lenny@icus.islp.ny.us (Lenny Tropiano) (02/14/89)
I recently purchased a new auto, and I wanted to get a new radar detector.
I had a original Fuzzbuster for quite some time. It did well with X-band
but I don't know how it managed with the K-band radar. It also wasn't
the best in sensitivity, had no city/hwy button, and tended to give warnings
that weren't good enough for proper speed adjustment (yes, I do have a
heavy foot) :-(
Well .. I've been checking around for a radar detector, and one saleswoman
mentioned to me something they are supposibly testing in NY State and Texas.
It's the Ka-band. I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that
will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the
license plate. There is no need to pull you over, they just send you a
picture and ticket in the mail. Is this just another marketing ploy? Or is
it a reality? I've been reading about the Laser stuff, and also heard
a while ago about those robot-units. What gives?
What do people suggest as far as a good, sensitive, not too many false
alarms, ability to distinguish "pulse-type" radar, X, K, Ka-bands, reasonably
priced ($125-$200) ... etc.. Thanks in advance.
-Lenny
--
Lenny Tropiano ICUS Software Systems [w] +1 (516) 582-5525
lenny@icus.islp.ny.us Telex; 154232428 ICUS [h] +1 (516) 968-8576
{talcott,decuac,boulder,hombre,pacbell,sbcs}!icus!lenny attmail!icus!lenny
ICUS Software Systems -- PO Box 1; Islip Terrace, NY 11752depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Jeff DePolo) (02/14/89)
In article <603@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.UUCP writes: >Well .. I've been checking around for a radar detector, and one saleswoman >mentioned to me something they are supposibly testing in NY State and Texas. >It's the Ka-band. I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that >will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the >license plate. There is no need to pull you over, they just send you a >picture and ticket in the mail. Is this just another marketing ploy? Or is >it a reality? I've been reading about the Laser stuff, and also heard >a while ago about those robot-units. What gives? >-- >Lenny Tropiano ICUS Software Systems [w] +1 (516) 582-5525 >lenny@icus.islp.ny.us Telex; 154232428 ICUS [h] +1 (516) 968-8576 >{talcott,decuac,boulder,hombre,pacbell,sbcs}!icus!lenny attmail!icus!lenny > ICUS Software Systems -- PO Box 1; Islip Terrace, NY 11752 Ka band has been authorized by the FCC for speed measurement use. However, the photo radar units that you are talking about haven't actually been imployed anywhere in the US yet. They are being tested in two states (California, and I believe New Mexico), but they aren't been used in actual speed traps. The Ka detectors (currently only made by Bel) are somewhat worthless for a number of reasons. First of all, the design of the photo radar unit makes it very difficult to detect. The beam that the radar uses is very narrow, and is angled in such a way that it does not transmit down a lane of traffic, rather, at an angle across it. Second of all, the FCC also approved a second photo radar band that has yet to be exploited, so a few months from now, another photo radar unit may use this band, making the Ka detectors obsolete. By the way, the photo radar units are made by a Swiss?? company called something like Multinova. The units themselves are VERY expensive. The company not only sells the units outright, but they have a system where they will lease the unit to a department and receive a "royalty" on the revenue that the units earn the department. Kinda sleezy in my opinion. If I were you, I'd forget about Ka band. If it ever does becomes widely used in the US, you can upgrade then, but it probably won't be for a year or two, if it ever does happen. Instead, I'd buy either an Escort or a Passport. I've owned (in order) a Whistler Spectrum, a Bel Express-LR (844S), and now use an Escort and the Escort is far and away the best of the three. One last note - the problem with the Ka units is once the public figures out where it is located on the highway, it isn't going to take long for somebody to come back and seek revenge on the incriminating unit with a baseball bat or a sledgehammer :-). No department wants to spend the money for such a unit if it is going to be destroyed soon after it is installed. Replies to the address in the signature, please! --- Jeff +----------------------------------------------+------------------------------+ | Jeff DePolo [depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu] | o The best things in life | | => The University of Pennsylvania <= | come in six-packs. | | Class of 1991 - Computer Science Engineering | o Life begins at 85 MPH. | +----------------------------------------------+ o It's not illegal if they | | DISCLAIMER: Someone else used my account. | don't catch you. | +----------------------------------------------+------------------------------+
john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) (02/14/89)
In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu> depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Jeff DePolo) writes: ]In article <603@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.UUCP writes: ]>Well .. I've been checking around for a radar detector, and one saleswoman ]>mentioned to me something they are supposibly testing in NY State and Texas. ]>It's the Ka-band. I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that ]>will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the ]>license plate. There is no need to pull you over, they just send you a ]>picture and ticket in the mail. Is this just another marketing ploy? Or is ]>it a reality? I've been reading about the Laser stuff, and also heard ]>a while ago about those robot-units. What gives? ] ]>-- ]>Lenny Tropiano ICUS Software Systems [w] +1 (516) 582-5525 ]>lenny@icus.islp.ny.us Telex; 154232428 ICUS [h] +1 (516) 968-8576 ]>{talcott,decuac,boulder,hombre,pacbell,sbcs}!icus!lenny attmail!icus!lenny ]> ICUS Software Systems -- PO Box 1; Islip Terrace, NY 11752 ] ]Ka band has been authorized by the FCC for speed measurement use. However, ]the photo radar units that you are talking about haven't actually been ]imployed anywhere in the US yet. They are being tested in two states WRONG! Paradise Valley, AZ (where I live) has used one for over a year and have issued thousands of tickets. They plan to increase the usage now that it has been successful. PS - the accident rate in PV has dropped sharply, as have the average speeds. Unfortunately, PV has speed limits lower than surrounding communities (Phoenix, Scottsdale) on the same roads. ](California, and I believe New Mexico), but they aren't been used in ]actual speed traps. The Ka detectors (currently only made by Bel) are ]somewhat worthless for a number of reasons. First of all, the design ]of the photo radar unit makes it very difficult to detect. The beam ]that the radar uses is very narrow, and is angled in such a way that it ]does not transmit down a lane of traffic, rather, at an angle across it. True. Also it transmits very low power (.5 milliwatts) ]Multinova. The units themselves are VERY expensive. The company not only ]sells the units outright, but they have a system where they will lease ]the unit to a department and receive a "royalty" on the revenue that the ]units earn the department. Kinda sleezy in my opinion. This how PV does it - the company gets $20.00 for each fine paid. ] ]One last note - the problem with the Ka units is once the public figures out ]where it is located on the highway, it isn't going to take long for somebody ]to come back and seek revenge on the incriminating unit with a baseball ]bat or a sledgehammer :-). No department wants to spend the money for ]such a unit if it is going to be destroyed soon after it is installed. Wrong again! In paradise valley, the unit is installed in a chevy S-10 blazer which is manned (to prevent revenge) by a police officer and is moved around every few hours. The officer is still much more cost effective than just doing traffic duty with traditional techniques - it averages 50 tickets PER HOUR! By the way, the best defense in daytime is to keep your eyes open - you can see the unit before you cross the beam. However, they now use infrared film and run at night. I know of no defense other than sticking to the speed limit. This subject has been discussed extensively in rec.autos. -- John Moore (NJ7E) mcdphx!anasaz!john asuvax!anasaz!john (602) 861-7607 (day or eve) The opinions expressed here are obviously not mine, so they must be someone else's. :-)
palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu (David Palmer) (02/15/89)
In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu> depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Jeff DePolo) writes: >Ka band has been authorized by the FCC for speed measurement use. However, >the photo radar units that you are talking about haven't actually been >imployed anywhere in the US yet. They are being tested in two states >(California, and I believe New Mexico), but they aren't been used in >actual speed traps. I don't know whether they are Ka band, but here in Pasadena Ca. photo radar is used to apprehend and punish that lawless breed of sociopath who seeks to destroy this great nation by willfully and with malice driving 35 in a 30 zone. Someone I know was caught twice on successive days by one of these. David Palmer palmer@tybalt.caltech.edu ...rutgers!cit-vax!tybalt.caltech.edu!palmer "I was sad that I had no shirt, until I met a man with no torso"
aejc@occrsh.ATT.COM (Anthony_Campbell) (02/15/89)
>>It's the Ka-band. I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that >>will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the >>license plate. There is no need to pull you over, they just send you a >>picture and ticket in the mail. >>-- >>Lenny Tropiano > >Ka band has been authorized by the FCC for speed measurement use. However, >the photo radar units that you are talking about haven't actually been >employed anywhere in the US yet. > -- Jeff DePolo, UPenn An camera type radar system is in use in parts of Europe, and has been used in Houston. Last summer, the system was placed in an "abandoned" Chevy Blazer on I-45 to spy on Galveston-bound traffic, and a similar system using a '72 Cadillac was placed along US 290 in NW Houston. The news was disheartening for Houstonians like myself and A. J. Foyt :-) The Texas fallout has forced Houston to attempt to enforce a speed limit on the freeways. Tickets were only mailed when the car and driver could be positively identified in the photograph. I am now prone to lane changes when passing an abandoned vehicle. - AEJCampbell ...att!occrsh!aejc
leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Lee Mellinger) (02/15/89)
In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu> depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Jeff DePolo) writes: :In article <603@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.UUCP writes: :>Well .. I've been checking around for a radar detector, and one saleswoman :>mentioned to me something they are supposibly testing in NY State and Texas. :>It's the Ka-band. I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that :>will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the :>lenny@icus.islp.ny.us Telex; 154232428 ICUS [h] +1 (516) 968-8576 : :Ka band has been authorized by the FCC for speed measurement use. However, :the photo radar units that you are talking about haven't actually been :imployed anywhere in the US yet. They are being tested in two states :(California, and I believe New Mexico), but they aren't been used in :actual speed traps. The Ka detectors (currently only made by Bel) are : --- Jeff They have been in use in Pasadena for more than 6 months, and aside from some procedural problems which got most of the very first tickets thrown out, the courts have accepted them. Pasadena has just installed photo units at an interesction that monitors red light runners and of course takes their picture. Lee -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- |Lee F. Mellinger Caltech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory - NASA| |4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109 818/393-0516 FTS 977-0516 | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------| |UUCP: {ames!cit-vax,psivax}!elroy!jpl-devvax!leem | |ARPA: jpl-devvax!leem!@cit-vax.ARPA -or- leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV | -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
fransvo@htsa.uucp (Frans van Otten) (02/15/89)
In article <603@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.UUCP writes: > >I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that >will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the >license plate. There is no need to pull you over, they just send you a >picture and ticket in the mail. Is this just another marketing ploy? Or is >it a reality? I've been reading about the Laser stuff, and also heard >a while ago about those robot-units. What gives? I don't know about the usa, but down here in The Netherlands the police do use that kind of 'robot-units'. They work very well (far too well). It's also almost useless to buy a radar detector here, because the ray is too small to be detected early. When your detector starts blipping you're already photographed. -- Frans van Otten Algemene Hogeschool Amsterdam Technische en Maritieme Faculteit fransvo@htsa.uucp
sampson@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Steve Sampson) (02/15/89)
The best defense for Ka band photo radars is to simply ignore the summons. They send you a picture in the mail with a request that you appear and pay a fine. Since there is some legal problems in that, they don't go after the people who ignore the summons.
bb@mtuxo.att.com (52332-B.BARMAK) (02/15/89)
In article <7169@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>, sampson@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Steve Sampson) writes: > > The best defense for Ka band photo radars is to simply ignore the summons. > They send you a picture in the mail with a request that you appear and pay > a fine. Since there is some legal problems in that, they don't go after the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > people who ignore the summons. Please explain what these legal problems are. I am interested to find out. Anyone else who knows some facts please post or e-mail to mtuxo!bb. Thanks. 512BB
jlh@loral.UUCP (Physically Phffft) (02/16/89)
In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu> depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Jeff DePolo) writes: >Ka band has been authorized by the FCC for speed measurement use. However, >the photo radar units that you are talking about haven't actually been >imployed anywhere in the US yet. They are being tested in two states >(California, and I believe New Mexico), but they aren't been used in >actual speed traps. I'm sure the residents of Pheonix would beg to differ. Last year there was a big article in one of the local papers about this wunnerful, nifty neat technological gadget that was a radar connected to a camera. Local politicians were raving about how it would greatly increase city revenues without any corresponding need to buy more cops. (I should probably rephrase that...). Oh yeah, it would also make the streets safer. Even better, it was mounted in, I believe, a station wagon so it could be moved around at will. Note this wasn't the city of Pheonix, rather a suburb. I think it was Paradise Valley but I'm not sure. Here in Californicate the city of Pasadena is rumored to be testing them. I think the whole issue is now tied up in the courts, I hope to hell the things are declared unconstitutional, being a rocket pilot myself. Jim "I used to be a stud, now I'm a spud" -- Jim Harkins jlh@loral.cts.com Loral Instrumentation, San Diego
gws@cbnews.ATT.COM (Gary W. Sanders) (02/16/89)
In article <4160@mtuxo.att.com> bb@mtuxo.att.com (52332-B.BARMAK) writes:
With the new KA band photo radars, you apparently need a good
photo of the car and/or driver to make any kind of charges stick.
It seems to me that some polarized license plate covers or somthing that
forced the "viewer" to be directly in front(or rear) to see the tag
number might work. most states have laws that force you to have your
tags in view, but is any kind of viewing angle include? Looks like a
neat test case is in order. And what about the driver. I light tint
on the upper part of a windshield might sove this problem. Also
what about states that have no front tags, only rear, how do you get a
good picture of the driver and rear tag at the same time?
--
Gary Sanders (N8EMR) gws@cbnews (w) gws@n8emr (h)
614-860-5965 (353-5965 cornet)sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (02/16/89)
In article <4427@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>, leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Lee Mellinger) writes: > In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu> depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Jeff DePolo) writes: > :In article <603@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.UUCP writes: > :>It's the Ka-band. I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that > :>will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the > They have been in use in Pasadena for more than 6 months, and aside > from some procedural problems which got most of the very first tickets > thrown out, the courts have accepted them. Pasadena has just > installed photo units at an interesction that monitors red light > runners and of course takes their picture. seems like it would be easy to avoid paying a remote ticket such as this. the driver is responsable for the speeding violation, not the owner of the car, right? how can they prove it was you who was driving? innocent unless PROVEN guilty. I assume they just photograph the back of the car, just to get the license, then mail the owner of the car the speeding ticket. Also, doesn't the officer who gave you the ticket, have to apear in court to validate the 'crime'? since there was no officer..... also I was under the impression that you had to sign the ticket when the cop pulled you over? I am sure a good lawyer could think of a dozen ways to get the case thrown out. I just think that getting an automated radar machine to give out tickets is wrong. Although driving is a privelage, not a right, aren't we still allowed our rights as a citizen? next thing you know they will have the cars themselves record how fast they are going and either: a> limit the speed to the current speed limits (thru bar codes on the road to read in the speed limit, I saw this on tv. they have it in Australia as an experiment) b> the car will call the cops and turn you in. then you will get a ticket in the mail. -- John Sparks // Amiga | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks \X/ UUCP | >> call D.I.S.K. @ 502/968-5401 thru 5406 << An idea is not responsible for the people who believe in it.
john@stiatl.UUCP (John DeArmond) (02/16/89)
In article <4160@mtuxo.att.com> bb@mtuxo.att.com (52332-B.BARMAK) writes: >In article <7169@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>, sampson@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Steve Sampson) writes: >> >> The best defense for Ka band photo radars is to simply ignore the summons. >> They send you a picture in the mail with a request that you appear and pay >> a fine. Since there is some legal problems in that, they don't go after the > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> people who ignore the summons. > >Please explain what these legal problems are. I am interested to >find out. Anyone else who knows some facts please post or e-mail >to mtuxo!bb. Thanks. Well a few come to mind after approx 500 miliseconds of though... The presumption of inocence (Damn that constitution, get's 'em every time) The right to confront your accusors. The requirement that they prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the radar and camera are in sync. Prove that the film was not altered. Perhaps between this and the laser radar, we'll be motivated to do what we should have done 15 years ago - revolt and overthrow the damn stupid speed limit laws. (actually, a grenade in the bed of the truck would solve the photo-radar problem :-) John . -- John De Armond, WD4OQC | Manual? ... What manual ?!? Sales Technologies, Inc. Atlanta, GA | This is Unix, My son, You ...!gatech!stiatl!john | just GOTTA Know!!!
wiz@xroads.UUCP (Mike Carter) (02/16/89)
Photo Radar ** NOT ** being used ???? Ahem, err, excuse me, try taking a wild ride through Paradise Valley here in Arizona some time. Especially along Tatum Blvd. There's this neet Jimmy Blazer that pops flashes at motorists. They've had this gem in operation for over a year now. -Just adding my pre-tax 2 cents worth. -- ============================================================================= = Mike Carter N7GYX, Phoenix AZ| Q: Why did the Chicken cross the road ? = = hplabs!hp-sdd!crash!xroads!wiz| A: To ESCape the Main Menu . = =============================================================================
bnick@aucis.UUCP (Bill Nickless) (02/16/89)
In article <4042@cbnews.ATT.COM>, gws@cbnews.ATT.COM (Gary W. Sanders) writes: > > With the new KA band photo radars, you apparently need a good > photo of the car and/or driver to make any kind of charges stick. > [ saving bandwith ] > neat test case is in order. And what about the driver. I light tint > on the upper part of a windshield might sove this problem. > My two brothers are twins. They jointly own a 1979 Honda accord hatchback. Most people can't tell them apart easily--much less with a blurred photo. Now, let's say John was driving and got his picture taken. 1. Who gets the ticket and points on the license--Jim or John? 2. Where is the burden of proof of identity; on the Plaintiff (State Police) or Defendant (John [or Jim?])? They both have valid drivers' licenses and they are both named on the car title. Any ideas, net.lawyers? -- Bill Nickless Andrews University Computer Science Department ...!sharkey!aucis!bnick or bnick@aucis.UUCP Unix Support Group "Help! I'm locked up in this .signature factory!"
kenneth@turbo.RAY.COM (Kenny Crudup, still in Mass....) (02/16/89)
(Hello again everbody!) In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu>, depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Jeff DePolo) writes: > The Ka detectors (currently only made by Bel) are > somewhat worthless for a number of reasons. First of all, the design > of the photo radar unit makes it very difficult to detect. The beam > that the radar uses is very narrow, and is angled in such a way that it > does not transmit down a lane of traffic, rather, at an angle across it. At an angle? What about cosine error? (Or do I have the angle backwards?) Also, the local "Evening Magazine-type Show" here in Boston had an article about the new radar, and even tested a detector (Bel?). They seemed to get enough warning to at least slow down......one of the few good things about this state (MA) is that most cars don't have front plates, and even if they did, the RMV won't tell the other state who you are anyway. (Not part of the DLC). BTW, Jeff seems to hit all the points that make this country great! > o The best things in life | > come in six-packs. | > o Life begins at 85 MPH. | > o It's not illegal if they | > don't catch you. | -- Kenneth R. Crudup, Contractor, Raytheon CWS Development Group 1001 Boston Post Road, Marlboro, MA 01752 +1 508 490 2015 kenneth@pebbles.ray.com, ...!rayssd!pebbles!kenneth Ya know, this place ain't so bad after all......
hgp@lzaz.ATT.COM (H.PAGE) (02/16/89)
In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu>, depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Jeff DePolo) writes: . . > photo radar units are made by a Swiss?? company called something like > Multinova. The units themselves are VERY expensive. Apparently, the Multinova units have been in use in Switzerland since the Seventies. I have in front of me a copy of a paper from the ``First International Electronic Crime Countermeasures Conference'' in Edinburgh, Scotland, July 18-20, 1973, entitled, ``Safer Roads By Optimizing Speed Limits and Controls'' about the (an earlier version?) Multinova unit. I'll send a copy to anyone who sends me an 8.5 x 11 self addressed, stamped envelope (big enough for 25 pages) to: Howard G. Page AT&T Bell Labs, Room 1B-115K 307 Middletown-Lincroft Rd. Lincroft, NJ 07738 -- Howard G. Page AT&T LZ 1B-115K (201)576-2731 ..!ihnp4!lzaz!hgp
lloyd@axecore.UUCP (Lloyd Buchanan) (02/17/89)
In article <7169@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> sampson@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Steve Sampson) writes: > >The best defense for Ka band photo radars is to simply ignore the summons. >They send you a picture in the mail with a request that you appear and pay >a fine. Since there is some legal problems in that, they don't go after the >people who ignore the summons. I imagine the best defense is to remove your front license plate!! (They aren't required in NY, I don't know about TX)
ciciora@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Ciciora; Steven joseph) (02/17/89)
In article <343@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >seems like it would be easy to avoid paying a remote ticket such as this. >the driver is responsable for the speeding violation, not the owner of the >car, right? > >how can they prove it was you who was driving? innocent unless PROVEN guilty. > Simple. Cops can do ANYTHING they want, who's gonna stop them? I was driving my mom's car and incorrectly got a parking ticket (long story...) in boulder, co. I was going to ignore it, but they looked up her address, and sent her about 6 letters, first from 'please pay this ticket' to 'its now tripple to what it would of cost' to 'your car is now on our tow list' to 'if you don't pay soon, we will put a warrent out for your arrest'. After this I gave up and returned the one that says 'please pay $20', called them up and found out that that shut them up. I guess they assumed that since she owned the car, she is responsible for any one who drives this. Hey, this is starting to sound like a topic for rec.autos....
ron_b@apollo.COM (Ronald Buttiglieri) (02/17/89)
In article <4427@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Lee Mellinger) writes: >In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu> depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Jeff DePolo) writes: >:In article <603@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.UUCP writes: >:>Well .. I've been checking around for a radar detector, and one saleswoman >:>mentioned to me something they are supposibly testing in NY State and Texas. >:>It's the Ka-band. I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that >:>will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the >: --- Jeff >They have been in use in Pasadena for more than 6 months, and aside >from some procedural problems which got most of the very first tickets >thrown out, the courts have accepted them. Pasadena has just The major issue throwing these tickets out of court is that unless the photos are clear enough to prove the driver of the vehicle (at that time) was in fact the owner of said vehicle, effectively, the owner is being held responsible for the driving habits of anyone using his/her car. Ron
koontz@oregon (02/17/89)
In article <101@axecore.UUCP>, lloyd@axecore.UUCP (Lloyd Buchanan) writes: > In article <7169@killer.DALLAS.TX.US> sampson@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Steve Sampson) writes: > > > >The best defense for Ka band photo radars is to simply ignore the summons. > >They send you a picture in the mail with a request that you appear and pay > >a fine. Since there is some legal problems in that, they don't go after the > >people who ignore the summons. > > I imagine the best defense is to remove your front license plate!! (They > aren't required in NY, I don't know about TX) What about spectrum shifting coatings for your license plates. Make 8 look like 3 etc. Wear a ronald reagan mask, or ski mask. Lets see someone make it illegal to cover your visage.
fransvo@htsa.uucp (Frans van Otten) (02/17/89)
In article <4182da6e.16321@apollo.COM> ron_b@apollo.COM (Ronald Buttiglieri) writes: >The major issue throwing these tickets out of court is that unless >the photos are clear enough to prove the driver of the vehicle (at that >time) was in fact the owner of said vehicle, effectively, the owner >is being held responsible for the driving habits of anyone using his/her >car. In The Netherlands the police photograph the rear side of the car. This has something to do with privacy legislation. Anyway, the driver is guilty, not the owner, but the owner *must* tell who was in the car. Another issue: This equipment can also be installed in cars and used while *driving* the police car ! -- Frans van Otten Algemene Hogeschool Amsterdam Technische en Maritieme Faculteit fransvo@htsa.uucp
hgp@lzaz.ATT.COM (H.PAGE) (02/17/89)
In article <4427@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>, leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Lee Mellinger) writes: . . > Pasadena has just > installed photo units at an interesction that monitors red light > runners and of course takes their picture. > NYC's getting them also, but, according to the local news show, the $50 tickets will be sent to the owner of the car and have the same weight of a parking ticket (due to a new NY state law?). Interesting concept. -- Howard G. Page AT&T LZ 1B-115K (201)576-2731 ..!ihnp4!lzaz!hgp
john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) (02/17/89)
In article <249@turbo.RAY.COM> kenneth@pebbles.ray.com writes: ]In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu>, depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Jeff DePolo) writes: ]> The Ka detectors (currently only made by Bel) are ]> somewhat worthless for a number of reasons. First of all, the design ]> of the photo radar unit makes it very difficult to detect. The beam ]> that the radar uses is very narrow, and is angled in such a way that it ]> does not transmit down a lane of traffic, rather, at an angle across it. ] ]At an angle? What about cosine error? (Or do I have the angle backwards?) ] The angle is known to the onboard computer which simply compensates. ]enough warning to at least slow down......one of the few good things about ]this state (MA) is that most cars don't have front plates, and even if they ]did, the RMV won't tell the other state who you are anyway. (Not part of ]the DLC). The system here in Paradise Valley has a slave stobe and camera mounted on a tripod about 50 feet behind the main unit. The slave takes a picture of the rear plate. Even nastier, the cameras work with infrared strobes and film and are run at night, when it is much harder to spot the vehicle holding the radar. However, for some bizarre reason, the town decided (no doubt the politicos on the town council) to put up a yellow warning sign ("warning - photo radar in use") with the mobile unit. This sign is normally somewhat concealed, smaller than a normal warning sign, mounted at ground level, and right next to the truck. In other words, if you can see the sign, you have already seen the truck! -- John Moore (NJ7E) mcdphx!anasaz!john asuvax!anasaz!john (602) 861-7607 (day or eve) The opinions expressed here are obviously not mine, so they must be someone else's. :-)
neal@lynx.uucp (Neal Woodall) (02/18/89)
In article <101@axecore.UUCP> lloyd@axecore.UUCP (Lloyd Buchanan) writes: >I imagine the best defense is to remove your front license plate!! (They >aren't required in NY, I don't know about TX) Supposedly, in Texas the front plates are required, but for the ten years I lived in Texas, I never got in trouble for not having one on my car. Even after being stopped by the cops on several occasions, I never got a ticket for the missing front plate, just a friendly warning about possible 200 $ fines. I guess that most cops just don't want to take the time to write someone up for something so trivial. Now, if they get specific orders from the chief, who has decided to purchase on of the infamous radar-equipped Blazers..... Neal
jeffw@midas.STS.TEK.COM (Jeff Winslow) (02/18/89)
In article <6681@boulder.Colorado.EDU> ciciora@tramp.Colorado.EDU (Ciciora) writes: > Hey, this is starting >to sound like a topic for rec.autos.... But, as interesting as it may be, it's long since stopped being a topic for sci.electronics. Edit the newsgroups line, please. Jeff Winslow
sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) (02/18/89)
I got it! yea... you have this detector that senses when you have been
zapped by one of these photo-nightmares and at that instant, closes a
shutter (with a nasty message on the cover, of course) over your license
plate. Since in order to take a picture of your car and plate, the camera
has to wait till you are past the camera (rear shot), you should have
enough time to close the shutter. You could even hae the shutter resemble
another license plate!... say.... maybe the plate number of the Chief of
Police? yeeeeaa... that's the [speeding] ticket!
--
John Sparks // Amiga | {rutgers|uunet}!ukma!corpane!sparks
\X/ UUCP | >> call D.I.S.K. @ 502/968-5401 thru 5406 <<
Death is nature's way of telling you to slow down.leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Lee Mellinger) (02/18/89)
In article <4182da6e.16321@apollo.COM> ron_b@apollo.COM (Ronald Buttiglieri) writes: :In article <4427@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV> leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV (Lee Mellinger) writes: :>In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu> depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu.UUCP (Jeff DePolo) writes: :>:In article <603@icus.islp.ny.us> lenny@icus.UUCP writes: :>:>It's the Ka-band. I've heard they've installed robot type radar units that :>:>will clock your car using the Ka Band radar, and then photograph the :>: --- Jeff :>They have been in use in Pasadena for more than 6 months, and aside :>from some procedural problems which got most of the very first tickets :>thrown out, the courts have accepted them. Pasadena has just : :The major issue throwing these tickets out of court is that unless :the photos are clear enough to prove the driver of the vehicle (at that :time) was in fact the owner of said vehicle, effectively, the owner :is being held responsible for the driving habits of anyone using his/her :car. : :Ron No, the reason the first tickets were thrown out is that the vehicle the photo radar was mounted in was not painted in police colors as a CA Vehicle Code law requires. Lee -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- |Lee F. Mellinger Caltech/Jet Propulsion Laboratory - NASA| |4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91109 818/393-0516 FTS 977-0516 | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------| |UUCP: {ames!cit-vax,psivax}!elroy!jpl-devvax!leem | |ARPA: jpl-devvax!leem!@cit-vax.ARPA -or- leem@jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV | -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
gbell@pnet12.cts.com (Greg Bell) (02/18/89)
Why worry about all the legalities and such? There are many ways to make
this radar/photo system really work.
Chances are you know when you've been clocked. So, the machine could
have a ticket dispenser. You'd pull over, walk back to where the machine is,
take your ticket and be on your way! No problem.
Or, the machine could fire one of those paint pellets at your car and a
cop could pull you over when you see it.
But since the law is so ridiculous anyway, why not just have a periodic
mailing of tickets to EVERYONE who has a driving license? Would generate
GREAT revenues. The letter attached could say something like: "This is a
speeding ticket for the speeding you were doing on <RANDOM DATE HERE>". How
could any of us argue with this??
Sarcasm is a wonderful tool.
Greg Bell_________________________________________________________
Hardware hacker |
Electronics hobbyist | UUCP: uunet!serene!pnet12!gbell
EE major at UC San Diego |gregl@ozvax.GWD.TEK.COM (Greg Lacefield) (02/18/89)
In article <343@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: >also I was under the impression that you had to sign the ticket when the >cop pulled you over? In what state? Here in Oregon, they hand it to you. No signature is necessary (except for the officer's). Not that I would have ANY experience with this MYSELF... :^) ============================================================================== My employer doesn't care about opinions on radar machines. As a matter of fact, it's pretty apathetic about ANY of my opinions!! :^) ============================================================================== Greg Lacefield :^) | | "...they that wait upon the Lord shall Interactive Technologies Division | renew their strength; they shall mount Tektronix, Inc. | up with wings as eagles; they shall P.O. Box 1000 M.S. 60-850 | run, and not be weary; and they shall Wilsonville, Oregon 97070 | walk, and not faint." (503) 685-2638 (day) | | - Isaiah 40:31 gregl@ozvax.WV.TEK.COM | ...!tektronix!ozvax!gregl | ==============================================================================
A-N-Onymouse@cup.portal.com (John - DeBert) (02/18/89)
> >The best defense for Ka band photo radars is to simply ignore the summons. >They send you a picture in the mail with a request that you appear and pay >a fine. Since there is some legal problems in that, they don't go after the >people who ignore the summons. In California, if you commit a misdemeanor or infraction, the latter being the most common type of moving violation, you may not be legally arrested or cited for it unless it was witnessed by a police officer or a witness has done a citizen's arrest. In sum, you must be arrested before you may be cited. SInce photo speed traps do not make an arrest, the summons or citation has no legal standing or force. If ignoring a summons that was based upon the photo causes your arrest, it can be considered a false arrest. A-N-Onymouse@cup.portal.com
koontz@oregon (02/18/89)
> :The major issue throwing these tickets out of court is that unless > :the photos are clear enough to prove the driver of the vehicle (at that > :time) was in fact the owner of said vehicle, effectively, the owner > :is being held responsible for the driving habits of anyone using his/her > :car. > : > :Ron > > No, the reason the first tickets were thrown out is that the vehicle > the photo radar was mounted in was not painted in police colors as a > CA Vehicle Code law requires. > > Lee I was under the impression you had the right to be confronted by your accusser. I don't see one in this case. Next thing you know, parking meters will issue tickets for expired time. Or, cross walk signals for crossing against the light.
jb@aablue.UUCP (John B Scalia) (02/18/89)
In article <343@corpane.UUCP>, sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: > [a whole bunch here deleted] > our rights as a citizen? next thing you know they will have the cars > themselves record how fast they are going and either: > > a> limit the speed to the current speed limits (thru bar codes on the road to > read in the speed limit, I saw this on tv. they have it in Australia as an > experiment) > > b> the car will call the cops and turn you in. then you will get a ticket > in the mail. Such a system already exists and is in use in certain sections of Hong Kong. Not only can it determine your speed and through bar codes painted on the road decide if you're speeding, it also reports where you've been and at what time of the day you where there. Of course, they use this information to give you your, I believe it's, monthly driving bill! Naturally the act of disconnecting or modifying said under-car black box is an imprisonable crime. A couple of friends there, have received a couple of rediculous bills in the past five months, and the word is that the system will be Hong Kong wide sometime next year. -- A A Blueprint Co., Inc. - Akron, Ohio +1 216 794-8803 voice UUCP: {uunet!}aablue!jb Marriage is a wonderful institution, but who FidoNet: 1:157/697 wants to spend their life in an institution. EchoNet: US:OH/AKR.0
sparks@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (David Sparks) (02/19/89)
In article <1580@anasaz.UUCP>, john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) writes: > In article <249@turbo.RAY.COM> kenneth@pebbles.ray.com writes: > ]In article <7944@netnews.upenn.edu>, depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Jeff DePolo) writes: > ]> The Ka detectors (currently only made by Bel) are > ]> somewhat worthless for a number of reasons. First of all, the design > ]> of the photo radar unit makes it very difficult to detect. The beam > ]> that the radar uses is very narrow, and is angled in such a way that it > ]> does not transmit down a lane of traffic, rather, at an angle across it. > ] > > ]enough warning to at least slow down......one of the few good things about > ]this state (MA) is that most cars don't have front plates, and even if they > ]did, the RMV won't tell the other state who you are anyway. (Not part of > ]the DLC). > The air force is currently using visors connected to light sensors. This is so when a nuclear blast occours, the visor is darkened so the pilot wont be blinded. This same technique can be used to defeat the multinova. By placing the material(I dont know what it is) over the liscence plate, and connecting it to a Ka band Radar detector, the plate could be darkened in the time it takes to darken(1/1000 s I believe). This might be a little co$tly, but so is a radar detector. A company is selling some kind of cover for your front liscence plate that distorts the plate enough that it cant be decoded by the police. But the police have been giving out tickets to people who have been using these, so I wouldnt invest in one. (Note that these are completly different techniques, one distorts all the time, while the other blackens only when Ka radar is detected) sparks@cpsc.UCalgary.CA
jbs@rti.UUCP (Joe Simpson) (02/19/89)
In article <27002@sgi.SGI.COM> koontz@oregon writes: > >Wear a ronald reagan mask, or ski mask. >Lets see someone make it illegal to cover your visage. Actually, it's illegal in quite a few small towns, or so I was told by a policeman. I've never gone to the courthouse and looked up the laws, though. I think some of these laws specify that it's only illegal to wear a mask after dark.
hermann@.ucalgary.ca (Michael Hermann) (02/19/89)
In article <742@cs-spool.calgary.UUCP>, sparks@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (David Sparks) writes: > placing the material(I dont know what it is) over the liscence plate, and > connecting it to a Ka band Radar detector, the plate could be darkened in the > time it takes to darken(1/1000 s I believe). This might be a little co$tly, > but so is a radar detector. Hmm, don't need _quite_ a blast visor here, but it gave me an idea: Assuming with a little work you could pull from your radar detector a useable trigger signal, you could use it to control a relay driving some sort of countermeasure. I think a large liquid crystal would do the trick, just large enough to fit over your license plate. Detector goes off, pulls relay, drives liquid crystal (probably off car 12VDC), plate made unviewable. Somebody must sell LC's in an appropriate dimension/configuration. Didn't some company sell LC windows for your apartment/home, whose opacity you could vary under control of a rheostat? Sounds like the right company to talk to... | Mike Hermann | ..!uunet!ubc-cs!calgary!hermann calgary!hermann@cs.ubc.ca Organized Religion is like Organized Crime; it preys on peoples' weakness, generates huge profits for its operators, and is almost impossible to eradicate. -- me
dhsu@crunchyfrog.Sun.COM (David Hsu) (02/20/89)
In article <744@cs-spool.calgary.UUCP> hermann@.ucalgary.ca (Michael Hermann) writes: > I think a large liquid crystal would do >the trick, just large enough to fit over your license plate. Detector >goes off, pulls relay, drives liquid crystal (probably off car 12VDC), >plate made unviewable. I don't know about this home-use version, but this here Edumund Scientific catalog lists "LC Light Shutter Windows"; "On" time (clear) 10ms, "Off" time (opaque) 30ms. Problems are in the cost: 6"x6" = $89, 1'x1' = $170, and you have to provide a small power supply: 60-90vac, 60Hz, 20ma/sq ft. Me, I think the old trick of using a slave-strobe disguised as driving lights oughta work admirably (and cheaply!), especially in something like a Camaro where the fogs are adjacent to the front plate. -dave David Hsu, just this guy, you know dhsu@sun.com hsu@eneevax.umd.edu "Yam sausages, you see?"
gts@dasys1.UUCP (G. T. Samson) (02/21/89)
In article <353@corpane.UUCP> sparks@corpane.UUCP (John Sparks) writes: > [detector that closes shutter over your license plate, with nasty > message on it, or the Chief of Police's plate...] In West Germany, a friend told me, the way they nail people for driving through red lights at night is also automated; when you pass through a red light, a flash goes off, lighting up your rear plate for a picture. Someone figured out that clear nail polish would cause a HUGE amount of glare/reflection off one's license plate, enough to keep one's license plate from being photographed... and what was the result? It's now nearly impossible to buy clear nail polish in W. Germany. (Or at least it was while he was there.) He told me, too, that a favorite night's hanging out for him and his friends was to get up on the roof of a high building and sit with a few beers at nightfall, and wait for the flashes to start going off at the streetcorners... Hmm... wonder if clear polish would do me any good if I were going to be night-speeding? (1/8 8-) ) -- Name: Gregory T. Samson AKA: The Evil MicroWizard [and once An Insane Man] Nets: dasys1!gts@masa.com [NOT gts@prep.AI.MIT.EDU!] ...!cmcl2!phri!dasys1!gts Quote: "You've made my day, and now you have to sleep in it." - TMBG
snoopy@sopwith.UUCP (Snoopy) (02/21/89)
In article <2786@rti.UUCP> jbs@rti.UUCP (Joe Simpson) writes: |In article <27002@sgi.SGI.COM> koontz@oregon writes: |> |>Wear a ronald reagan mask, or ski mask. |>Lets see someone make it illegal to cover your visage. | |Actually, it's illegal in quite a few small towns, or so I was told by a |policeman. I've never gone to the courthouse and looked up the laws, though. |I think some of these laws specify that it's only illegal to wear a mask |after dark. Oh great, it's illegal to protect your face from frostbite. _____ /_____\ Snoopy /_______\ |___| tekecs.gwd.tek.com!sopwith!snoopy |___| sun!nosun!illian!sopwith!snoopy "Land of the free, home of the brave."
jgo@mcgp1.UUCP (John Opalko, N7KBT) (02/22/89)
In article <1580@anasaz.UUCP>, john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) writes: > > Even nastier, the cameras work with infrared strobes and film > and are run at night, when it is much harder to spot the vehicle > holding the radar. So, you cover your plates with a material that's transparent to visible light (so you're legal) but opaque to I/R. I attended a demo of a surgical I/R laser a while back, and the laser op said that those of us who were wearing glasses were safe, but the others had to put on safety glasses. The safeties looked like they were made of plain old ordinary transparent plastic. This was a 10 watt laser, so if few millimeters of plastic blocked enough I/R to protect our eyes, it should be sufficient to prevent the RoboCop from getting an image of a license plate. Anybody know for sure what plastics are I/R opaque? John Opalko, N7KBT jgo@mcgp1.UUCP john@n7kbt.WA.COM "Honest, officer, it's there to keep the plates clean."
alien@cpoint.UUCP (Alien Wells) (02/22/89)
In article <418@lzaz.ATT.COM> hgp@lzaz.ATT.COM (H.PAGE) writes: >Apparently, the Multinova units have been in use in Switzerland since >the Seventies. ... Photo radar units are in common use throughout most of Europe. My mother got a 'remote' ticket in W. Germany in 1975 - and the units were not new then. I also 'know' they are in use in France. In Europe and Japan, radar detectors are also illegal. There is a thriving black market in US mfg radar detectors - the foreign transmitters use the same frequencies as US transmitters. Furthermore, it is VERY illegal to do anything to cover/deface your license plates. For a while, it was common to cover your license plate with varnish (just to make it stay clean, officer!) which would give nothing but glare to the camera. It is now basically a felony offense to varnish your license plate in France. Of course, France is the country that is considering a system to have your car automatically ticket you for speeding ... -- ============================================================================= A path is a terrible thing to waste ... decvax!frog!cpoint!alien bu_cs!mirror!frog!cpoint!alien =============================================================================
depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Jeff DePolo) (02/23/89)
In article <2061@cpoint.UUCP> alien@cpoint.UUCP (Alien Wells) writes: >In article <418@lzaz.ATT.COM> hgp@lzaz.ATT.COM (H.PAGE) writes: >In Europe and Japan, radar detectors are also illegal. There is a thriving >black market in US mfg radar detectors - the foreign transmitters use the >same frequencies as US transmitters. > decvax!frog!cpoint!alien bu_cs!mirror!frog!cpoint!alien Not so. Europe, Asia, and even some parts of Canada use radar frequencies that differ from X, K, and Ka band that we have here in the U.S. Bel used to make a European version of one of their detectors - it worked on the 3 common bands used in Europe. Europe has about a dozen or more different bands licensed. A number of the bands are right around 10 GHz, so some U.S. detectors will see this other frequency as an X-band signal. It will depend on the bandwidth of the detector are to whether or not it will pick up the off-band signal. In general, don't trust a U.S. detector to work in other places. After all, every country has their own version of the FCC which dictates what frequencies are to be used for radar. They don't coordinate their frequencies with each other. --- Jeff +----------------------------------------------+------------------------------+ | Jeff DePolo [depolo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu] | o The best things in life | | => The University of Pennsylvania <= | come in six-packs. | | Class of 1991 - Computer Science Engineering | o Life begins at 85 MPH. | +----------------------------------------------+ o It's not illegal if they | | DISCLAIMER: Someone else used my account. | don't catch you. | +----------------------------------------------+------------------------------+
hollombe@ttidca.TTI.COM (The Polymath) (02/24/89)
In article <1772@mcgp1.UUCP> jgo@mcgp1.UUCP (John Opalko, N7KBT) writes: }In article <1580@anasaz.UUCP>, john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) writes: }> Even nastier, the cameras work with infrared strobes and film }> and are run at night, when it is much harder to spot the vehicle }> holding the radar. } }So, you cover your plates with a material that's transparent to visible }light (so you're legal) but opaque to I/R. In California, at least, it's illegal to cover your plates with _anything_, transparent or not. Also, some of the radar units here aren't mounted on vehicles. They're on permanent posts and traffic signals, instead. They're easy to miss, if you're new to the neighborhood (and the boxes are bullet proof, if you're not (-: ). -- The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, hollombe@ttidca.tti.com) Illegitimati Nil Citicorp(+)TTI Carborundum 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. (213) 452-9191, x2483 Santa Monica, CA 90405 {csun|philabs|psivax}!ttidca!hollombe
dave@onfcanim.UUCP (Dave Martindale) (03/13/89)
In article <1772@mcgp1.UUCP> jgo@mcgp1.UUCP (John Opalko, N7KBT) writes: > >So, you cover your plates with a material that's transparent to visible >light (so you're legal) but opaque to I/R. > >I attended a demo of a surgical I/R laser a while back, and the laser op >said that those of us who were wearing glasses were safe, but the others >had to put on safety glasses. The safeties looked like they were made of >plain old ordinary transparent plastic. This was a 10 watt laser, so if few >millimeters of plastic blocked enough I/R to protect our eyes, it should >be sufficient to prevent the RoboCop from getting an image of a license plate. > >Anybody know for sure what plastics are I/R opaque? It depends on the wavelength. The laser may have been a CO2 laser, which produces infrared with a wavelength of about 10 microns. This is so far removed from visible light (0.4 - 0.7 microns) that many things clear to visible light are quite opaque to the laser (including ordinary glass). But infrared film is not sensitive to 10 micron IR. Instead, it is sensitive to the near IR just beyond 0.7 microns in wavelength. Almost anything that looks transparent to white light (and thus to visible red light) will also be transparent to near-IR, unless it was specifically designed to be a near-IR filter.
vaso@mips.COM (Vaso Bovan) (12/01/89)
Continuing my education on radar detectors now that I've wised up to the necessity: Is it prudent to hold out for an X, K, & Ka detector, rather than buy just an X & K detector ? How do remotes (behind the grille) compare to visor models ?
BHB3@PSUVM.BITNET (12/02/89)
In article <32554@buckaroo.mips.COM>, vaso@mips.COM (Vaso Bovan) says: > >Continuing my education on radar detectors now that I've wised up to >the necessity: > >Is it prudent to hold out for an X, K, & Ka detector, rather than buy >just an X & K detector ? > >How do remotes (behind the grille) compare to visor models ? There have been ad naseum posts in rec.autos on radar detetcors of all sorts and types in rec.autos. The Ka detection is kind of useless to summarize since it is only used in photo radar installation and by the time it goes of it is too late to slow down. The Ka detection would be of use in some kind of clever countermeasure device perhaps, but not in the usual way a detector is used. Brent H. besler
sampson@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Steve Sampson) (12/02/89)
Don't worry about the Ka Band. This is the photo radar band (as far as I've known - there may be some modifying going on). When you receive a photo in the mail, put it in your scrap book and throw away the letter asking you to send money. No city has yet gone after those who don't pay. If they bug you tell them to contact your attorney. By not paying, being forced to pay, you have defeated the radar in the cheapest way possible. Cities don't mail you parking tickets, they can't mail you speeding tickets. At least in the U.S. I'm waiting to get one so I can cause them to hate the day they were born, the filthy communists... :-) <--- Some people can't read my humor and require a visual aid.
blarson@dianne.usc.edu (bob larson) (12/03/89)
In article <10443@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> sampson@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Steve Sampson) writes: >Cities don't mail you parking tickets, Maybe not in Texas, but the do here in LA. (Not the originals, just a bill/ oportunity to go to court.) If you don't pay, you can't re-register your car, and are more likely to get the "boot" on future parking tickets. [followups to ca.driving, since there isn't a us.driving.] Bob Larson blarson@dianne.usc.edu usc!dianne!blarson --** To join Prime computer mailing list **--- info-prime-request@ais1.usc.edu usc!ais1!info-prime-request
john@anasaz.UUCP (John Moore) (12/03/89)
In article <10443@attctc.Dallas.TX.US> sampson@attctc.Dallas.TX.US (Steve Sampson) writes: > >Don't worry about the Ka Band. This is the photo radar band (as far as I've >known - there may be some modifying going on). When you receive a photo in >the mail, put it in your scrap book and throw away the letter asking you to >send money. No city has yet gone after those who don't pay. If they bug you WRONG! They have gone after those in Paradise Valley. One appeal made its way to the State Supreme Court, where it failed. -- John Moore (NJ7E) mcdphx!anasaz!john asuvax!anasaz!john (602) 861-7607 (day or eve) long palladium, short petroleum 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253 The 2nd amendment is about military weapons, NOT JUST hunting weapons!
allanc@physiol.su.oz.au (Allan Creighton) (10/16/90)
I recently posted to this group re. radar detectors prices and questions did any one read it or was it blotted thru the net. please email me or just a response thru the group may help thanks. allan
allanc@physiol.su.oz.au (Allan Creighton) (10/22/90)
I shall be in Santa Monica and Houston in Jan 91,Honolulu Feb 91 and all through UK in between (all in the name of Rugby Union). Questions are as follows. I would like ANY help/advice on purchasing a radar detector. Experiences with any brands and factual information would be greatly appreciated. The criteria should include the following: 1 X and K band as well as photo 2 Is the photo radar just an extension of either band or seperate.? 3 Brands and areas within the above regions would help. 4 Price... mmmm ... in Australia the top of the lines are Uniden/Cobra etc they cost between $400-$600 Aus.Top of the range. Seriously,any help no matter how trivial would be appreciated. I have tried to post this twice but it has bounced or evaporated,if anyone reads this please email me on the email address. Apologies if this has been covered or it is in the wrong n'group thanks in advance allan
ssave@srvr1 (Shailendra Anant Save) (10/23/90)
From article <1286@physiol.su.oz.au>, by allanc@physiol.su.oz.au (Allan Creighton): > I shall be in Santa Monica and Houston in Jan 91,Honolulu Feb 91 > and all through UK in between (all in the name of Rugby Union). > Questions are as follows. > I would like ANY help/advice on purchasing a radar detector. > Experiences with any brands and factual information would be greatly appreciated. > The criteria should include the following: > 1 X and K band as well as photo > 2 Is the photo radar just an extension of either band or seperate.? > 3 Brands and areas within the above regions would help. > 4 Price... mmmm ... in Australia the top of the lines are Uniden/Cobra etc > they cost between $400-$600 Aus.Top of the range. > > Seriously,any help no matter how trivial would be appreciated. > I have tried to post this twice but it has bounced or evaporated,if anyone > reads this please email me on the email address. > Apologies if this has been covered or it is in the wrong n'group > > thanks in advance > allan I have a Whistler 425 which I am very satisfied with. It has X and K band, and has the usual features of bargraph LED display, and an changing tone with the proximity of the radar source. It cost US$ 98 but has saved me at least a couple of times at > 90 mph so I have already got my moneys worth back. It is made in Korea and has a years wwarranty, it is sleek and fits on the visor or the dashboard. Called in from the Sears Catalogue. To the best of my knowledge, photo radar is a camera which is placed facing in the direction where you are going with a gun pointing towards you. The radar guages your speed, and if you exceed the speed limit, the camera takes the picture of your backside when you drive by. The polaroid is digitally sent and the registration is checked out and a ticket is sent to your address. In Chicago, they even have a radar gun with noone or no camera. When you near it, the guys ahead of you who have a fuzz-buster hit the brakes for no apparent reason, the whistler goes wild, and everyone slows down. Quite neat. --Shailendra ssave@caen.engin.umich.edu The University of Michigan Ann Arbor.
mcdorman@qucis.queensu.CA (Doug McDorman) (10/25/90)
In article <1286@physiol.su.oz.au> allanc@physiol.su.oz.au (Allan Creighton) writes: >I would like ANY help/advice on purchasing a radar detector. >Experiences with any brands and factual information would be greatly appreciated. >The criteria should include the following: >1 X and K band as well as photo >2 Is the photo radar just an extension of either band or seperate.? >3 Brands and areas within the above regions would help. >4 Price... mmmm ... in Australia the top of the lines are Uniden/Cobra etc >they cost between $400-$600 Aus.Top of the range. > >Seriously,any help no matter how trivial would be appreciated. > Another thing you might want to keep in mind is what brands emit microwaves. Here in Cananda at least, the police are using radar detector detectors, supposedly these work by detecting the small amout of microwave signal generated by the detector. They are supposed to be quite effective reports are that several hundred radar detectors were confiscated in the first few weeks after introduction of the detector detectors. I have no idea which brands or models cannot be detected and i have never seen any advertise the capability, of course if it is legal to use radar detectors where you are going to drive then don't worry. Doug.McDorman@QueensU.CA
lahikain@lut.fi (Mikko Lahikainen) (06/09/91)
Are there any radar detectors which are immune to anti radar detectors ? *lahikain@lut.fi*