Installed Radar Detector on a 991 a problem
12-20-2012, 03:04 PM
#31
Naw, he's baiting me for the slam. Good times. 
But if I'm wrong (and I am a lot! ), thanks. I'm sure I will let you down.
As has been said many times this month, "it's all good."
How can anyone have a heckler on a radar detector discussion? Really? Bahahaha! It's not like I called anyone a dick (and I wouldn't...too easy & ghetto). Reminds me of a song for today's Moment of Deutsche Zen: Der Wolf (old school babies):
But if I'm wrong (and I am a lot! ), thanks. I'm sure I will let you down. As has been said many times this month, "it's all good."
How can anyone have a heckler on a radar detector discussion? Really? Bahahaha! It's not like I called anyone a dick (and I wouldn't...too easy & ghetto). Reminds me of a song for today's Moment of Deutsche Zen: Der Wolf (old school babies):
12-20-2012, 05:54 PM
#33
6th Gear
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In that case you really want to go with the BELTRONICS STiR Plus
It is the same unit less the laser.
https://www.beltronics.com/store/stir-plus.html
I am adding the Laser Interceptor Quad to the Belltronics unit. I am also going with a Radar Mirror because I want a real clean install.
I sent the mirror out and ordered the LI system. It may take a while to get it all in. I am going to have the Dealer install the factory sport exhaust and I want them to install the real LI units while the bumper is off, we will see how that goes.
It is the same unit less the laser.
https://www.beltronics.com/store/stir-plus.html
I am adding the Laser Interceptor Quad to the Belltronics unit. I am also going with a Radar Mirror because I want a real clean install.
I sent the mirror out and ordered the LI system. It may take a while to get it all in. I am going to have the Dealer install the factory sport exhaust and I want them to install the real LI units while the bumper is off, we will see how that goes.
12-20-2012, 07:28 PM
#34
Still researching my best course of action. Found this link, which seems darn good, more scientific presumably from University of Colorado at Boulder than from the industry: http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/usenet-ar.../msg00000.html
The most compelling part (unless I read it wrong) is that the math does not support the conclusions of the industry provided an engagement happens at under 200 meters. Here's the key portion of the estimate:
"Jamming Police Lidar
Craig Peterson wrote reviews of radar and lidar jammers in
which he tested products that use these jammer techniques and
found they didn't work.
Is Jamming feasible? The two techniques outlined here do not
appear to be viable on technical grounds. Assumptions about
these techniques are built into the descriptions below, and a
more $ophisticated jammer might work.
Is it legal? Jamming lidar is not illegal under FCC rules since they don't
regulate this part of the spectrum, but most jurisdictions have a law
which makes it illegal to "interfere with the duties of a police officer."
I am not a lawyer and the above should not be considered legal advice.
There are two kinds of jamming proposed and on the market -
pulsed LEDs and CW Headlights.
My calculations indicate that neither of these work without combining them
with stealth measures. These calculations are specific to the range of
250 meters.
CW Jamming sources.
Headlights aimed into .5 by .2 radian distribute their power over 0.1
steradians, at 250 meters range, this illuminates 6000 square meters or
10^(-6) of the police receiving aperture. 200 Watt lights put 200 microWatts
into the lidar gun. Presumably the lidar gun has a narrow band filter passing
about 10 nanometer of the spectrum, reducing this CW jammer by a factor of
about 40, meaning that the light is now 5 microWatts. The detector is AC
coupled so we calculate the shot noise due to this background
ShotNoise = SQRT[RecievedPower * PhotonEnergy * MeasurementBandwidth]
Sqrt[5. Micro Watt PlanckConstant SpeedOfLight/(900 Nano Meter)*30 Giga Hertz]
= 0.200 microWatt equivalent optical power.
This is small compared to the 25 microWatts return from a license plate.
The Car and Driver article indicates that this jamming technique works,
contrary to this calculation.
Pulsed Jamming sources
LEDs:
At a 250 meter range, LEDs broadcast into .005 steradians
(.5 radian horizontal times .01 radian vertical) would
have to be 500 times brighter than the 25 milliWatts they hit you with
to beat the retroreflective paint which broadcasts into only
10^(-5) = ( 4 milliradian times 4 milliradian) return.
This is 12 Watts, well beyond the power of an LED. At shorter range,
the problem of jamming is worse. The police lidar power grows as
1/(Range^4) power as the range decreases, and your jammer power grows
only as 1/(Range^2). The reason jamming is not feasible is that
you have to broadcast into all directions, reducing the power aimed
at the lidar gun.
Laser diodes:
The strongest laser diode you can buy is the one they put in the
lidar gun (see product data sheet below). Unless you actively steer
this jamming signal towards the police lidar gun, it will only
be an effective jammer at ranges farther than about 200 meters for
a jamming signal broadcast into .005 steradians."
The most compelling part (unless I read it wrong) is that the math does not support the conclusions of the industry provided an engagement happens at under 200 meters. Here's the key portion of the estimate:
"Jamming Police Lidar
Craig Peterson wrote reviews of radar and lidar jammers in
which he tested products that use these jammer techniques and
found they didn't work.
Is Jamming feasible? The two techniques outlined here do not
appear to be viable on technical grounds. Assumptions about
these techniques are built into the descriptions below, and a
more $ophisticated jammer might work.
Is it legal? Jamming lidar is not illegal under FCC rules since they don't
regulate this part of the spectrum, but most jurisdictions have a law
which makes it illegal to "interfere with the duties of a police officer."
I am not a lawyer and the above should not be considered legal advice.
There are two kinds of jamming proposed and on the market -
pulsed LEDs and CW Headlights.
My calculations indicate that neither of these work without combining them
with stealth measures. These calculations are specific to the range of
250 meters.
CW Jamming sources.
Headlights aimed into .5 by .2 radian distribute their power over 0.1
steradians, at 250 meters range, this illuminates 6000 square meters or
10^(-6) of the police receiving aperture. 200 Watt lights put 200 microWatts
into the lidar gun. Presumably the lidar gun has a narrow band filter passing
about 10 nanometer of the spectrum, reducing this CW jammer by a factor of
about 40, meaning that the light is now 5 microWatts. The detector is AC
coupled so we calculate the shot noise due to this background
ShotNoise = SQRT[RecievedPower * PhotonEnergy * MeasurementBandwidth]
Sqrt[5. Micro Watt PlanckConstant SpeedOfLight/(900 Nano Meter)*30 Giga Hertz]
= 0.200 microWatt equivalent optical power.
This is small compared to the 25 microWatts return from a license plate.
The Car and Driver article indicates that this jamming technique works,
contrary to this calculation.
Pulsed Jamming sources
LEDs:
At a 250 meter range, LEDs broadcast into .005 steradians
(.5 radian horizontal times .01 radian vertical) would
have to be 500 times brighter than the 25 milliWatts they hit you with
to beat the retroreflective paint which broadcasts into only
10^(-5) = ( 4 milliradian times 4 milliradian) return.
This is 12 Watts, well beyond the power of an LED. At shorter range,
the problem of jamming is worse. The police lidar power grows as
1/(Range^4) power as the range decreases, and your jammer power grows
only as 1/(Range^2). The reason jamming is not feasible is that
you have to broadcast into all directions, reducing the power aimed
at the lidar gun.
Laser diodes:
The strongest laser diode you can buy is the one they put in the
lidar gun (see product data sheet below). Unless you actively steer
this jamming signal towards the police lidar gun, it will only
be an effective jammer at ranges farther than about 200 meters for
a jamming signal broadcast into .005 steradians."
12-20-2012, 09:14 PM
#36
Still researching my best course of action. Found this link, which seems darn good, more scientific presumably from University of Colorado at Boulder than from the industry: http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/usenet-ar.../msg00000.html
The most compelling part (unless I read it wrong) is that the math does not support the conclusions of the industry provided an engagement happens at under 200 meters. Here's the key portion of the estimate:
"Jamming Police Lidar
Craig Peterson wrote reviews of radar and lidar jammers in
which he tested products that use these jammer techniques and
found they didn't work.
Is Jamming feasible? The two techniques outlined here do not
appear to be viable on technical grounds. Assumptions about
these techniques are built into the descriptions below, and a
more $ophisticated jammer might work.
Is it legal? Jamming lidar is not illegal under FCC rules since they don't
regulate this part of the spectrum, but most jurisdictions have a law
which makes it illegal to "interfere with the duties of a police officer."
I am not a lawyer and the above should not be considered legal advice.
There are two kinds of jamming proposed and on the market -
pulsed LEDs and CW Headlights.
My calculations indicate that neither of these work without combining them
with stealth measures. These calculations are specific to the range of
250 meters.
CW Jamming sources.
Headlights aimed into .5 by .2 radian distribute their power over 0.1
steradians, at 250 meters range, this illuminates 6000 square meters or
10^(-6) of the police receiving aperture. 200 Watt lights put 200 microWatts
into the lidar gun. Presumably the lidar gun has a narrow band filter passing
about 10 nanometer of the spectrum, reducing this CW jammer by a factor of
about 40, meaning that the light is now 5 microWatts. The detector is AC
coupled so we calculate the shot noise due to this background
ShotNoise = SQRT[RecievedPower * PhotonEnergy * MeasurementBandwidth]
Sqrt[5. Micro Watt PlanckConstant SpeedOfLight/(900 Nano Meter)*30 Giga Hertz]
= 0.200 microWatt equivalent optical power.
This is small compared to the 25 microWatts return from a license plate.
The Car and Driver article indicates that this jamming technique works,
contrary to this calculation.
Pulsed Jamming sources
LEDs:
At a 250 meter range, LEDs broadcast into .005 steradians
(.5 radian horizontal times .01 radian vertical) would
have to be 500 times brighter than the 25 milliWatts they hit you with
to beat the retroreflective paint which broadcasts into only
10^(-5) = ( 4 milliradian times 4 milliradian) return.
This is 12 Watts, well beyond the power of an LED. At shorter range,
the problem of jamming is worse. The police lidar power grows as
1/(Range^4) power as the range decreases, and your jammer power grows
only as 1/(Range^2). The reason jamming is not feasible is that
you have to broadcast into all directions, reducing the power aimed
at the lidar gun.
Laser diodes:
The strongest laser diode you can buy is the one they put in the
lidar gun (see product data sheet below). Unless you actively steer
this jamming signal towards the police lidar gun, it will only
be an effective jammer at ranges farther than about 200 meters for
a jamming signal broadcast into .005 steradians."
The most compelling part (unless I read it wrong) is that the math does not support the conclusions of the industry provided an engagement happens at under 200 meters. Here's the key portion of the estimate:
"Jamming Police Lidar
Craig Peterson wrote reviews of radar and lidar jammers in
which he tested products that use these jammer techniques and
found they didn't work.
Is Jamming feasible? The two techniques outlined here do not
appear to be viable on technical grounds. Assumptions about
these techniques are built into the descriptions below, and a
more $ophisticated jammer might work.
Is it legal? Jamming lidar is not illegal under FCC rules since they don't
regulate this part of the spectrum, but most jurisdictions have a law
which makes it illegal to "interfere with the duties of a police officer."
I am not a lawyer and the above should not be considered legal advice.
There are two kinds of jamming proposed and on the market -
pulsed LEDs and CW Headlights.
My calculations indicate that neither of these work without combining them
with stealth measures. These calculations are specific to the range of
250 meters.
CW Jamming sources.
Headlights aimed into .5 by .2 radian distribute their power over 0.1
steradians, at 250 meters range, this illuminates 6000 square meters or
10^(-6) of the police receiving aperture. 200 Watt lights put 200 microWatts
into the lidar gun. Presumably the lidar gun has a narrow band filter passing
about 10 nanometer of the spectrum, reducing this CW jammer by a factor of
about 40, meaning that the light is now 5 microWatts. The detector is AC
coupled so we calculate the shot noise due to this background
ShotNoise = SQRT[RecievedPower * PhotonEnergy * MeasurementBandwidth]
Sqrt[5. Micro Watt PlanckConstant SpeedOfLight/(900 Nano Meter)*30 Giga Hertz]
= 0.200 microWatt equivalent optical power.
This is small compared to the 25 microWatts return from a license plate.
The Car and Driver article indicates that this jamming technique works,
contrary to this calculation.
Pulsed Jamming sources
LEDs:
At a 250 meter range, LEDs broadcast into .005 steradians
(.5 radian horizontal times .01 radian vertical) would
have to be 500 times brighter than the 25 milliWatts they hit you with
to beat the retroreflective paint which broadcasts into only
10^(-5) = ( 4 milliradian times 4 milliradian) return.
This is 12 Watts, well beyond the power of an LED. At shorter range,
the problem of jamming is worse. The police lidar power grows as
1/(Range^4) power as the range decreases, and your jammer power grows
only as 1/(Range^2). The reason jamming is not feasible is that
you have to broadcast into all directions, reducing the power aimed
at the lidar gun.
Laser diodes:
The strongest laser diode you can buy is the one they put in the
lidar gun (see product data sheet below). Unless you actively steer
this jamming signal towards the police lidar gun, it will only
be an effective jammer at ranges farther than about 200 meters for
a jamming signal broadcast into .005 steradians."
12-20-2012, 09:50 PM
#40
Was pointing to the science not the makers. Science should still be valid to compare to claimed industry capabilities on both LIDAR guns and shifters. I could add that the newer guns are now effective out to 8000 yards, process the signal much faster, and worst of all emit a much more powerful signal than what can effectively be interfered with. Also that the available test data put out by the industry is from 2008. Yikes.
12-20-2012, 09:57 PM
#42
Well I'm not really saying jammers are bs I guess but the more I read the more I'm beginning to wonder if it is worth over 1000 bucks for me. Just trying to share what I find. It's really not easy to find reliable and current info on this subject, which is suspect. Can you hear the pennies in my pocket and the little screams they make as I pinch them? I already wasted some of my inheritance on some liar fat hooker years ago.