Talk:Direction finding

Talk
I plan to add more information on single channel direction finding in the coming months when I get some nice graphics that aren't copyrighted. I will also add some mathematical background & equations as soon as I am confident I can get them to show up nicely (I'm fairly new to this). If there are any issues with what I have added, feel free to remove them but please tell me why. --Negative3 05:58, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree that this article should be merged with Radio Direction Finding. RDF should be the proper name of the article. Jakro64 07:06, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Information on sources of error in RDF, common patterns of error, and degree of/type of error associated with particular situations would be a useful addition to this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.132.190.26 (talk) 16:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I added a reference (Appleyard 1988) with information about marine DF accuracy. I also believe that this article and Radio Direction Finding should be merged.sv1xv 2008-01-06.

 Today all such systems are being generally removed in favour of the GPS system: I added a request for citations, as NDBs are gradually replaced with VORs, not with the GPS system. Sv1xv (talk) 04:32, 8 January 2008 (UTC)  I removed this phrase: "Today all such systems are being generally removed in favour of the GPS system."

and copied it here, as there is no reference or evidence supporting it.

Aviation Portal assessment
There are four related articles on the subject:
 * Non-directional beacon with a detailed description of NDB navigation
 * Direction finding
 * Radio direction finder
 * Electric beacon

I propose that further content development and improvement about NDBs goes in the fist article and the other three give a brief description and refer the reader to the first one.

Sv1xv (talk) 07:21, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

External links & Further reading
I removed the following two external links for the reasons stated:


 * ''Radio Direction Finding Equipment & Systems (Morcom): The link is dead.


 * http://www.ewgenesis.com: it is a purely commercial site.

I also removed the following link, as it is not directly relevant:


 * The role of active millimetre wave radar using Direction Finding. The real title is: The role of active millimetre wave radar in defence surveillance by Dr Duncan A. Wynn.

The folloing link is also part of a commercial site, but contains 13 articles with a lot of useful information and references, so I decided to keep it in the article:


 * Radio Direction Finding Applications Literature (RDF Products)

Sv1xv (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

merge
I suggest merging DFing into direction finding, since both terms mean exactly the same thing. Or at least close enough that a single article can cover both, with a sentence or two discribing the difference (if any). --68.0.124.33 (talk) 17:15, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * There's no content worth saving in the DFing article, so I've done the redirect. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Good job. Thank you, DJ Clayworth. --68.0.124.33 (talk) 00:22, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Complexity
This article is far too complex for the general reader. I know quite a bit about radio and it's too technical. We need a description of how DF works up front. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Merge (May 2012)
This article substantially overlaps the contents of Radio direction finding - the non-redundant contents of the two should be merged. Since this article is specifically about radio techniques, Radio direction finding would seem to be the appropriate title. --Wtshymanski (talk) 15:49, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Both articles cannot be the source of the merge. The merge tags suggest both are the source and that there is no target.  Also the tag on Radio direction finder points to a talk page that contains no rationale for the merger (it should probably point here).  DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:08, 25 July 2012 (UTC)


 * A merger is obvious, and now I'm upset I started working on the other article. I will move that work here over the next little while. Maury Markowitz (talk) 18:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Direction finding. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110722082049/http://www.backcountryaccess.com/images/documents/457andFuture_000.pdf to http://www.backcountryaccess.com/images/documents/457andFuture_000.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:10, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Direction finding. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131023032013/http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/implementation/media/NextGen_Implementation_Plan_2013.pdf to http://www.faa.gov/nextgen/implementation/media/NextGen_Implementation_Plan_2013.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:52, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

linearity
There is a description in Superheterodyne receiver that it was first used because RDF required linear amplifiers. That is, implying that measuring signal strength was of primary importance. Since RDF searches for the null, it seems that it isn't important, though if one knows the output power, one might estimate distance based on received signal strength. So, why the need for linearity? Gah4 (talk) 21:44, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Reinserting Microwave Direction Finding
Previously, I submitted an article on Microwave Direction Finding. I considered the contents differed substantially from the existing Wiki article Direction finding to justify a separate entry, but several editors pointed out that "there was an existing article on direction finding" and suggested my article should be added to that. I added my section to Direction finding on 4th April 2021. However, this was removed by User:Sunlight123 on 31st August 2021 and I was unaware, at the time, that this had happened. The odd thing is that this event shows up on the "View history" of the DF article, but not in that of User:Sunlight123. More recently, I have failed to contact this editor to discuss the matter.

In the circumstances I wish to resurrect my article. An advisor on Teahouse suggested, in view of the size of the article, I first place it in my Sandbox (find at: User:D1ofBerks/sandbox), where it can be viewed by editors. Hopefully, they can then advise on the way forward. Should I add the article back, should I try and create a separate article or should I abandon it completely (which would be a pity, as there are many DF systems which used the methods described). Thank you D1ofBerks (talk) 11:14, 9 April 2022 (UTC)


 * This reply is now moot since the material has been restored, but an explanation of what happened here may still be useful. From the edit summary and this diff it is clear that the editor only intended to add an image, but did so by editing an old version of the page and actually did this which accidentally removed all the edits that had occured in the intervening period (nearly five months).  In view of that, I see no problem with restoring the deleted material, especially as the image was being inserted for the second time without first trying to resolve the problem with the editor who removed it.  There is more material that has been removed or changed than just the microwave section.  I will try to restore anything significant, but it will not be so easy as it will have to be done manually due to the length of time elapsed and the number of intervening edits. SpinningSpark 18:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Having now thoroughly looked through the edit history, as far as I can tell, everything significant has already been put back by others. But it's hard to be completely sure because there is a lot of manual fixing and intervening edits. SpinningSpark 14:27, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments and help.
 * D1ofBerks (talk) 16:01, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Links Back To Itself
"Radio Direction Finder" redirects to itself on this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by EloquentMosquito (talk • contribs) 15:39, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 21 September 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. Per consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 12:32, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Direction finding → Radio direction finding – the lead only defines the more specific term; "direction finding" can be kept as a redirect. fgnievinski (talk) 04:18, 21 September 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. >>> Extorc . talk  08:10, 29 September 2022 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * I'm not seeing any pressing need to rename. The current title doesn't need disambiguating from anything else, and DF is commonly used to mean RDF.  What we have now seems fully in line with WP:PRECISION and WP:TITLEDAB. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 15:10, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Spinningspark. Current name seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME for the concept. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 12:12, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Aviation and WW2
isn't radio direction finding like a fundamental part of modern aviation, starting with the US and the TACAN network, which was adopted for universal use by civil aviation post war? Yet it isn't even listed in the main applications, and only gets passing mention in the article. Like the technology fundamentally changed civil (and military) aviation and is used by all aircraft larger than small pleasure craft for navigation.

And from reading this article one would think that the UK was the only one developing and using radio direction finding during the war, or the only one who used it effectively, yet the Germans were using it during the Blitz, extensively, and the US was developing their network all though the war. Every Allied and Luftwaffe combat plane and many besides were fitted with RDF aerials which were a basic part of their tactics. The RAF is just a well known early success, and radio plays an important role in the mythos of the Battle of Britain, mostly for the radar system and combat control elements however. That was a part of "radio direction finding" but not as we see it today. The part that was just plain directional signal location was used by all the major combatants, the Luftwaffe wasnt flying over London by night by simple dead reckoning. Disrupting the Luftwaffe radio navigation was also a major part of the battle. Inversely, it was the primary reason why Allied convoys maintained strict radio silence during the passage, so the Germans couldnt locate them by tracking their signals, because they were fully capable of doing so.

Idumea47b (talk) 01:39, 19 September 2023 (UTC)