|
Could this device be built?
|
Could this device be built?
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 17:17:23 +0800, "Tom Potter"
wrote: "John Larkin" wrote in message .. . On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:41:13 -0500, (Hal Murray) wrote: No, but I have enough years of experience with RF in general and radar in particular to know building a phased array requires precise phase (or frequency) control and you can't do that with an ultra wideband device, which has a bandwidth of 500 Mhz. At a minumum! What is the bandwidth of modern radars? I'd expect it to be wide and using spread spectrum tricks to make jaming harder. Spiffy modern radars hop and chirp, both of which broaden the working bandwidth. With modern signal processing, wider radar bandwidth improves resolution. You can do all sorts of fun stuff with 1000 antennas and a few teraflops of compute power. All the major powers - US, Russia, France, Germany, China, Israel, UK - are working on HPM weapons and array radars. The Brits call their projects "Suave" and "Virus." MBDA and BAE are major players. Google "mbda hpm" and "bae hpm", and believe it or don't. John It seems to me, that with modern electronics and information technology, that a high resolution, handheld, RADAR system is possible. You could quasi-randomly modulate (Variable transmit and listen periods), a solid state microwave oscillator (Gunn Diode) with a digital code with good correlation properties (Gold Code), cross-correlate the echoes received when in the listen mode with the Gold Code, then cross-correlate the correlations from the echoes with stored geo-patterns downloaded from a Google-Earth like data base covering the area of operation, compare adjacent (In time) echo returns to spot moving targets, then present the pattern on a small, solid state, color display that shows the Google-Earth like picture of the area, with super-imposed moving targets. One would not need a directional antenna, nor high power for such a device, but it would be necessary to sweep the device around to build up a good correlation of the area as one's body and other things would block the signals and, even though the Google-Earth like picture, and the location of the RADAR would still be valid, but blocked moving targets would not be detected. Note that if a map of the area of operation is downloaded into the system, and a set of times from the radar to fixed targets is compared to the map, one could quickly correlate the map with the echoes and determine where one is. With such a device, one could move around, and see where they were on a moving Google-Earth-like picture, and see the moving targets about them, perhaps even colored and shaped by the RADAR signatures of the targets. (People, cars, tanks, trains, an incoming missle, etc.) Note that for many situations that such a device could replace GPS. Just like GPS, after the device determines where one is, it would be able to compute changes in position quickly. Hey maybe, I should patent this device? I'd like to have a short-range imaging radar, sort of like my Flir handheld thermal imager, as a sort of super stud finder. Imagine a pc board covered with etched patch antennas, one or more step-recovery-diode impulse generators, and a lot of sampling receivers. Run it at several MHz, do a lot of averaging and signal processing, and reconstruct the image. Maybe use Wii type accelerometers so as the array is moved around, additional signal paths can be crunched in to enhance resolution without blurring. The microwave side of the hardware would be dirt cheap, and the signal processing would have a high engineering cost but would also be cheap in production. Take a look at McEwan's patents for an idea of how the hardware would work. He was mostly looking at stuff like auto collision detection, 1-dimensional ranging, but imaging is quite feasible if you dump enough DSP onto the problem. Firemen could use this for smoke penetration, or cops could spot bad guys in the next room, and I could spot cats under beds without having to crawl around on the floor. John |
Could this device be built?
In sci.physics Tom2000 wrote:
On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 21:35:02 GMT, wrote: Been there, done that, got a DD-214, a life-time ID card and a monthly check from Dfas-Cleveland. Don't know what Dfas means, but, Jim, if you were stationed at the Nike site in Cleveland, I owe you guys a big thanks. Defense Finance and Accounting Service; where retired pay comes from. I was alost assigned to Cleveland, but they switched the orders to Union Lake, Michigan at the last minute. When I was in the Army, I'd have access to an AUTOVON phone every now and then. When I was able, I'd call the Cleveland Nike site and ask for a patch to an outside line for a personal call. You guys were nice enough to give me the patch, every time, with absolutely no hassles. It was really great to talk to my family and girlfriend about every month or so. It meant a lot to me. Thanks! Most of the Nike sites did that. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Could this device be built?
In sci.physics Fred Bloggs wrote:
wrote: In sci.physics Fred Bloggs wrote: wrote: TRR - Target range radar; tracked the target in range in ECM, frequency agile to defeat ECM, elevation and azimuth provided by the ECM source How exactly did that mode work, tracking target range but using EW interference for az/el? How could you not know your az/el if you're getting detections from your pulse? The TRR was slaved in azimuth and elevation to the TTR. The TTR had the required hardware to track in azimuth and elevation. When jammed, the TTR tracked the jamming source. The TRR provided only range information. The TTR was X band. The TRR was Ku band and frequency agile to get around the jamming. Frequency agile Ku band transmission? What kind of tube did they use for that? Wondering why the Ku band could not just take a handoff and do the tracking on its own, must not have been a stable track. What kind of cheap ill-begotten antenna gets you less angular resolution at Ku band than X-band? It used magnetrons, dual, independant receivers and transmitters and a panoramic display. It takes a quadurature feed to get angular error information and the TRR didn't have that and didn't need it as you got all the angular information needed from the TTR. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Could this device be built?
"John Larkin" wrote in message
... Firemen could use this for smoke penetration, or cops could spot bad guys in the next room, and I could spot cats under beds without having to crawl around on the floor. You can already buy these devices, but of course the price tag is still rather high (possibly something like $50k/unit!? -- I visited the booth of a company selling them a couple years back now, and they were targeting fire departments and other government funded agencies that had that kind of money to throw around). Super stud finders would sell like hotcakes once you got them to the $500 level. Even at $2500 you'd probably get plenty of takers. But at $50k... not so much. |
Could this device be built?
"John Larkin" wrote in message ... On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 17:17:23 +0800, "Tom Potter" wrote: "John Larkin" wrote in message . .. On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:41:13 -0500, (Hal Murray) wrote: No, but I have enough years of experience with RF in general and radar in particular to know building a phased array requires precise phase (or frequency) control and you can't do that with an ultra wideband device, which has a bandwidth of 500 Mhz. At a minumum! What is the bandwidth of modern radars? I'd expect it to be wide and using spread spectrum tricks to make jaming harder. Spiffy modern radars hop and chirp, both of which broaden the working bandwidth. With modern signal processing, wider radar bandwidth improves resolution. You can do all sorts of fun stuff with 1000 antennas and a few teraflops of compute power. All the major powers - US, Russia, France, Germany, China, Israel, UK - are working on HPM weapons and array radars. The Brits call their projects "Suave" and "Virus." MBDA and BAE are major players. Google "mbda hpm" and "bae hpm", and believe it or don't. John It seems to me, that with modern electronics and information technology, that a high resolution, handheld, RADAR system is possible. You could quasi-randomly modulate (Variable transmit and listen periods), a solid state microwave oscillator (Gunn Diode) with a digital code with good correlation properties (Gold Code), cross-correlate the echoes received when in the listen mode with the Gold Code, then cross-correlate the correlations from the echoes with stored geo-patterns downloaded from a Google-Earth like data base covering the area of operation, compare adjacent (In time) echo returns to spot moving targets, then present the pattern on a small, solid state, color display that shows the Google-Earth like picture of the area, with super-imposed moving targets. One would not need a directional antenna, nor high power for such a device, but it would be necessary to sweep the device around to build up a good correlation of the area as one's body and other things would block the signals and, even though the Google-Earth like picture, and the location of the RADAR would still be valid, but blocked moving targets would not be detected. Note that if a map of the area of operation is downloaded into the system, and a set of times from the radar to fixed targets is compared to the map, one could quickly correlate the map with the echoes and determine where one is. With such a device, one could move around, and see where they were on a moving Google-Earth-like picture, and see the moving targets about them, perhaps even colored and shaped by the RADAR signatures of the targets. (People, cars, tanks, trains, an incoming missle, etc.) Note that for many situations that such a device could replace GPS. Just like GPS, after the device determines where one is, it would be able to compute changes in position quickly. Hey maybe, I should patent this device? I'd like to have a short-range imaging radar, sort of like my Flir handheld thermal imager, as a sort of super stud finder. Imagine a pc board covered with etched patch antennas, one or more step-recovery-diode impulse generators, and a lot of sampling receivers. Run it at several MHz, do a lot of averaging and signal processing, and reconstruct the image. Maybe use Wii type accelerometers so as the array is moved around, additional signal paths can be crunched in to enhance resolution without blurring. The microwave side of the hardware would be dirt cheap, and the signal processing would have a high engineering cost but would also be cheap in production. Take a look at McEwan's patents for an idea of how the hardware would work. He was mostly looking at stuff like auto collision detection, 1-dimensional ranging, but imaging is quite feasible if you dump enough DSP onto the problem. Firemen could use this for smoke penetration, or cops could spot bad guys in the next room, and I could spot cats under beds without having to crawl around on the floor. John Note that John's idea for a hand-held RADAR differs from mine. The one I propose would use Google Maps to correlate with the RADAR data, and to display where the user was, and the moving targets about him, whereas John's RADAR would be provide a two, and perhaps three dimensional picture of the targets in its' range. John's RADAR would use techniques like those used in medical imaging I suppose. -- Tom Potter *** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 *** *** May 2007 Anti-Bigot Award *** http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home http://no-turtles.com http://www.frappr.com/tompotter http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001 http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter http://tom-potter.blogspot.com -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Could this device be built?
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:16:34 +1200, Terry Given wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote: And everyone WANTS a death ray, but no one has made a practical one yet. There are plenty of commercial death rays in the 54-72 MC and 76-88 MC bands. They don't cause death directly, but transmissions on these frequencies can cause severe brain damage even at low levels when demodulated and viewed. A number of studies have shown long-term exposure to cause all sorts of problems in children. --scott AIUI they are termed "brain-death rays" I thought those were merely the mind-control rays, but I thought their spectrum also covered 174-216 MHz and 470-890 MHz. ;-) http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf Cheers! Rich |
Could this device be built?
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 18:22:24 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Rich Grise wrote: No, the Wild Weasels were recce. The EWO (Electronic Warfare Officer), ususally the GIB (Guy In Back), had a spectrum-analyzer display, to sniff out the jammers (and maybe even comm.). I don't know exactly what they did with the info, other than evasive maneuvers, but it gave a pretty good idea of the radar environment they were flying into. At the time, the Bad Guys only had a limited number of standard radar platforms. So with a spiral antenna and a spectrum analyzer, you could pretty quickly tell what was in the neighborhood from the emission frequency and the rough envelope. And with a directional antenna and a little hunting around, you could pretty quickly localize the direction of the source. So with a pretty limited toolkit, you could tell what the bad guys were (ie. targetting radar, sky search, airborne radar) and where they were. Likewise you could very easily tell a legitimate radar system from a jammer from the spectrum, and the jamming platforms were fairly standardized. Doing this while being shot at is left as an exercise to the student and may not be as easy as identifing spectral envelopes in an air-conditioned laboratory. One of the systems I worked on was the APR-9, "Radar Homing and Warning Receiver". It had four spiral antennas, one on each corner of the airplane, and it gave an indication like a PPI of which direction the radar was coming from, excpet the longer the strobe, the closer/more powerful. Because of the way the SAM radar worked, when the two beams are in sync, you know they've locked onto you. It lights up a light in the cockpit, labeled "AS" for "Acquisition Sector". Needless to say, it came to be referred to as the "Aw ****" light. ;-) Cheers! Rich |
Could this device be built?
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:03:20 -0400, Arny Krueger wrote:
"Fred Bloggs" wrote in message Frequency agile Ku band transmission? What kind of tube did they use for that? Klystrons and Magnetrons can be mechanically tuned over a limited range. Making the receivers track the transmitters is a bigger problem. Wondering why the Ku band could not just take a handoff and do the tracking on its own, must not have been a stable track. The jamming equipment I worked against was pretty limited - it seemed to only jam one band at a time. After all, it was in a fighter/bomber (F4) not a B-52. ALQ-71? ALQ-72? ALQ-87? QRC-119? ;-) Cheers! Rich |
Could this device be built?
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:22:13 -0700, Benj wrote:
Rich Grise wrote: [totally snipped] Benj I'd appreciate it if you're going to attribute me, you'd include at least _some_ of my actual words. Thanks, Rich |
Could this device be built?
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:22:13 -0700, Benj wrote:
Rich Grise wrote: Call it The Rapper Zapper. How about one of these: http://www.betterhomesecurity.com/~S...php?ref=stg800 discharged to the vehicle's antenna? Zappers are great solid state destroyers (transistors make better fuses than fuses) But you have to get close enough to zap the circuit boards. (Work great on Computer mother boards!) CD players don't have antennas. (antennae?) Yes, although every wire in the player is a potential antenna especially for high frequency (radar) EMP. Electronics have antennas. Bugs have antennae! In case my other post didn't get cancelled (where I bitch at you for not quoting me right) I didn't recognize the interleaved style right away. Sorry. |
Could this device be built?
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 05:34:46 -0400, JW wrote:
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 21:03:21 GMT Rich Grise wrote in On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 05:47:33 -0400, JW wrote: On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 18:05:48 -0700 Spob Sitting at a gas station as some backwards baseball cap and saggass britches wearing kid parks in the fire zone in front of the store with some fukdamuhfukinniggahbeyotch crap blasting out of his truck for everyone's entertainment, got me to thinking. Would it be possible to build a gizmo that could be surreptitiously aimed at the offending stereo system to fry some crucial components? It would have to be able to do it on a pretty localized basis without causing damage to the person aiming the gizmo or innocent bystanders or their car's electronics. Whether it would fry any additional components of said target punk's car isn't of great concern. Call it The Rapper Zapper. How about one of these: http://www.betterhomesecurity.com/~S...php?ref=stg800 discharged to the vehicle's antenna? CD players don't have antennas. (antennae?) I would assume that an automotive CD player would also be equipped with an AM/FM tuner, wouldn't you? The OP just mentions a "stereo", anyway. Even so, zapping their front ends won't have a lot of effect on the power amp and "speak"ers. Thanks, Rich |
Could this device be built?
Fred Bloggs posted to sci.electronics.design:
wrote: In sci.physics Fred Bloggs wrote: wrote: TRR - Target range radar; tracked the target in range in ECM, frequency agile to defeat ECM, elevation and azimuth provided by the ECM source How exactly did that mode work, tracking target range but using EW interference for az/el? How could you not know your az/el if you're getting detections from your pulse? The TRR was slaved in azimuth and elevation to the TTR. The TTR had the required hardware to track in azimuth and elevation. When jammed, the TTR tracked the jamming source. The TRR provided only range information. The TTR was X band. The TRR was Ku band and frequency agile to get around the jamming. Frequency agile Ku band transmission? What kind of tube did they use for that? Wondering why the Ku band could not just take a handoff and do the tracking on its own, must not have been a stable track. What kind of cheap ill-begotten antenna gets you less angular resolution at Ku band than X-band? Sure, chirp radar is over 40 years old. TWT comes to mind. They may have had a problem figuring out CSRO for Ku band at the time. A bent horn? |
Could this device be built?
On Aug 18, 8:05 pm, Spob wrote:
Sitting at a gas station as some backwards baseball cap and saggass britches wearing kid parks in the fire zone in front of the store with some fukdamuhfukinniggahbeyotch crap blasting out of his truck for everyone's entertainment, got me to thinking. Would it be possible to build a gizmo that could be surreptitiously aimed at the offending stereo system to fry some crucial components? It would have to be able to do it on a pretty localized basis without causing damage to the person aiming the gizmo or innocent bystanders or their car's electronics. Whether it would fry any additional components of said target punk's car isn't of great concern. Call it The Rapper Zapper. Just wonderin'. :-) Yeah. Invent a time machine and live out your life before the invention of sound systems. |
Could this device be built?
Toy? they were used a Carin Airfield, just a few miles from Ft Rucker Alabama, for the US Army helicopter and US Air Force Air Traffic Controller schools. 2 million watts is not a toy. It had a 200 mile maximum range, and was built by Westinghouse. two complete, hot systems that could be switched over at the flip of a switch, if there was any problems. Five techs on duty, 24/7 doing routine maintenance, and emergency repairs. If they went down, two schools and 17 airfields were shut down to all non instrument rated pilots. The US Air Force's air traffic control school was and (assuming they cleaned up after Katrina) is at Keesler AFB, Biloxi, Mississipi. As was the radar technician school. I was an Air Traffic Controller in the Air Force from 1975-1982. At no time did we use "live" radar. It was all simulation. Control tower training (as opposed to radar training) consisted of students holding toy airplanes in position as instructed over a ping-pong type table which had been painted to resemble an airport. Some guys got pretty good at imitating a cessna's engine noise. ; -) Further, in both the Air Force and FAA, radar failures were and are still common. That was one of the major issues that caused the controller strike in 1982. We had to then convert to non radar procedures. which consisted of, among other things, increasing spacing and having the pilots report "fixes". Airports do not close because of these failures. Non-Instrument rated pilots do not as a rule use the ATC system except for radar advisories and controllers provide this service to VFR pilots on a time permitting basis. The exception is the airspace near large airports and certain other high traffic areas. Regards, MickeyD |
Could this device be built?
"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in
message Bull****. The antennas rotate, but the elevation is fixed. Tracking radars have both elevation and azimuth axes and drives. There is no telescope on any RADAR Antenna, Sure there are, when you have to synchronize them, as you do in a missile battery. My recollection is that you sight the acquisition radar on a marker some distance away, and then sight the trackers on the acq in rotation. and no way to "Siting the cop's squad car". Easy to do with with any of the trackers. There are no keying of brief pulses, Sure, kick the radar's transmitter out of standby and into transmit. the system works with a steady stream of pulsed RF, Or CW. and measuring the reflected signals. Congratulations, you finally got a fact right! If the RADAR equipment in a cruiser WAS damaged, it was because the idiot cop was too close to the RADAR site, In a manner of speaking. ;-) RADAR sites are usually well inside a fenced area, Yes, but the fenced in areas aren't necessarily that large. For example, there are the remains of a Nike Hercules site at N42 34' 15". W82 58' 23". The building on the north side of the road at that location looks to me like a Hercules Assembly and Service building. The road running diagonal south of is is Utica road a major heavily-used public road, and its been there and in continous service since the 1800s. The radars were on pylons tree-covered area south of the road. There was another Nike Hercules site at W83 03' 03" N 42 38' 21". You can see what it looked like in the days of, at http://nikehercules.tripod.com/d-06.html . The road that the site is on has again been there since the 1800s, is a major public road, and was in continuous service while the site was in use. far from civilian areas, and No. There was an Ajax site, nitric acid fuel and all, immediately next to 7 mile road in Detroit, inside the Detroit city limits. Our family drove by it on the way to church on Sunday. A few hundred feet away from the launchers were occupied residences. high enough to clear close in ground clutter. Concrete pylons or steel towers, if necessary. The high gain, highly directional antennas do not radiate enough near field RF to do any damage, Just cook birds and land crabs. Oh, and give me sun burns on cloudy days when I worked on them powered up for adjustments. unless the cruiser was on very high a hilltop, and less than a 1/4 mile from the RADAR site. As I've shown, many air defense sites had heavily-used public roads running right through them! |
Could this device be built?
What may work and has a little more comedic value and stealth than a
full blown gun is a pellet gun (air rifle). Make you own rubber pellets (indian rubber is best) with a broken peice of cermaic inside. Fire it at the side or rear window, the cermaic will puncture the glass causing it to break into little cubes. The rubber will make sure that it bounces away from the window (no evidence left on the seat)-- have you ever broken a window as a kid with a hard rubber ball, the ball always came back as opposed to going through. Little sound from the air rifle (they will never hear it). In the end the idiots will think the sound system blew out the window. "Man my system is powoerful, it blew out my window..." They may come back but it will eventually get expensive for them.... Does not kill the music but it may solve the issue.... If nothing else they will turn it down to save the windows... Will not work on the windsheild BTW, different glass. |
Could this device be built?
Rich Grise wrote: I'd appreciate it if you're going to include... me. OK. :) |
Could this device be built?
In sci.physics Arny Krueger wrote:
As I've shown, many air defense sites had heavily-used public roads running right through them! Since Nike sites in the US were normally deployed around major cities, it would have been rather hard to place one far from public areas. The Union Lake, Michigan site was surrounded by a Little League ball field, a public golf course, and housing developments. If we had had to fire, the boosters would have come down in a housing tract, but better a Nike booster through your roof than a Soviet nuclear device. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Could this device be built?
Mickey530 wrote:
Toy? they were used a Cairns Airfield, just a few miles from Ft Rucker Alabama, for the US Army helicopter and US Air Force Air Traffic Controller schools. 2 million watts is not a toy. It had a 200 mile maximum range, and was built by Westinghouse. Two complete, hot systems that could be switched over at the flip of a switch, if there was any problems. Five techs on duty, 24/7 doing routine maintenance, and emergency repairs. If they went down, two schools and 17 airfields were shut down to all non instrument rated pilots. The US Air Force's air traffic control school was and (assuming they cleaned up after Katrina) is at Keesler AFB, Biloxi, Mississipi. As was the radar technician school. I was an Air Traffic Controller in the Air Force from 1975-1982. The school was, and still is run by the Army, but the students were mostly Air Force in '72 & '73 when I maintained the 'Weathervision' and ETV distribution systems. In fact, the only mess hall at Cairns Airfield was Air Force, and the refused to allow any Army personnel eat there. The Air Force barracks were at the airfield, as well. If you do a little research, you'll discover that installation now has the newest ATC simulator available. I was never trained in RADAR work. They were short handed at one point due to people on leave, and several sick techs, so they 'borrowed' me for a few days. I was paired with a condescending jerk who was busy trying to tell me that I couldn't possibly grasp the complexities of a RADAR system. While he was talking, I had already found the problem, and made the repairs. At every worksite, I found the problem, while he was dragging in his cart full of tools and test equipment. He was very ****ed, but his boss tried several times to have me transferred to his section. He laughed when he asked about my training, and I told him that a RADAR system was a stripped down TV system, and that I had read and studied some WWII aircraft RADAR while in high school. He was stunned to learn that I had tested out of all military electronics training, and had only been in the military for six months. Does anyone else remember the 15R and 15E tubes used in those WWII RADAR systems? At no time did we use "live" radar. It was all simulation. Control tower training (as opposed to radar training) consisted of students holding toy airplanes in position as instructed over a ping-pong type table which had been painted to resemble an airport. Some guys got pretty good at imitating a cessna's engine noise. ; -) Further, in both the Air Force and FAA, radar failures were and are still common. GEE, the FAA was building their regional office at Ft Rucker while I was stationed there. It took so long to build their fancy office building/data center (1000 phone lines) that they had to install their mainframe computer in an old wooden barracks building. That left the huge computer room with the raised floor sitting empty. I suggested they move the ETV studios to the building, and vacate the WWII wood building they were in. The control room for the computers was bigger than their current studio. That was one of the major issues that caused the controller strike in 1982. We had to then convert to non radar procedures. which consisted of, among other things, increasing spacing and having the pilots report "fixes". Airports do not close because of these failures. Non-Instrument rated pilots do not as a rule use the ATC system except for radar advisories and controllers provide this service to VFR pilots on a time permitting basis. The airfield was used to train pilots on their way to Vietnam, and working with the air traffic controllers was a big part of their training. Any failure over 15 minutes in the 'Weathervision' system would close the school, too. We ar talking about student pilots, not certified. The only certified pilots were the instructors. Most of the students left the area as soon as they were qualified pilots. The exception is the airspace near large airports and certain other high traffic areas. Cairns Airfield has some of the highest ATC traffic of any airfield. I don't think you understand how busy the place was, and is. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
Could this device be built?
"Spob" wrote in message ups.com... Sitting at a gas station as some backwards baseball cap and saggass britches wearing kid parks in the fire zone in front of the store with some fukdamuhfukinniggahbeyotch crap blasting out of his truck for everyone's entertainment, got me to thinking. Would it be possible to build a gizmo that could be surreptitiously aimed at the offending stereo system to fry some crucial components? It would have to be able to do it on a pretty localized basis without causing damage to the person aiming the gizmo or innocent bystanders or their car's electronics. Whether it would fry any additional components of said target punk's car isn't of great concern. Call it The Rapper Zapper. Just wonderin'. Actually, there's a site (in German) that describes someone's theory as to how that might be done: http://www.heise.de/ct/Redaktion/cm/...le_Zapper.html Use Babelfish to translate it (sort of) http://babelfish.altavista.com/ |
Could this device be built?
wrote in message
In sci.physics Arny Krueger wrote: As I've shown, many air defense sites had heavily-used public roads running right through them! Since Nike sites in the US were normally deployed around major cities, it would have been rather hard to place one far from public areas. The Union Lake, Michigan site was surrounded by a Little League ball field, a public golf course, and housing developments. If we had had to fire, the boosters would have come down in a housing tract, but better a Nike booster through your roof than a Soviet nuclear device. Agreed. We had a Hawk site in Miami where you could overlook a subdivision from several radar towers. Eventually the Army sold the site's plot of land to the developers, and this was the first of the batteries in our battalion to simply disappear. |
Could this device be built?
"Bill" wrote in message
\ Actually, there's a site (in German) that describes someone's theory as to how that might be done: http://www.heise.de/ct/Redaktion/cm/...le_Zapper.html Use Babelfish to translate it (sort of) http://babelfish.altavista.com/ In the end he suggests the use of a water-pistol. |
Could this device be built? =Possible =
In article . com, Spob wrote: Sitting at a gas station as some backwards baseball cap and saggass britches wearing kid parks in the fire zone in front of the store with some fukdamuhfukinniggahbeyotch crap blasting out of his truck for everyone's entertainment, got me to thinking. Would it be possible to build a gizmo that could be surreptitiously aimed at the offending stereo system to fry some crucial components? It would have to be able to do it on a pretty localized basis without causing damage to the person aiming the gizmo or innocent bystanders or their car's electronics. Whether it would fry any additional components of said target punk's car isn't of great concern. Call it The Rapper Zapper. Just wonderin'. :-) Its possible by taking apart a microwave oven and use the generator to fry the electronics. You have to be VERY CAREFULL with the radiations and you better know what you are doing. It works perfectly against radars for example. |
Could this device be built?
Hold up a $100 bill and call something unintelligible to
the driver at a level just below the music volume. You'll experience and immediate reduction in the volume of the music. Spob wrote: Sitting at a gas station as some backwards baseball cap and saggass britches wearing kid parks in the fire zone in front of the store with some fukdamuhfukinniggahbeyotch crap blasting out of his truck for everyone's entertainment, got me to thinking. Would it be possible to build a gizmo that could be surreptitiously aimed at the offending stereo system to fry some crucial components? It would have to be able to do it on a pretty localized basis without causing damage to the person aiming the gizmo or innocent bystanders or their car's electronics. Whether it would fry any additional components of said target punk's car isn't of great concern. Call it The Rapper Zapper. Just wonderin'. :-) -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Could this device be built?
"John Larkin" wrote in message ... On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 17:17:23 +0800, "Tom Potter" wrote: "John Larkin" wrote in message . .. On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:41:13 -0500, (Hal Murray) wrote: No, but I have enough years of experience with RF in general and radar in particular to know building a phased array requires precise phase (or frequency) control and you can't do that with an ultra wideband device, which has a bandwidth of 500 Mhz. At a minumum! What is the bandwidth of modern radars? I'd expect it to be wide and using spread spectrum tricks to make jaming harder. Spiffy modern radars hop and chirp, both of which broaden the working bandwidth. With modern signal processing, wider radar bandwidth improves resolution. You can do all sorts of fun stuff with 1000 antennas and a few teraflops of compute power. All the major powers - US, Russia, France, Germany, China, Israel, UK - are working on HPM weapons and array radars. The Brits call their projects "Suave" and "Virus." MBDA and BAE are major players. Google "mbda hpm" and "bae hpm", and believe it or don't. John It seems to me, that with modern electronics and information technology, that a high resolution, handheld, RADAR system is possible. You could quasi-randomly modulate (Variable transmit and listen periods), a solid state microwave oscillator (Gunn Diode) with a digital code with good correlation properties (Gold Code), cross-correlate the echoes received when in the listen mode with the Gold Code, then cross-correlate the correlations from the echoes with stored geo-patterns downloaded from a Google-Earth like data base covering the area of operation, compare adjacent (In time) echo returns to spot moving targets, then present the pattern on a small, solid state, color display that shows the Google-Earth like picture of the area, with super-imposed moving targets. One would not need a directional antenna, nor high power for such a device, but it would be necessary to sweep the device around to build up a good correlation of the area as one's body and other things would block the signals and, even though the Google-Earth like picture, and the location of the RADAR would still be valid, but blocked moving targets would not be detected. Note that if a map of the area of operation is downloaded into the system, and a set of times from the radar to fixed targets is compared to the map, one could quickly correlate the map with the echoes and determine where one is. With such a device, one could move around, and see where they were on a moving Google-Earth-like picture, and see the moving targets about them, perhaps even colored and shaped by the RADAR signatures of the targets. (People, cars, tanks, trains, an incoming missle, etc.) Note that for many situations that such a device could replace GPS. Just like GPS, after the device determines where one is, it would be able to compute changes in position quickly. Hey maybe, I should patent this device? I'd like to have a short-range imaging radar, sort of like my Flir handheld thermal imager, as a sort of super stud finder. Imagine a pc board covered with etched patch antennas, one or more step-recovery-diode impulse generators, and a lot of sampling receivers. Run it at several MHz, do a lot of averaging and signal processing, and reconstruct the image. Maybe use Wii type accelerometers so as the array is moved around, additional signal paths can be crunched in to enhance resolution without blurring. The microwave side of the hardware would be dirt cheap, and the signal processing would have a high engineering cost but would also be cheap in production. Take a look at McEwan's patents for an idea of how the hardware would work. He was mostly looking at stuff like auto collision detection, 1-dimensional ranging, but imaging is quite feasible if you dump enough DSP onto the problem. Firemen could use this for smoke penetration, or cops could spot bad guys in the next room, and I could spot cats under beds without having to crawl around on the floor. John Note that John's idea for a hand-held RADAR differs from mine. The one I propose would use Google Maps to correlate with the RADAR data, and to display where the user was, and the moving targets about him, whereas John's RADAR would be provide a two, and perhaps three dimensional picture of the targets in its' range. John's RADAR would use techniques like those used in medical imaging I suppose. -- Tom Potter *** Time Magazine Person of the Year 2006 *** *** May 2007 Anti-Bigot Award *** http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp http://tdp1001.googlepages.com/home http://no-turtles.com http://www.frappr.com/tompotter http://spaces.msn.com/tdp1001 http://www.flickr.com/photos/tom-potter http://tom-potter.blogspot.com -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Could this device be built?
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:50:35 -0700, Tobiah top-posted:
Hold up a $100 bill and call something unintelligible to the driver at a level just below the music volume. You'll experience and immediate reduction in the volume of the music. What, it's not bad enough they're going around disturbing the peace, you want to PAY them for it?????!?!?!?!???? And top-posting is wrong too. Thanks, Rich Spob wrote: Sitting at a gas station as some backwards baseball cap and saggass britches wearing kid parks in the fire zone in front of the store with some fukdamuhfukinniggahbeyotch crap blasting out of his truck for everyone's entertainment, got me to thinking. Would it be possible to build a gizmo that could be surreptitiously aimed at the offending stereo system to fry some crucial components? It would have to be able to do it on a pretty localized basis without causing damage to the person aiming the gizmo or innocent bystanders or their car's electronics. Whether it would fry any additional components of said target punk's car isn't of great concern. Call it The Rapper Zapper. Just wonderin'. :-) |
Could this device be built?
Donald wrote:
What, it's not bad enough they're going around disturbing the peace, you want to PAY them for it?????!?!?!?!???? Where does it say, "then give them the bill after the volume is turned down". Metal fatigue will have the car auto-disintegrate anyway ... And top-posting is wrong too. Maybe top posting is a function of being able to keep track of whats going on That's a novel concept ... nah, it canšt be done. And it is blind-friendly to post like I do it here, ie. with comments in the context of what is commented on, and stuff that is not commented on snipped away. Kind regards Peter Larsen |
Could this device be built?
Rich Grise wrote:
On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:50:35 -0700, Tobiah top-posted: Hold up a $100 bill and call something unintelligible to the driver at a level just below the music volume. You'll experience and immediate reduction in the volume of the music. What, it's not bad enough they're going around disturbing the peace, you want to PAY them for it?????!?!?!?!???? Where does it say, "then give them the bill after the volume is turned down". And top-posting is wrong too. Hmmm, you did not seem to have trouble understanding the out-of-order answer. Maybe top posting is a function of being able to keep track of whats going on and less then having any respondent follow "net rules" Thanks, Rich Spob wrote: Sitting at a gas station as some backwards baseball cap and saggass britches wearing kid parks in the fire zone in front of the store with some fukdamuhfukinniggahbeyotch crap blasting out of his truck for everyone's entertainment, got me to thinking. Would it be possible to build a gizmo that could be surreptitiously aimed at the offending stereo system to fry some crucial components? It would have to be able to do it on a pretty localized basis without causing damage to the person aiming the gizmo or innocent bystanders or their car's electronics. Whether it would fry any additional components of said target punk's car isn't of great concern. Call it The Rapper Zapper. Just wonderin'. :-) |
Could this device be built?
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:02:42 -0600, Donald wrote:
Maybe top posting is a function of being able to keep track of whats going on and less then having any respondent follow "net rules" NO. It's a matter of respect. You disrespect us by flouting convention. And it's not a "rule", it's simply the way civilized people behave on USENET. http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html Thanks, Rich |
Could this device be built?
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 11:18:38 -0700, UltimatePatriot wrote:
On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 16:26:56 GMT, Rich Grise wrote: .... What, it's not bad enough they're going around disturbing the peace, you want to PAY them for it?????!?!?!?!???? So is not trimming as you did, dip****. He doesn't pay ANYTHING, idiot. One holds up the $100 bill because that will ALWAYS get the attention of an inconsiderate retard with his boom boom car blasting out "I'm a drug dealer". You get the stereo turned down, then walk away laughing. Yeah, and get shot in the back. Good Luck! Rich |
Could this device be built?
Your ideas are too hard core and militant.
How about this, a high powered IR sender that transmits power off codes for all the manufacturers and models serially ? Jango |
Could this device be built?
How about a high-powered IR sender that transmits power-
off codes for all the manufacturers and models serially? This device exists for TVs. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:54 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 DIYbanter