Behind windshield laser jammer?

[NormSky]

Because exterior mounted laser jammers deteriorate over time will we ever see interior mounted jammers? Or will laser jammers always need to be mounted near the most reflective parts?

[category4]

Who knows what the future will bring, but I don't see it in the foreseeable future!

[AirMoore]

Who knows what the future will bring, but I don't see it in the foreseeable future!

X2. I can't even imagine the sensor optics needed to make sure they pick-up all laser hits, then the brute power they would have to push out to make up for their distance away from virtually every hard-point on the front-end of a car, and make it through (what might be a dirty) windshield... I don't think complex algorithms can make-up for power (or lack of) in that case.


Granted... I think current gens of high-end jammers (Read: Blinder/LI) have been holding up very well for people, so I don't see the big issue... ALL electronics fail over time (look at our internally mounted radar-detectors)!



Lastly... there could be a system coming in the future (add-on to current jammers) which might allow us to mount the head away from "the worst" the road has to offer... not sure how much we can talk about it... so that is a feasible alternative methinks.

[Solidjake]

Who says they deteriorate?

[fatchick1o9]

I think he is referring to the lenses. The way they get scratched/pitted/hazy over time as road debris and grime effect the lenses.

[NormSky]

Exactly! The led/diode don't wear out but using them outside will eventually decrease performance. If it could be rugged behind the wipers it'll have a clear cue all the time.

[fatchick1o9]

Your concern is understood. But the problem is that Lidar pulses will hit & bounce off the forward most surfaces before it hits your jammers detector (if mounted in a location like you are thinking of). And timing is critical. The jammer has to read the pulses, interpret them, lookup the proper jamming algorithm then fire it's own pulses. The further forward the heads the more likely they will jam in time and prevent PT.

Blinder makes a head with a replaceable Lens. An Allen Key and 2 screws are all you need to replace the lens housing. Replacement lenses are inexpensive and easy to replace.

[Solidjake]

^ what he said. The shots will be at the front of the car by the plate most of the time. The jammers need to go where the shots are made

[Stealth Stalker]

...the problem is that Lidar pulses will hit & bounce off the forward most surfaces before it hits your jammers detector (if mounted in a location like you are thinking of). And timing is critical. The jammer has to read the pulses, interpret them, lookup the proper jamming algorithm then fire it's own pulses. The further forward the heads the more likely they will jam in time and prevent PT.
Exactly. At the speed of light, the return pulses from the gun will be received before the jammer pulses, which are a good four feet farther away, if behind a windshield. Perhaps an 'always on' device would solve this problem, but that bring forth a whole new set of problems.

[ZPrime]

...the problem is that Lidar pulses will hit & bounce off the forward most surfaces before it hits your jammers detector (if mounted in a location like you are thinking of). And timing is critical. The jammer has to read the pulses, interpret them, lookup the proper jamming algorithm then fire it's own pulses. The further forward the heads the more likely they will jam in time and prevent PT.
Exactly. At the speed of light, the return pulses from the gun will be received before the jammer pulses, which are a good four feet farther away, if behind a windshield. Perhaps an 'always on' device would solve this problem, but that bring forth a whole new set of problems.
So given this, does this mean that "further forward" is always better, for instance on a car with a slanted nose?

[man114]

If you wanted to see how well such a design worked, just mount some Blinder or LI heads on the dash and see how well it works. I doubt it will work well. If those are ineffective than don't expect anything further to be effective. If they're marginally effective than you'd have to ramp the power up and see what happened (maybe go from 2 to 4 heads). If that works then it can be done with some tinkering. I still think if they're going to shoot the plate you'll lose some effectiveness just on where they shoot let alone the IR the windshield absorbs.

[fatchick1o9]

yes and no.

Yes, further forward is the most ideal location but not always feasible. Especially for the people that are unwilling to modify their car.

No, if (by putting them in the forward most position) they are not "within spec" for distance from License plate and headlights. As an example I'll use my car. Take the follow measurements:

Base of windshield to ground = ~36"
Bumper (Blinder location) to ground = ~18"

So that leaves ~18"-19" between the windshield/wiper area and the License plate (normal Lidar target). Rule of thumb spec for mounting Jammer heads is "no more than 18 inches" between jammer head and License plate & headlight. So already you're getting to the outside limit of that spec which is radius of a Lidar beam @ 2000' or the diameter of the Lidar beam at 1000'. Now you have the jammer head behind a windshield that is angled (causing a percentage of the Lidar beam to be reflected and not picked up by the jammer and then you have the jammer head firing into the angled windshield causing a percentage of the oputput power to not be directed at the gun). And it just gets more complicated from there on out.

fun stuff.


http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s125/fatchick1o9/PIC_0297.jpg

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s125/fatchick1o9/PIC_0298.jpg

As you can see on my install, the heads are the at the most forward position and well with spec for distance to CM and HL. But I am more than happy to mod my car to make the install work best. Now that the heads are surrounded with a shroud and the License plate is back in place, the install looks pretty non-descript.

[upstatedoc]

fatchick- wtf car is that!?!?

[fatchick1o9]

yes and no.

Yes, further forward is the most ideal location but not always feasible. Especially for the people that are unwilling to modify their car.

No, if (by putting them in the forward most position) they are not "within spec" for distance from License plate and headlights. As an example I'll use my car. Take the follow measurements:

Base of windshield to ground = ~36"
Bumper (Blinder location) to ground = ~18"

So that leaves ~18"-19" between the windshield/wiper area and the License plate (normal Lidar target). Rule of thumb spec for mounting Jammer heads is "no more than 18 inches" between jammer head and License plate & headlight. So already you're getting to the outside limit of that spec which is radius of a Lidar beam @ 2000' or the diameter of the Lidar beam at 1000'. Now you have the jammer head behind a windshield that is angled (causing a percentage of the Lidar beam to be reflected and not picked up by the jammer and then you have the jammer head firing into the angled windshield causing a percentage of the oputput power to not be directed at the gun). And it just gets more complicated from there on out.

fun stuff.


http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s125/fatchick1o9/PIC_0297.jpg

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s125/fatchick1o9/PIC_0298.jpg

As you can see on my install, the heads are the at the most forward position and well with spec for distance to CM and HL. But I am more than happy to mod my car to make the install work best. Now that the heads are surrounded with a shroud and the License plate is back in place, the install looks pretty non-descript.


fatchick- wtf car is that!?!?

That would be my 1986 Ford Mustang LX 5.0 that I have rebuilt to be a SCCA roadracer / streetrod / daily driver.

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s125/fatchick1o9/front-cen.jpg

http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s125/fatchick1o9/HID Retrofit/PIC_0300.jpg

[Stealth Stalker]

LOL @ the bowtie :D

[fatchick1o9]

hehehhe. Yeah I did that to piss off the Ford & Chevy guys at race events. It was worth the $1.99 at the parts store.

[man114]

lmao @ the chevy logo. Reminds me of the time someone brought a Mercury Topaz into work with a BMW logo in place of the Mercury logo.