You probably have me there. Not my area at all.
It depends on your receivers. The more of them you have, and the more sensitive they are, the more likely you are to pinpoint the transmitter. If you can use signal strength to approximate distance with a known error, then every measurement you take from a different position is going to draw four points on a map: the closest it could be and the farthest it could be, and the farthest off-center it could be. Connect the points and you’ll have a long skinny oval on a map with the oval’s long axis pointing at your receiver.
Add another receiver at right angles and the overlap of the two ovals is the most likely location of the transmitter, inside a box bounded roughly by your azimuth error. Take multiple measurements to cut down azimuth error and you shrink the box. There are probably also some tricks you can do with multi-path, time difference of arrival, and Doppler frequency to reduce your ranging error.
It seems like everyone lost track here. Back to the top, let’s start again, with these tips: every third line begins and ends with the number “0”. … and 86 86 means just that… to “86” the subjective. Or should we just 86 the whole idea. :smack:
Both of these message seem to break down into chains of 3-digit numbers easily enough, but there doesn’t seem to be anywhere to go from there. They don’t seem to be any simple substitution code, and with modern encryption hardware it would be easily possible to make a code that was impossible to decode without the appropriate key and algorithm.