Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1

    Default "Coast" mode for Jammers

    Checking out the vid's from IRCM, there is pretty convincing evidence that speed acquisitions are being obtained not via PT, but through non-detect of lasers. With that in mind, I'd like to see a sort of "coast" mode for jammers where the jamming pulses continue for a brief period after losing the signal (~1-2sec). This has the potential to really increase the effectiveness of jammers. On the downside, gun mfrs might incorporate a sniff mode where the gun shuts off for 1/3 or so of a sec to look for jamming pulses. Of course LA is already doing a pretty good number detecting jamming so would this really hurt?

  2. #2

    Default

    wont work, a jamming signal is a return signal or eco so to speak that has specific flash timing. Without a time referance point the jammer has no idea whare to start jaming sequence. if it cant see it it cant jam it.

  3. #3

    Default

    I'm thinking the coast mode would be for already detected laser. Once the jammer is working it's magic, it should be able to build a pretty good idea of the pulse train and in the absence of continuing pulses, predict reasonably well when the next pulse is going to arrive. I'm not sure how the various jammers are working but it doesn't seem like they'd only send out a pulse after the real pulse arrives (a repeater type jammer if you will). If they did, the lidar mfrs could look at the first pulse or incorporate a lead edge tracker.

  4. #4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roundstone99
    I'm thinking the coast mode would be for already detected laser. Once the jammer is working it's magic, it should be able to build a pretty good idea of the pulse train and in the absence of continuing pulses, predict reasonably well when the next pulse is going to arrive. I'm not sure how the various jammers are working but it doesn't seem like they'd only send out a pulse after the real pulse arrives (a repeater type jammer if you will). If they did, the lidar mfrs could look at the first pulse or incorporate a lead edge tracker.
    What happens when he lets go of the trigger and reshoots?

    This is a 50 ms sweep of what a PL3 waveform looks like that’s .005 seconds!! There are 8 pulses if anything changes where the jammer can no longer monitor POW instant PT

    You got a neat idea but won’t logically work.


  5. #5

    Default

    I think it'd work The problem is, how "smart" are these jammers? If they are able to ID the gun then they have the ability to accurately time the pulses. I'd just like to see the jam pulses continue briefly. If the officer lets go of the trigger and reengages, the jammer would resync on the received pulses. It's doable...just not sure the current set of jammers have the memory and computing power to perform this. I'm thinking they can with the right coding. They are already doing some type of pulse prediction...we just need them to extend a second or two. From what I've seen, the laser gun isn't jittering pulses so the jammer has a much easier job figuring out when pulses are coming.

    Nice scope BTW....have you ever considered a dual input with laser pulses superimposed with jammer pulses? I'd be interested to see if any guns do any form of active jam detection. The LA is pretty good at ID'ing jammers, it'd be nice to see how it behaves in the presence of a good jam train.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Roundstone99
    I think it'd work The problem is, how "smart" are these jammers? If they are able to ID the gun then they have the ability to accurately time the pulses. I'd just like to see the jam pulses continue briefly. If the officer lets go of the trigger and reengages, the jammer would resync on the received pulses. It's doable...just not sure the current set of jammers have the memory and computing power to perform this. I'm thinking they can with the right coding. They are already doing some type of pulse prediction...we just need them to extend a second or two. From what I've seen, the laser gun isn't jittering pulses so the jammer has a much easier job figuring out when pulses are coming.

    Nice scope BTW....have you ever considered a dual input with laser pulses superimposed with jammer pulses? I'd be interested to see if any guns do any form of active jam detection. The LA is pretty good at ID'ing jammers, it'd be nice to see how it behaves in the presence of a good jam train.
    Yes i have that’s why i know it won’t work.
    You are doing a lot of hinting and i am not willing to expose that information publicly, sorry…

    Yes i have a 4-channel 9 thousand dollar scope i have tested the ins and outs of 4 different jammers not the performance but how they work.
    One day i may even make my own just for sh*ts and grins.

    You ask pretty specific and knowledgeable questions for only having 12 posts
    I am not sure what your angle is but im not getting evolved hope you understand.

  7. #7
    Professional
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Daytona Beach, FL
    Posts
    1,406

    Default

    I do think a feature that would continue the jamming pulses for a second or two, after the laser signal was no longer detected, based on the last signals characteristics, provided no new signal was detected, would be good.

    I think the PT's we see most of the time are because the LJ no longer sees the laser beam and stops jamming, not because the LG reflections are stronger than the jammer's signals while it is jamming.

    I also agree that any discussion that could be thought of as reverse engineering must be avoided on this forum. I guess it's a fine line between knowing more to understand how things work and to best use them, and digging too deep.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by edweird
    I do think a feature that would continue the jamming pulses for a second or two, after the laser signal was no longer detected, based on the last signals characteristics, provided no new signal was detected, would be good.

    I think the PT's we see most of the time are because the LJ no longer sees the laser beam and stops jamming, not because the LG reflections are stronger than the jammer's signals while it is jamming.

    I also agree that any discussion that could be thought of as reverse engineering must be avoided on this forum. I guess it's a fine line between knowing more to understand how things work and to best use them, and digging too deep.
    i can show video of how things perform all day long but i wont expose products too many legality issues sorry but i cant share that info

  9. #9

    Default

    Unfortunately I understand the legal angle. I don't think it would be illegal to post but my wonderful opinion isn't worth much and I've seen a lot of BS DMCA lawsuits filed to shut people up. Sure, the lawsuit may not have merit, but lawyers aren't cheap.

    FYI- My "angle" is seeing how good these jammers are. I'm an ex ECM type so it's interesting to see what tricks these guys are pulling out. The only device I ever cracked open was the Blinder M-06 if you can believe. Once you've seen it on a scope, it's pretty clear how it worked. I wonder how well it would work these days since it was always transmitting (ignore all the jam codes it'd throw).

  10. #10

    Default

    Could someone test the total milliamp consumed when a police laser gun is shooting and at rest , this would give us the milliamp consumed by the laser diode , at least approximatively . (Milliamp when shooting) - (milliamp at rest) = diode consumption.

    I will do it with my Osprey and post the result.

    Do you think it could be usefull ?

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Valentine One's "L" mode...finally explained.
    By TwoLitersOfFury in forum Valentine One
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-03-2011, 11:07 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 08-22-2008, 08:22 PM
  3. CONSUMER ALERT!! Goons / Team Joke/3 selling "Unapproved" Jammers
    By eire05 in forum Laser Jammers - General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-01-2008, 02:21 AM
  4. X Band threshold for non-muted alert in "l" Mode
    By MyOwnSpiRal369 in forum Valentine One
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-01-2007, 03:02 PM
  5. RX65 K Alert "distorted" in display threat mode
    By lowdtunz in forum Beltronics
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-01-2006, 04:22 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •