I begin to answer on sensors, and then I get a little too technical (more than 1 page on only the gunshot detector...)
I drop it and began to explain the two main philosophy of getting data (swarm and central), then after writing some more, I was already at more than 2 pages....
So I will try to summarize my ideas. Don't hesitate if you want some more information on one point, I will gladly give it If I have it.
Ryan wrote:If that were indeed possible, it would change the face of CQB forever. Especially templates hostage rescue.
I don't know. RAID isn't some magic. And anything that could be used by the good guy could also , one day, be used by the bad ones.
Ryan wrote:Am I on the right track here? You need something to give you information then use the algorithm. The more information you can get, the more accurate the algorithm?
You're on the right track with some minor modification.
The more _different_ and _useful_ information you can get, the clearer the picture will be.
For example : if all your team watch the door waiting for something, You will get a very fine detailed picture of the door, but absolutely no information of the corridor right next them, where a tango is coming
Signal theory is exactly the same thing at work : We need multiples sensors (k9 , but also drone, indirect channel (microphone on pipe, nobody's done it ? ) ..) only because we couldn't get enough detailed information with one.
Let's take a scenario. I think it will be clearer this way.
You've got three hostage takers , they've taken twenty hostages, on two group. one of the group had a bomb with electronic captor and detonator.
They refuse all communication propositions, and close all the sheds. It's a public space, so you've got the "evacuation plan" with the blueprint of the area. Some partition were added inside the space where there are.
You have full support and can use whatever mean necessary
(I like when it's simple).
(from now, it's only my imagination, I'm not an operator, nor I work with darpa so I could say dumb thing.)
On the support side you will deploy
- ELINT -> COMINT (without translation, but could still define their position).
- microphone, to hear what the hostage could say.
- camera under the door, or if you're sure , directly inside a partition.
- vibration microphone, on the floor.
- back-scatter x-ray (well I've said I've full support, isn't it ? .. just hope it doesn't detonate the bomb ^^)
- thermal imagery (dunno if it could see through light partition, but could help define hostage health, ...)
With all theses information you have a precise information of what is going inside, at T time.
at T+1; you've got absolutely no idea. Perhaps the three hostage takers will just surrender. Or they will start to execute hostages, or they will gather on one side of a room. You can't know.
That's where RAID is coming to help.
It will follow all theses leads, and form pattern.
A full support team could do exactly the same staff, with some limitation.
- they will tend to apply they will to the enemy. (for example they will think that "the enemy is from this cult, then it will begin to pray before killing." , but discard the fact that the enemy isn't wearing his clothes as the cult say it must. They discard an evidence because it didn't conform to the other information they had).
-> RAID doesn't have will or ego. So it could consider that the enemy decided to part from his previous cult, and automatically discard all "optimist" rules from this cult.
- Information will not be privileged on a staff-to-staff basis, following their formation to the tools.
- It could manipulate, in real time a much bigger array of information. No Information overload or over passing.
- It would not form bad habits and could detect transient change (the comint data does'nt move in more than twenty minutes, I don't need to watch it anymore. The comint change for only 0.1s after 20 min. RAID will detect it and treat it, not tag it as "noise" before even verifying).
- detect and show pretty complex and/or new pattern,
Human brain is just not fit to this sort of work
What RAID would NOT do:
- adapt and explicate directly on a mission with untrained member. It could not explicate "what the fucking red box on my screen is". Nor it could give additional precision on subject if it's not specified somewhere
From this point, all the information are centralized and process inside RAID.
Then each team could select the information they want to see. No more reason that the analyst team had the last reco picture, while the assault team is still on a 3-hour late picture, because nobody sent them the last one.
With all this, you will say "I want to assault in 20 minutes, from this and this point".
It will say in return
-> doesn't began the jamming before 14min, since they do a check at 30 min fuzzy interval fuzzy, and I calculate that they will do it with 99.9% confidence in 14min. (Nothing it's sure:) )
-> Tango 1 will be in this radius in room 1, Tango 2 will be in this radius in room 3 , Tango 3 will be in this radius in room 4", with a xxM confidence. (If they walk in a absolutely random way,this part will be with 0% confidence.But Absolute random isn't human).
-> hostage seem fine and could certainly wait for 20 min.
-> danger fire area : when you shoot Tango 1, bullet could attain group 2 hostages through a partition
-> danger : Tango 2 will be in blind spot and in position to wound hostages through partition.
Or you could use it as "best time to assault from this and this point" for example.
In this case, deploying more sensor wouldn't help because we've got the maximum precision necessary for the work (knowing where is each enemy, and how it is working with the others and the hostages.).
(in signal theory, getting more information than necessary is called "oversampling").
In addition, have you seen how nothing on the bomb come from RAID? No captor could bring information on it, so RAID will not, if something wasn't already coded inside RAID to detect it, it will not find it.
Perhaps an operator would suspect something with his instinct and warn the assault team. (but experiences shows that on MOUT, RAID was much more reliable than human instinct. Once a rule is coded, it could be applied).
Now, what to do if you get deployed on a black ops, with your team of five, and with an on foot infil of 24 hours, to capture a HVT inside a building. You're exfil is in 6h, and you've got only 4 hour to complete the assault (intelligence say you've got "only" 4 bad guys in the perimeter). You could not send a reco team inside the building, so you must adapt on the fly.
You couldn't be supported by anyone at HQ, a satellite-transfer lag is something like 2 sec.Bandwidth is scarce, and power-hungry. Then the information must be processed locally.
Multiple, light and versatile sensors array, you could drop near the target , or directly on you.
Then a local computer will aggregate and analyses all the data.
You will have a return in a clear and simple way ( I hope
Of course, only basic information from the sensor and simple predictions could be showed. Mainly due to the lack of time range of the data collection, and range/precision of the sensors used).
I'm not sure that, once all hell break loose, the system wouldn't be very useful to predict anything.
It could/would still pinpoint accurately gunshot, or comint, or automatic detection of threat (for example, a moving barrel behind a barricade could be highlight by a high precision camera and showed on a HUD ) (raw data and aggregation of multiples sensors).
It could also detect pattern even when all hell break loose. For example it could detect that some call are systematically answered from another part of the building,
But all of this are purely assumption.
If I understand it well, all of theses refers to statistics on certain dimensions (capacity of the player of doing this, or that).
The idea behind RAID, I think, is a little different. It's more like the statistic to have a certain player , at a certain time, in a certain place.
It's more about how the game is played than the player constituting the game.