Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:41:18 +0100, "Dr Zoidberg"
AlexNOOOOO!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote:
Mac <foo@bar.net> wrote:
There's a basic fact I'm missing on this. Does the jammer jam all
the time, or does it wait until it detects an incoming signal and
then start jamming?
It receives passively, and upon detecting a laser it jams it. You
also get an audio warning (which is the bit I've never heard in
several years, although the sounder does work, during the power-up
tests) and then you jump on the brakes and switch the unit off
fast, allowing the PC to get a valid reading.
So it can start jamming the signal fast enough to prevent any return
to the laser gun?
Yes, the commonly used laser speed detection devices (SDD's) send out
30-40 pulses over about a third of a second. They use least-squares on
the time of flight to calculate the speed of the vehicle. The jammer
would be active after the first few pulses are detected and produces
signals which frustrate the detector portion of the SDD.
Interesting , thanks.
Yes, bravo well done for stating the one exception to the rule. Made your"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9p87q$m2m$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:44:37 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote:
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote on 27 Jun 2005 14:04:09 GMT:
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
news:d9oush$lku$2@outcold.yadt.co.uk:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:03:15
+0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If it's
working properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a reading at
all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a reading,
I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun
cannot make it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
So, how do you stealth a car, required by law to have a reflective
numberplate on the front of it?
All states DON'T require a front plate... for example, Arizona.
Meanwhile, in uk driving groups and in the UK in general, reflective
numberplates front and rear are legal requirements on all vehicles
registered since 1973.
Incorrect , they are not required on the front of motorcycles or
motorscooters
Ooh, touchy.steve robinson wrote:
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9p87q$m2m$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:44:37 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote:
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote on 27 Jun 2005 14:04:09 GMT:
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
news:d9oush$lku$2@outcold.yadt.co.uk:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:03:15
+0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If it's
working properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a reading at
all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a reading,
I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun
cannot make it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
So, how do you stealth a car, required by law to have a reflective
numberplate on the front of it?
All states DON'T require a front plate... for example, Arizona.
Meanwhile, in uk driving groups and in the UK in general, reflective
numberplates front and rear are legal requirements on all vehicles
registered since 1973.
Incorrect , they are not required on the front of motorcycles or
motorscooters
Yes, bravo well done for stating the one exception to the rule. Made your
day has it, feel that you've added something useful and worthwhile to the
fount of human knowledge tosser?
Mark Foster wrote:
In article <d9pef6$8ev$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>,
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote:
steve robinson wrote:
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9p87q$m2m$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:44:37 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote:
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote on 27 Jun 2005 14:04:09 GMT:
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
news:d9oush$lku$2@outcold.yadt.co.uk:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005
13:03:15 +0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If it's
working properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a reading at
all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a reading,
I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun
cannot make it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
So, how do you stealth a car, required by law to have a
reflective numberplate on the front of it?
All states DON'T require a front plate... for example, Arizona.
Meanwhile, in uk driving groups and in the UK in general,
reflective numberplates front and rear are legal requirements on
all vehicles registered since 1973.
Incorrect , they are not required on the front of motorcycles or
motorscooters
Yes, bravo well done for stating the one exception to the rule. Made
your day has it, feel that you've added something useful and
worthwhile to the fount of human knowledge tosser?
Nope, just putting a brat in it's place.How do I know the PP is a brat? IfIn article <d9pef6$8ev$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>,
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote:
steve robinson wrote:
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9p87q$m2m$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:44:37 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote:
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote on 27 Jun 2005 14:04:09 GMT:
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
news:d9oush$lku$2@outcold.yadt.co.uk:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005
13:03:15 +0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If it's
working properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a reading at
all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a reading,
I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun
cannot make it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
So, how do you stealth a car, required by law to have a
reflective numberplate on the front of it?
All states DON'T require a front plate... for example, Arizona.
Meanwhile, in uk driving groups and in the UK in general,
reflective numberplates front and rear are legal requirements on
all vehicles registered since 1973.
Incorrect , they are not required on the front of motorcycles or
motorscooters
Yes, bravo well done for stating the one exception to the rule. Made
your day has it, feel that you've added something useful and
worthwhile to the fount of human knowledge tosser?
Ooh, touchy.
Actually you posted this in Alt. uk law and Uk legal which are primarly asteve robinson wrote:
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9pp5i$g64$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Mark Foster wrote:
In article <d9pef6$8ev$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>,
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote:
steve robinson wrote:
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9p87q$m2m$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:44:37 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote:
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote on 27 Jun 2005 14:04:09
GMT:
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
news:d9oush$lku$2@outcold.yadt.co.uk:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005
13:03:15 +0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If
it's working properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a
reading at all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a
reading, I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun
cannot make it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
So, how do you stealth a car, required by law to have a
reflective numberplate on the front of it?
All states DON'T require a front plate... for example, Arizona.
Meanwhile, in uk driving groups and in the UK in general,
reflective numberplates front and rear are legal requirements on
all vehicles registered since 1973.
Incorrect , they are not required on the front of motorcycles or
motorscooters
Yes, bravo well done for stating the one exception to the rule.
Made your day has it, feel that you've added something useful and
worthwhile to the fount of human knowledge tosser?
Actually there are several exceptions to the rule , if you had
bothered to look instead of sprouting crap
Perhaps if I'd said "cars and lorries" instead would that have satisfied
you? Since the motoring NG this is posted in is primarily about car
driving
my phrasing was in context. It#s tossers like you that make groups such as
this such bloody hard work. Now FOAD.
---Perhaps if I'd said "cars and lorries" instead would that have satisfied
you? Since the motoring NG this is posted in is primarily about car driving
my phrasing was in context. It#s tossers like you that make groups such as
this such bloody hard work. Now FOAD.
Perhaps if I'd said "cars and lorries" instead would that have satisfied"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9pp5i$g64$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Mark Foster wrote:
In article <d9pef6$8ev$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com>,
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote:
steve robinson wrote:
"Brimstone" <brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:d9p87q$m2m$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:44:37 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote:
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote on 27 Jun 2005 14:04:09
GMT:
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
news:d9oush$lku$2@outcold.yadt.co.uk:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005
13:03:15 +0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If
it's working properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a
reading at all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a
reading, I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun
cannot make it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
So, how do you stealth a car, required by law to have a
reflective numberplate on the front of it?
All states DON'T require a front plate... for example, Arizona.
Meanwhile, in uk driving groups and in the UK in general,
reflective numberplates front and rear are legal requirements on
all vehicles registered since 1973.
Incorrect , they are not required on the front of motorcycles or
motorscooters
Yes, bravo well done for stating the one exception to the rule.
Made your day has it, feel that you've added something useful and
worthwhile to the fount of human knowledge tosser?
Actually there are several exceptions to the rule , if you had
bothered to look instead of sprouting crap
Your "point" was no more valid than any of the other crap you you'veActually you posted this in Alt. uk law and Uk legal which are
primarly a legal discussion group so my point was valid
if you cant understand that then you must be a bigger fuckwit then
you first appeared , and its tossas likeYOU that make groups such as
this hard work now fuck off back to uk rec driving and next time ask
mommy before you come out to play with the big boys
I'm not, but don't tell him that. ;-)On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 21:46:42 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
brimstone@hotmail.com> wrote:
Perhaps if I'd said "cars and lorries" instead would that have
satisfied you? Since the motoring NG this is posted in is primarily
about car driving my phrasing was in context. It#s tossers like you
that make groups such as this such bloody hard work. Now FOAD.
---
Why are you getting so upset?
The specs I've seen were 18 inches at 1000ft.Too wide,and you could beOn Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:57:56 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote:
I've had a kit of these (four in total, two in the front and two in
the back) fitted in different vehicles over the last 4 years or so,
and not once has it picked up anything!
Radar detectors work because the radar signal is scattered off of
everything. Laser beams are very highly focused beams of light.
Unless the police point the laser at the detector, it won't
detect anything. They'll probably point it at your numberplate
to get a reading of your speed, so your detector won't notice.
At the standard operating distance the laser beam will have diverged
quite substantially, to the point that it could be a metre wide.
The Lidatek laser jammer mounts above the license plate,and one can fitThe problem with detectors and jammers is that they need to be fitted
properly. I went with my boss to see somebody about fitting an Origin
B2. The installer's detector was fitted onto the rear view mirror and
was obscured by the tint. I questioned whether this was a good idea
and the reply was "well it works when I point a Nokia phone with IR
enabled at it". Good test method then! As the range increases the
quality of installation will have a critical effect on the detection
capability. A detector and jammer *should* be fitted around the number
plate area because this is the most vertical area of a car and hence
it recommended for targetting. Apparently the reflectiveness of the
plate only has a marginal effect.
Gareth
"Wrong time of the month". ROFL. What a tango alpha roger tango."Brimstone" wrote:
Perhaps if I'd said "cars and lorries" instead would that have satisfied
you? Since the motoring NG this is posted in is primarily about car driving
my phrasing was in context. It#s tossers like you that make groups such as
this such bloody hard work. Now FOAD.
Why are you getting so upset?
All he did was bring up a couple of instances which you hadn't
covered.
So, what's so important about doing 100 MPH when 50 will get you thereGareth A. <gareth@nospam-please.attrill.co.uk> wrote in
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:57:56 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote:
I've had a kit of these (four in total, two in the front and two in
the back) fitted in different vehicles over the last 4 years or so,
and not once has it picked up anything!
Radar detectors work because the radar signal is scattered off of
everything. Laser beams are very highly focused beams of light.
Unless the police point the laser at the detector, it won't
detect anything. They'll probably point it at your numberplate
to get a reading of your speed, so your detector won't notice.
At the standard operating distance the laser beam will have diverged
quite substantially, to the point that it could be a metre wide.
The specs I've seen were 18 inches at 1000ft.Too wide,and you could be
measuring the car next to the desired one. After all,the laser spot is
invisible,and there's no method of verifying that the beam is actually
striking what you believe you're aiming it at.
The problem with detectors and jammers is that they need to be fitted
properly. I went with my boss to see somebody about fitting an Origin
...
The Lidatek laser jammer mounts above the license plate,and one can fit
additional jammers -if one can afford them.
Except that, the way I understand it, there are states that don'tIn article <Xns9682662C781E8jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.85>,
jyanik@abuse.gov. says...
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
news:d9oush$lku$2@outcold.yadt.co.uk:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:03:15 +0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If it's working
properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a reading at all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a reading,
I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun cannot make
it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
Then they arrest you for not having, modifying, or altering your
license plate. Problem solved.
So, obviously, if you are really impelled to flout the traffic safetyOn Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:44:37 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote on 27 Jun 2005 14:04:09 GMT:
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:03:15 +0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If it's working
properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a reading at all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a reading,
I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun cannot make
it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
So, how do you stealth a car, required by law to have a reflective
numberplate on the front of it?
All states DON'T require a front plate... for example, Arizona.
I don't know. What's a "human knowledge tosser"?day has it, feel that you've added something useful and worthwhile to
the fount of human knowledge tosser?
You sound like one of the nut-jobs that brought us 55-and-alive.On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:23:54 -0400, Keith Williams wrote:
In article <Xns9682662C781E8jyanikkuanet@129.250.170.85>,
jyanik@abuse.gov. says...
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
news:d9oush$lku$2@outcold.yadt.co.uk:
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:03:15 +0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If it's working
properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a reading at all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a reading,
I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun cannot make
it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
Then they arrest you for not having, modifying, or altering your
license plate. Problem solved.
Except that, the way I understand it, there are states that don't
(yet) require a front license plate.
But why put so much effort into defeating a system that's only
intended to keep you from killing people?
A couple of times a year I go out to visit my mother, which is a 1100miIf you're in _that_ much of a hurry to get where you're going, just
leave two minutes earlier. I read a write-up of a study once, or
maybe just heard it anecdotally, where they put two guys on the
road, and they told one guy, "Get there as fast as you can, and
screw the traffic laws!" and they told the other guy, "Get there
safe, and obey all of the traffic laws."
This is just too silly for words. Higher speed <> faster. Ok, if youThe fast guy, in about a 400 mile (600 km) trip, beat the law-abiding
guy by about two minutes. Less time than it takes to take a pee.
Whay don't you walk everywhere, if speed doesn't matter?So, if you're in that much of a hurry, just piss in your car!
http://neodruid.org/images/Safe-Car.gif
You must drive an *old* POS.On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 08:55:25 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Mon, 27 Jun 2005 15:44:37 +0000 (UTC), "David Taylor"
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov.> wrote on 27 Jun 2005 14:04:09 GMT:
"David Taylor" <davidt-news@yadt.co.uk> wrote in
driver@somewhere.in.the.uk.com wrote on Mon, 27 Jun 2005 13:03:15 +0100:
Incidentally, the jammer isn't supposed to be obvious. If it's working
properly, the speed gun just doesn't show a reading at all.
If they point a speed gun at you, and they don't get a reading,
I would call that obvious.
if there was no reflection of the pulses,the laser speed gun cannot make
it's measurements.
Is that "jamming"?
(no,it's stealthing)
So, how do you stealth a car, required by law to have a reflective
numberplate on the front of it?
All states DON'T require a front plate... for example, Arizona.
So, obviously, if you are really impelled to flout the traffic safety
laws, you should move to Arizona! ;-P
(Personally, I don't have a problem with going 35 in a 35 zone and
so on. And hell, my car is only calibrated to about 85!)
With you on the road, we'll need it!Good Luck!
That is just so wrong. Plenty of factors would influence the differenceThe fast guy, in about a 400 mile (600 km) trip, beat the law-abiding
guy by about two minutes. Less time than it takes to take a pee.
The fast guy was obviously not very good at going fast.If you're in _that_ much of a hurry to get where you're going, just
leave two minutes earlier. I read a write-up of a study once, or
maybe just heard it anecdotally, where they put two guys on the
road, and they told one guy, "Get there as fast as you can, and
screw the traffic laws!" and they told the other guy, "Get there
safe, and obey all of the traffic laws."
The fast guy, in about a 400 mile (600 km) trip, beat the law-abiding
guy by about two minutes. Less time than it takes to take a pee.