-
-
- That one I don’t know, but I did see another short article once years ago in a US car magazine (Car and Driver or Road & Track) about how US navy pilots were using one of the Cincinatti Microwave (Escort/Passport) radar detectors in the planes during training exercises. The reason had to do with the fact that missile targeting radar was one of the same frequencies used for speed radar guns. I can’t remember much of the details, except that the article was titled something like “Detecting Smokey at 40,000 Feet”. The radar detector used was a dual-band, and one came back for warranty service to the manufacturer and they found that one of the band antennas had been disabled by drilling a hole right in through the casing in the exact spot where the drill bit would cut the lead to the one antenna the Navy didn’t want to work.
~
- That one I don’t know, but I did see another short article once years ago in a US car magazine (Car and Driver or Road & Track) about how US navy pilots were using one of the Cincinatti Microwave (Escort/Passport) radar detectors in the planes during training exercises. The reason had to do with the fact that missile targeting radar was one of the same frequencies used for speed radar guns. I can’t remember much of the details, except that the article was titled something like “Detecting Smokey at 40,000 Feet”. The radar detector used was a dual-band, and one came back for warranty service to the manufacturer and they found that one of the band antennas had been disabled by drilling a hole right in through the casing in the exact spot where the drill bit would cut the lead to the one antenna the Navy didn’t want to work.
-
It is a UL. Link: Snopes
If so, that’s either a poorly-designed radar beacon, or a poorly-designed headlight reflector. A radar beacon is designed to reflect a beam directly back to the source, and for that purpose the ideal shape is three planes intersecting at right angles. For a headlight reflector, however, you want to take light from an (approximately) point source, and direct it into a straight beam, and for that purpose, the ideal shape is a paraboloid.
**un-**able. Dammit. Thanks folks I was highly suspicious.
Toyota has already built at least one “stealth car.” In 1983. The humble 2 door corolla coupe. Mine is routinely over 80mph on the freeways here in Denver and not once have the po-leece nabbed me. And this despite their setting numerous speed traps which enjoy a great deal of success on other, less technologically simple vehicles. Actually I think they just don’t believe it’s MY car giving them the reading. Ok, maybe not stealth then, but what would you call a system that frames other motorists?
Thanks for the responses. Now, about my steam-driven mechanical man…
I can’t speak to the specific story here that others have debunked, but I do know a bit about fighters and radars vs ground-based radar detectors, having flown F-16s for several years for the USAF.
The F-16’s radar (AN/APG-66) was pretty typical for late 1980’s fighter radar and it would display trucks and cars on the freeways easily if you adjusted the antenna tilt down to scan the ground. It had a quick scan rate so from the ground vehicles’ perspective, they’d get hit by a millisecond or two of energy every few seconds. Probably not enough to trigger any radar detector the driver had.
Like most digital Doppler radars, the F-16 radar was designed to filter out any signals from items moving less than about 75mph. That was the principal way the radar filtered out the signals bouncing back off the ground itself. By filtering out that background, what was left to display was the moving targets of potential interest to the pilot.
At any rate, our normal training areas included several freeways out in the boonies with light traffic where folks would cruise at 80, 90, even occasionally 100 mph. So whenever we’d see a ground target on the radar, we knew they were breaking the speed limit by a good margin.
Just for fun, we’d put the radar cursor over their target & hit “designate”. The radar would then try to lock on to their car/truck. That put out a concentrated blast of RF for a couple of seconds which usually set off their radar detectors.
Meanwhile, once we got lock-on, our computer would be caculating several parameters for the “intercept”, including their groundspeed. We’d see 90, then 85, then 80, then they’d disappear completely from the screen as they slowed towards the then-55 mph speed limit.
But to us it looked like we’d put the radar on them, hit the “Kill” button and they’d all-but-instantly blown up and disappeared. It was always good for a laugh later at the bar.
I always wondered what they thought when waay out in the middle of nowhere, their detector suddenly screamed, they got a major adrenaline jolt, slammed on the brakes and then they never found any cop cars. Such fun.
On another note, the radar warning system of the F-16 would have reacted if a cop had shot us with his radar gun. We’d have gotten an audio alert and an azimuth + estimated range display. We didn’t carry any radar homing missiles in those days, though some F-16s do now.
I’d be very skeptical that any fighter’s systems anywhere would be set up for fully automated launch. Automated target selection and threat prioritization, sure, but actually releasing ordnance, even in combat, is still a 100% man-in-the-loop decision.
But could a Tornado or HARM-equipped F-16 or F-18 blow a cop & his radar to smithereens if the cop was playing with his radar gun in a combat area? You bet. There’s an old military saying: never bring a knife to a gun fight. This would be an example of that to the umpteenth degree.
Modern traffic radars use spread-spectrum techniques. You’ll need some very sofisticated counter-measure equipment to make the radar show a specific speed. The most you can do is to emmit a lot of broadband noise and prevent the radar from getting a definite speed.
There was a review years ago in Car & Driver of the sportcars with the smallest radar profiles. IIRC the low slung, fiberglass bodied Corvette had the least noticable radar profile.
hello. i found this thread, upon googling if carbon fiber absorbed or defeated radar gun.
after reading this. and i guess learning that activating or employing electronic counter measures to thwart, disable or defeat speed calculating radar devices…
id like to share a story i heard a long time ago back in 93 lol. a co worker at the time( i no longer work at that job or with this person) was telling me that he beat radar detection and or destroyed radar guns by using a fish finder.
im no expert but on wave signal types and what theyd do to each other, if like in ghost busters you so to speak “crossed the streams” as there must be a reason sonar waves are sent downward into water and used by ships and radar is used above water and used typically in aviation or detecting things above sealevel and the two never cross paths. lol
i cant seem to exactly recall the reasoning for it though at moment .
again this is just myself wanting to know if this holds any amount of authenticity to it as to defeating radar. it sounds initially or on surface that projecting sonar waves which as i want to say are stronger slower but wider or longer signal wave and radar is a shorter wave signal but travels faster correct it doesnt sound like a very safe thing to do without possibly injuring the officer if they were holding the radar gun
If you have an EMP bomb device on top of your car, at the moment you suspect that someone is trying to measure your speed, you detonate the device.
Assuming that you are still alive and that your car still functions after the EMP blast, you will be able to get away without having had your speed measured.
As indicated upthread, although there may be methods of spoofing the signal from the radar gun that might work, they’re pretty much all illegal so the discussion is moot.
lol you wont get very far afterward unless your traveling in a human powered vehicle though
i guess in summation
what would happen to either device if anything, if you sent sonar and radar wave signals on a head on collison path? or is that grounds for new thread?
Why would you expect anything at all to happen, since sonar uses sound and radar uses radio waves?
By the way, your shift key appears to be broken.
Further, it had a quirk in its design that helped.
Apparently, big vertical metal surfaces reflect the microwave radar really well. Go figure.
On a C3 Corvette, the radiator (the first big metal object radar from the front will find) is tilted back (I believe 15 degrees).
Reportedly, this frequently makes a Corvette seem (to the radar) to be going slower than it actually is. I don’t see how that would work.
But I could see it making the reflected signal reaching the radar gun weaker, as some of the signal is being reflected upwards and will miss the gun, and that could prevent the gun from getting a reading until the car is much closer.
It is almost certainly possible, although as many have pointed out probably not practical.
As has been pointed out, active jamming is totally doable, and totally illegal (need an FCC license to broadcast on those frequencies, among other things).
Radar absorbent paint and materials probably can’t do the job all on its own.
But yeah, applying the lessons from the F-117 about using shapes that reflect radar away at odd angles instead of back to the sender and avoiding shapes that show up really well on radar, you should be able to make a car that reflects so little radar back to the sender as to make a standard radar gun pointless.
And like the F-117, it will look really freaky and cost a whole lot to build. 
So nobody ever got a speeding ticket prior to the introduction of the radar gun in 1947? Bah!
Relatives who were cops have told me many ways they identified speeders, even without radar guns:
- there are various places on their beat where they know the distance between certain points, like from one cross street to the next, and know that if a car travels that in less than x seconds, they are over the speed limit.
- they have enough practice to get pretty good at estimating the speed of cars they see going by.
- finally, there is the believability of police testimony in a traffic court – police testify in court regularly, they are experts on traffic control, and they are perceived to have less reason to lie than the ticketed driver. So their testimony is usually believed.
You could probably get away with going 35 mi/hr in a 30 zone right past police officers, but much faster and they will pull you over, radar or no radar. They will issue a ticket, and then you can take the time & effort to fight it in court.
Your friend was bullshitting you.
Most radio frequencies are significantly attenuated by water (whereas sound carries very well); the reason for using one and the other is nothing at all to do with problems mixing sound and radio waves - they are different phenomena from each other and do not conflict or interact with one another.
I remember a similar article in either Car & Driver or Road & Track from the late 1980s.
ETA: Or was it Zombie Digest?