On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 00:31:01 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com Gave us:
You're an idiot. One thing, they don't half to hit a license plate, nor do they have to do so at a half mile range.
Also, a laser is a constant beam and can be accurately aimed over several miles. There are planes over Iraq right now that can track and lase 100 targets at one time from several tens of miles away.
Give it up, dumbass.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 00:33:21 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com Gave us:
No. You're an idiot. "Score a direct hit" is proof of that.
They are optically "scope" aimed, and then the test (trigger) is actuated. The aimed at target is the only target struck, and the test doesn't produce a readout if the test didn't proceed correctly.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 04:45:11 GMT, "Homer J Simpson" Gave us:
Wrong, you retarded twenty blank lines after every post twit!
The radars NEVER had targets. They ALWAYS had a FOV (field of view) or FOS Field of Sensitivity. Lasers are the only devices that have ever had specific targets.
That means that BY DESIGN, they only report the fastest element moving in said field during said test run. "Test" means "use".
What they were notorious for is the stupid cop picking the wrong target (moving element) as the culprit for the speed reading garnered from the gun's use..
On 27 Oct 2006 08:40:26 -0700, "Richard Henry" Gave us:
Yes. However, at the speeds cars travel, the error generated is less than a single MPH. If the targets were mach speed jets, the error would be more than negligible. With this scenario, it is 100% negligible.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 09:36:26 -0700, Jim Thompson Gave us:
What I should be ignoring is retarded posts like this one that makes claims, yet provides zero backing for them.
Tell us, oh guru of RF emissions, what error is introduced in a test result of 60 MPH with a car moving at 60 MPH.
At one degree angle of incidence:
At ten degrees:
At 45 degrees:
At 90 degrees:
The pulse goes out at the speed of light (nearly) and is actually a serial train of pulses. Several pulse trains are sent during a single test, and the doppler electronics inside the gun perform the deterministic result.
So tell us, asshole... What amount of error can we expect to see for sub 100 MPH cars?
What amount of error would we expect to see for mach speed jets passing into the field of sensitivity for the device?
Can't answer those questions? Then f*ck off, asshole.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 12:39:06 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com Gave us:
You're an idiot.
The cop is supposed to observe the driving habit of the suspect as well.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:01:47 -0700, Charlie Edmondson Gave us:
Absolutely false.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 10:01:47 -0700, Charlie Edmondson Gave us:
Absolutely false!
A laser has only one target, and that target is optically selected by the cop. There are no errant target selections with the laser gun. And getting it right is quite easy, and they do not shift targets during the sampling. Aiming a laser is easier than pointing your f****ng finger.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 22:03:49 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com Gave us:
Actually, that is the very thing that cops in many states do.
The one time I was cited for speed by radar, I was shown the reading on the gun.
On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 22:07:41 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com Gave us:
The pulse train has a header in each test frame. All falsely generated light pulse trains are ignored.
No, but the FAA does. Try pointing your simple laser pointer at the county sheriff's helicopter next time it passes over, and see what you get charged with.
Also, it is not called a transmission. With light, it is referred to as radiation, or a radiant emission.
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
But many state laws do. Even if just called "interfering with police enforcement".
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
Then one has to ask why the speed measurement guns do not print out a receipt/ticket for evidence?? It's not difficult to do these days. They could even include a .jpg of the target vehicle,with the data at the bottom,like a date/time stamp.
Probably because few speeding tickets are successfully challenged in court, but it would be an excellent idea.
Best regards, Spehro Pefhany
Boy hippie to girl hippie: "Ever been picked up by the fuzz?" "No, but I bet it really hurts."
Anybody else find it tiresome explaining jokes to the dull?
Thansk, Rich
My question was rhetorical, and your answer shows you don't know what you are talking about.
All of this pulsed doppler radar technology stems from the radars designed to shoot down airplanes (in WWII) and the process is called "fire control' The rest of your profane rant only demonstrates how little you know
To say you can get an accurate doppler shift from a target that is shot from the side is an example. All radar can do is indicate rate of closure or departure. When it is at 90 degrees from the direction of travel that rate is exactly ZERO. It will then increase as the cosine of range and speed as the angle decreases
if your laywer could sucessfully argue that the speed you were doing was safe you could escape that one without paying. (such happened in Australia)
Bye. Jasen
not a bodily part.
a small bomb to open a door. (crack a safe?) or flatulence.
Bye. Jasen
On 28 Oct 2006 09:07:38 -0700, "Richard Henry" Gave us:
You're an idiot.
I'm amazed at the number of people who have replied as serious as a heart attack to what I intended to be a joke. Hell, I probably knew what "hoist by his own petard" meant before most of you whippersnappers could even talk!
Am I gonna have to 'splain all my phony names I use for fun stuff? I like to reserve the techie name, "Rich Grise" for techie stuff, because I am available for consulting. But when I'm clowning around, I like to forewarn people - there's no body language or facial expressions on USENET, except smileys. )-; [
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required