIF is it finally time to put
> IFF in ground vehicles to prevent blue on blue engagements?

They've been trying to develop workable ground IFF systems for years
(decades, actualyl). It turns out to be significantly harder than for
aircraft, especially if you want a system that doen't telegraph friendly
locations when it pings.

The best bet is probably something keyed to laser rangefinders, but you have
to find a way to create a directional response and to ahve it work at a high
relaibility level, even thought battlefield obscurants, smoke, haze, brush,
etc.

> Make sure it's an automatic lock to prevent go pill powered trigger
> fingers.

Not a wise idea. Nothing should ever prevent the gunner from firing if
urgently necessary. You could run into anything from having to shoot past
a friendly vehicle to an enemy spoofing your IFF.
--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

[Kevin Brooks]

"killfile" > wrote in message >...
> "Steven P. McNicoll" > wrote in message
> hlink.net...
> >
> > "Henry J. Cobb" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > >
> > > Given the friendly fire incidents during OIF is it finally time to put
> > > IFF in ground vehicles to prevent blue on blue engagements?
> > >
> >
> > I seem to recall a few friendly fire incidents during OIF on vehicles that
> > did have IFF.
>
> The OIF system relied on panels that showed up 'lighter' on thermal imaging
> scopes. Not very effective when your vehicle/aircraft doesn't actually have
> one...
>
> Matt

Didn't a large portion of the forces also have the EPLRS system?

Brooks

[Steven P. McNicoll]

"killfile" > wrote in message
...
>
> The OIF system relied on panels that showed up 'lighter' on thermal
imaging
> scopes. Not very effective when your vehicle/aircraft doesn't actually
have
> one...
>

The aerospace vehicles I was referring to used a different system.