BHB3@PSUVM.BITNET (11/30/89)
Would the following idea work:
Suppose the reciever horn of a detector is mounted in front of the engine grill
etc. in a hidden location. Right behind the horn would be a microwave amplifie
r circuit. That would feed into a cable. The cable would run to a well shield
ed reciever. This system would not emit the 11.5 Ghz frequency that the
radar detector detection systems use.
Brent H. Besler
FOrd Motor Scientific Res. Labwelty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) (11/30/89)
In article <89333.113354BHB3@PSUVM.BITNET>, BHB3@PSUVM.BITNET writes:
*Suppose the reciever horn of a detector is mounted in front of the engine grill
*etc. in a hidden location. Right behind the horn would be a microwave amplifie
*r circuit. That would feed into a cable. The cable would run to a well shield
*ed reciever. This system would not emit the 11.5 Ghz frequency that the
*radar detector detection systems use.
the real problem is that radar detector designers are lazy bums,
and every detector made today for X and K bands stole the basic
CMI design that uses 11.5Ghz; the detector detector boxes used
in Canada take advantage of this, as it means that they only have
to look for one single frequency. a detector used an appropriately
chosen alternative frequency (or frequencies) would not be
detectable with the current detector detector.
richard
--
richard welty 518-387-6346, GE R&D, K1-5C39, Niskayuna, New York
..!crdgw1!lewis.crd.ge.com!welty welty@lewis.crd.ge.com
``i've got a girlfriend with bows in her hair,
and nothing is better than that'' -- David ByrneBHB3@PSUVM.BITNET (12/01/89)
In article <2837372069@lewis.crd.ge.com>, welty@lewis.crd.ge.com (richard welty) says: > >In article <89333.113354BHB3@PSUVM.BITNET>, BHB3@PSUVM.BITNET writes: >*Suppose the reciever horn of a detector is mounted in front of the engine l >gril >*etc. in a hidden location. Right behind the horn would be a microwave e >amplifi >*r circuit. That would feed into a cable. The cable would run to a well d >shiel >*ed reciever. This system would not emit the 11.5 Ghz frequency that the >*radar detector detection systems use. > >the real problem is that radar detector designers are lazy bums, >and every detector made today for X and K bands stole the basic >CMI design that uses 11.5Ghz; the detector detector boxes used >in Canada take advantage of this, as it means that they only have >to look for one single frequency. a detector used an appropriately >chosen alternative frequency (or frequencies) would not be >detectable with the current detector detector. > >richard >-- >richard welty 518-387-6346, GE R&D, K1-5C39, Niskayuna, New York >..!crdgw1!lewis.crd.ge.com!welty welty@lewis.crd.ge.com > ``i've got a girlfriend with bows in her hair, > and nothing is better than that'' -- David Byrne Has anyone seen plans in Radio Electronics or Popular Electronics for a radar detector. It might be possible to make a system that used say 8 Ghz and 25 Ghz separate oscillator circuits. This would fool the RD detector. Brent H. Besler Ford Motor Scientific Res. Labs
woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods) (12/15/89)
In article <1989Dec5.125245.2627@me.toronto.edu> yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) writes: >BHB3@PSUVM.BITNET writes: >>not working at 11.5 Ghz. Of course importing detectors into Cananda is >>probably illegal, but then CMI adds to seem to hint they ship to Canada. >>If price were not an object, it would be a good product. > >Nope, not everywhere, in Alberta radar detectors are legal. I'm not too sure about this. The last time I was in Alberta (1983) they were definitely illegal, and you would be asked to back your tire onto any radar detector found on-board your vehicle. I believe that prior to 1979 or 1980 they were legal in Alberta. Definitely illegal here in Ontario. The situation in Saskatchewan is similar to that of Manitoba, if memory serves me right. (There was some discussion about this when I was home in October, but I'm not clear as to the outcome.) I've used a detector which seems to react to other detectors. The only other possible explanation for its behavior would be that every speeding truck I've met in New England is also talking on a cellular phone! Although nobody has confirmed it, the rumor is that the local highway police use this brand of detector as a detector-detector. Personally I don't like radar detectors. After a very short time you come to rely upon them, and if you forget about the tricks sometimes used, or are in un-familiar territory, you are just as likely to be caught. The best thing is to be very observant, and don't get your speed up too high. An example of a common trick used by the highway police in these parts is this: An officer stands (or sits in a vehicle) on an over-pass. When he thinks he's spotted a target, he pulls the trigger. By that time the target is past the un-marked cruiser on the side of the road, who see's the brake lights come on as the detector goes off as his partner radio's "radar contact made", or another officer down the road waits for the described vehicle and pulls it over. This works well even in heavy three lane traffic. Other tricks are parking on the up-side of a small dip in the road such that the radar signal doesn't have much range, or even parking in-line with a known "false" signal! And no, I've never been caught while using a detector, and I've not bought a ticket in over 8 years of steady driving. I have heard stories, and through careful observation saved a few friends from buying tickets. -- Greg A. Woods woods@{robohack,gate,tmsoft,ontmoh,utgpu,gpu.utcs.Toronto.EDU,utorgpu.BITNET} +1 416 443-1734 [h] +1 416 595-5425 [w] VE3-TCP Toronto, Ontario; CANADA