No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
An Examination of Criticisms of Automatic Radar Plotting Systems and their Advantages in Relation to Manual and Semi-auto Systems
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 January 2010
Extract
Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Much of Captain Wylie's note (this Journal, 27, 111) is undoubtedly correct, particularly the part headed ‘automatic versus manual’, which restates the strong operational requirement for automatic plotting. The earlier part, however, contains some truth, some error, and shows a notable omission. A detailed analysis would take far too much space, so I will deal with three points only.
- Type
- Forum
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 1974
References
REFERENCES
Harrison, A. (1972). The Risk of Error in Predicted C.P.A. I.E.E./I.E.R.E. Conference 1972.Google Scholar
Tarnowski, P. G. Radar Computer for the C.P.A. A.S.W.E. Laboratory Note TX-63–1.Google Scholar
Shuffleton, W. H. and Evans, H. G. (1972). A Critical Evaluation of an Experimental Collision Avoidance System. I.E.E./I.E.R.E. Conference 1972.Google Scholar
Gasparini, O., Grasso, G. and Pardini, S. (1972). A Smoothing Logic with High Precision in Velocity for Naval Collision Avoidance. I.E.E./I.E.R.E. Conference 1972.Google Scholar
Gustafson, B. G.System Properties of Jumping Frequency Radars. Philips Publication.Google Scholar
You have
Access