Ad JS

Collapse

Leaderboard

Collapse

Leaderboard Tablet

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Better than a Valentine One?

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Better than a Valentine One?

    Imagine a....

    Radar/Laser Detector with 5 receiving antennas. A antenna on each corner of the car and one concealed antenna on the roof. The purpose of having these antennas is to triangulate the position of the radar origin on the horizontal and the using the roof antenna to determine if the radar origin is above ground level. The detector is integrated into a aftermarket navigational system like a Pioneer AVIC-N2 with XM TrafficUpdate, which would pinpoint the position of the radar. A laser shifter would be connected to the detector and activated when it sense a laser threat.

    ....hell would freeze over. I think law enforcement might have to pay the inventor NOT to sell this.

  • #2
    Unless it could do all the stuff you described above...and have you react and slow down to the limit...all in less than 1/3 of a second...it would be a waste of time...cause the laser would be flashing your speed...ain't gonna happen!

    Comment


    • #3
      sorry, but i have to laugh at this one.

      why triangulate the signal for a location? if i used a radar detector, i would not care about where the signal was coming from, i would just care about whether the signal was a real radar gun and not someone's cheapy spewing the local oscillator all over the place.

      you'd be better off using some HARP cloth.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Dudley DoRight
        Unless it could do all the stuff you described above...and have you react and slow down to the limit...all in less than 1/3 of a second...it would be a waste of time...cause the laser would be flashing your speed...ain't gonna happen!
        Not necessarily. The scenario you have described above is a "best case scenario" for an officer. Imagine the sensitivity and accuracy of 5 antennas. Valentine 1s and Passport 8500 X50 will pick up a signal one to two miles out and they only have one or two antennas. If a LEO is sitting on the side of a highway working a "speeding" detail, chances are he would use the radar at least once in 4 mile stretch of cars - thereby giving away his position.

        ...and don't forget. It includes a laser shifter so the person has about 10 seconds or more to slow down.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by xwarp
          sorry, but i have to laugh at this one.

          why triangulate the signal for a location? if i used a radar detector, i would not care about where the signal was coming from, i would just care about whether the signal was a real radar gun and not someone's cheapy spewing the local oscillator all over the place.

          you'd be better off using some HARP cloth.
          That's why you need multiple antennas and a bogey counter. If you could triangulate the position of each and every signal, it would give you a better idea of whether it is a real threat or not. For example, automatic doors in a shopping mall could trigger an X band alert. If you knew that the signal was coming from the mall, then its likely that it is a false.

          However, a bogey counter would help in this case by a lot. If the bogey counter reads "two", then that means there are two separate signal generators. The second one could be a sneaky officer trying to use the automatic door to cover his real radar's signal. It would confuse an ordinary radar detector, but not this one...

          Comment


          • #6
            how much do you know about radar and laser?

            generally speaking, i speed, but it's usually with the flow of traffic. i.e. 45 in a 35. but i usually don't go that fast if i'm on the road by myself or if traffic is sparse. same in a 55, or whatever.

            5 antennas is pretty much useless unless you are trying to pinpoint the radar gun's origin and then go into autopilot tracking it. but let's talk about that. typically, from what i know of radar guns, they are generally line of sight, and cannot give true readings if the angle of incidence is too great. (a large angle of incidence generally returns a slower reading). 5 antennas to receive multiple signals, and then the processing time goes up resulting in slower reaction time. so to sum it up, elevation and azimuth data, (which is what the extra antennas would be used for), would be a waste.

            with the lasers, how far out do you expect a "shifter", as you call it, to transmit? the circuitry to drive these diodes would have to pretty hefty for the duty cycle you are presenting, not to mention that the detector would have to mimmick the received pulse train and then shift it, and then overdrive the original return reflected by your car. (and given this is done within a 1000 ft. distance).

            i think you are wishful thinking. why don't you just follow the flow of traffic and be done with it.
            Last edited by xwarp; 11-02-2005, 11:55 AM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by xwarp
              how much do you know about radar and laser?

              generally speaking, i speed, but it's usually with the flow of traffic. i.e. 45 in a 35. but i usually don't go that fast if i'm on the road by myself or if traffic is sparse. same in a 55, or whatever.

              5 antennas is pretty much useless unless you are trying to pinpoint the radar gun's origin and then go into autopilot tracking it.

              You can't autopilot track it if the radar is on "hold". However, knowing the position of the origin is a huge advantage.

              but let's talk about that. typically, from what i know of radar guns, they are generally line of sight, and cannot give true readings if the angle of incidence is too great. (a large angle of incidence generally returns a slower reading). 5 antennas to receive multiple signals, and then the processing time goes up resulting in slower reaction time. so to sum it up, elevation and azimuth date, (which is what the extra antennas would be used for, would be a waste).

              Processing time on a simple device like this (relative to modern day computers) is nothing to worry about. In addition, knowing for a mile or two ahead of what a Valentine 1 or Passport 8500 X50 is a huge advantage by itself anyways.

              with the lasers, how far out do you expect a "shifter", as you call it, to transmit? the circuitry to drive these diodes would have to pretty hefty for the duty cycle you are presenting, not to mention that the detector would have to mimmick the received pulse train and then shift it, and then overdrive the original return reflected by your car. (and given this is done within a 1000 ft. distance).

              Escort ZR-3. That is all.

              i think you are wishful thinking. why don't you just follow the flow of traffic and be done with it.
              Who ever said I was not following the traffic flow? This was a hypothetical question, and yet you rush to assumptions and conclusions...

              A radar detector does not mean you're guilty of speeding. Period. By using a typical officer's logic that a radar constitutes prima facie evidence, couldn't we say that anyone who buys a sports car is guilty of speeding? Possessing a sports car could be prima facie evidence. Otherwise, what is the need for a vehicle that can do a quarter mile in 13 seconds and trap at over 110mph?

              Comment


              • #8
                and since i am assuming......

                i'm assuming you are not going with the flow of traffic because of the "context clues".

                i.e. "imagine this.....,(followed by a pretty detailed picture of your idea, then ending with,)....law enforcement might have to pay the inventor NOT to sell this."

                all this on a forum whose membership is primarily LEOs.

                i dunno. i am an elctronics technician and somewhat specialize in r.f.

                i live two houses down from an officer, but i don't ask him his thoughts about something used to defeat the tools of his trade.

                By using a typical officer's logic that a radar constitutes prima facie evidence, couldn't we say that anyone who buys a sports car is guilty of speeding?
                wow....if that's the typical officers logic, then we all are in trouble.

                Otherwise, what is the need for a vehicle that can do a quarter mile in 13 seconds and trap at over 110mph?
                the speedo in my MR2 shows 150......you think i'll ever push it to that? nope, don't see the "NEED".

                kinda like i tell the wife when she drives, just because the lane is 8 feet wide, it doesn't mean you can surf it all.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hahaha...I love pulling over people for speeding who have radar detectors....instant ticket, no deals! Some of them argue that I can't give them a ticket b/c their detector did not go off, therefore, I didn't use Radar.

                  Dumbasses!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by JHoek
                    Hahaha...I love pulling over people for speeding who have radar detectors....instant ticket, no deals! Some of them argue that I can't give them a ticket b/c their detector did not go off, therefore, I didn't use Radar.

                    Dumbasses!

                    Hahaha. Around my area, people would be dumbasses for not using a radar because not using a radar has not translated into warnings even with a good attitude. So what's to lose?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      So what's to lose?
                      The $350 you spent on the detector?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by HailStorm
                        The $350 you spent on the detector?
                        LOL! that's too funny.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          [QUOTE=BlueFlare77]Imagine a....

                          Radar/Laser Detector with 5 receiving antennas. A antenna on each corner of the car and one concealed antenna on the roof.


                          Sounds like the start of a Sci-FI show. Even if they had that radar dectector, so what. It's just a traffic ticket, drive normal and be polite = no worries
                          If you ever find yourself in a fair fight, you need to re-think your tactics.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Bring that thing to Virginia....then when you set off my VG-2, you can get not only a speeding ticket but one for possession of a radar detector. And if I'm feeling froggy, we can disconnect and remove it so I can hold it for court.
                            Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.

                            Ronald Reagan

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by HailStorm
                              The $350 you spent on the detector?
                              Versus +$350 someone would pay out in tickets and insurance from getting caught. I'm sure to them its economics at play. Unfortunately, economics and safety do not necessarily go hand in hand.

                              Comment

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 9697 users online. 412 members and 9285 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 19,482 at 11:44 AM on 09-29-2011.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X