not sure they go quick enoughOriginally Posted by Crash
not sure they go quick enoughOriginally Posted by Crash
So IŽll just get a budy to push me in the backOriginally Posted by lordhamster
whaqt i do know is if you go over 150 they dont flash at all!!
Probably the exposure on the film is too slow, so you just have a blur?!
Now what you would want is a Yugo, but strap a used fighter jet motor to the back and let it run
And run myself into a cliff face at 600 mph? Mmmmmm... InterestingOriginally Posted by SmaartAasSaabr
To defeat the Multanova, go above 250Kmph.
Not sure about the hard braking, i've tried that before (almost enough to engage ABS) and it did not work... so...
Has anyone tried the attachment horn to the X50? They say in Europe it increases range 2-4X against Photoradar!!! Anyone try?
2-4x??? Goodbye Valentine, hello Mr. X50Originally Posted by nvr2fast
I'm not sure of the link etiquette yet as I'm new here but I read a case study page a while back that indicated radar in general had to have a consistent (within a certain range) speed in order to get a reading. If you were to deaccelerate at a speed greater than this threshold, the radar could not get a lock/reading. It was listed as 1mph/sec but to me that doesn't sound like very much at all. Heck some cars loose that much speed just going up hill I do think there has to be a legitimate number though. Even lidar, from my information, has to get two readings and then divides to get speed. If it can't get the first or the second because of a rapid speed change, then it shouldn't be able to get a reading.Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
So the trick is, maximum braking applied before the gun gets a reading? My reflexes are getting slower with age so I guess someone must come up with a device that hooks directly to the cars braking system to automatically brake when needed at a rate greater than the guns can get a reading (if possible). Some of the new vehicles like the higher end MB are getting electrical braking systems so this concept wouldn't really be that hard to implement. Takes away the human reaction time and gives maximum braking. 8) Of course there are some downsides and risk to this but wouldn't that be the next step?
In my opinion those who believe that braking is the solution are correct. At least in two points: 1. - by braking hard you quickly get within the speed limit , 2. - all classic radars, regardless of the band they operate on use classic Doppler effect, that is, as you all know, the microwaves hitting against hard surface and comparation of signal's return timing to put it simple. As Just Right said, there is a threshold of when the measurement is securely and surely implemented - this is definitely not possible if the vehicle is either de- or accelerating above this threshold. Considering multanovas 6-12 meters (depending on the setup and measuring head position) field of measurement you can easily be parallel to the radar car or tripod and it still won't measure you (if the car is turned in your driving direction - the other way around and you are of course measured earler). Hard braking in this case means rapid decceleration and therefore - no measurement, but, be warned, since braking has to be consistent (until you get out of radar sheaf) and intensive, you may get fined for endangering the traffic safety... You can still blame the cat or a dog running across the street though
Just my thoughts. And a little knowledge from my police friend (he operates Multanova 6F). And from this webiste, explaining Czech radars Ramer-7. An old site with loads of useful information.
I'm new to forum and hope to be able to contribute anything useful...
I think it was something like 1m/s^2 but likely more.Originally Posted by Just Right
Bookmarks