Talk:Bomb damage assessment
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This topic is in need of attention from an expert on the subject. The section or sections that need attention may be noted in a message below. |
The future of BDA
[edit]Hi. Will be applying a tag to the article to hopefully draw attention of a subject matter expert from one of the wikiprojects who can make it current, since it last seems to reference developments in 2002.
{{Expert-subject|Military history|talk=The future of BDA|reason="The future of BDA" section is outdated and appears to last reference material from 2002; it may require the attention of a subject matter expert to make current|date=January 2014}}
The 1991 Gulf War is widely regarded as having the most effective and consistent BDA of any conflict to date. After the end of hostilities, the Battle Damage Assessment Working Group (BDAWG) was formed at the behest of MTIC, the Military Targeting Intelligence Committee. Largely, this group sought to create a standard lexicon of terminology for describing BDA, and to develop an outlook for the future of BDA. Possible future techniques involve using lasers or particle beams in a manner similar to side scan sonar to map, in three dimensions, the condition of a target. Boeing has developed (as of 2002) a system whereby a BDA "sensor" is towed a third of a kilometer behind the munition. This system is supposed to be capable of near real-time BDA by directly observing the munition's interaction with the target.
This is my first time tagging an article for a section update like this but please know I'm proceeding in good faith. I'm just not an expert on this and would prefer that one tackle it. Cheers. Jdanek007 (talk) 20:10, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Note that I also tagged the article for linking to broken or outdated sources. All of the links are dead... Jdanek007 (talk) 20:47, 21 January 2014 (UTC)