Close range shoots which laser jammers performs the best?

[Suf Daddy]

The Marksman has a beam which "looks" round at close ranges (under 100 feet) because of the intensity. Its (and the Ultralyte) beam are about the size of a door knob at ~<20 feet, the height of a license plate @150 feet, and 3' wide ala picket fence at 1,000 feet: "3 miliradians"

28 feet:


100 feet:


670 feet:


My "jammer' guess would be for close range:
Head placement VERY important
next would be a bright enough Tx head which cones / diverges enough to cover a lot of (hopefully reflective) surface area.

My 2 centavos
-Suf Daddy

<SNIP> I don't know how small the beam on the Marksman actually got, but it was obviously still wide enough to trigger the jammer, otherwise there would have been PT.

I was able to fool the Valentine 1 when shooting short range on fog lights or at the plate, but never the jammer.

My guess is that the beam will only get down to a certain size on some guns and never smaller.

I'd love to see an IR video of a variety of guns at say 100FT to see what the beam looked like in terms of size.

Does anyone have anything like that to post??

[Suf Daddy]

Stalker LIDAR at ~75 feet:



and

-Suf Daddy

[Suf Daddy]

ALL LIDAR guns, jammer TX heads (LED or Diode) diverge (spread)
its part of the characteristics of the beast.
-Suf Daddy

From what I understand, jammer beams are divergent.

[fulcrum]

ALL LIDAR guns, jammer TX heads (LED or Diode) diverge (spread)
its part of the characteristics of the beast.
-Suf Daddy

From what I understand, jammer beams are divergent.

I think you're missing the point.

- If you stand behind a car at 150ft, you will see the rearlights from many different positions as long as the rearlights are within your field of view. The field of view of your eyes is very large (> 120 deg) You can see the rearlights because the light diverges. (almost 180 deg?). If the diverging angle of the rearlights is equal or more than your field of view, you will see them.
- Now imaging looking at the rear of that car through a very narrow pipe, or a camera with a huge telelens. You will only see the rearlight when you point that pipe or camera exactly at the position of that light.

The field of view of a lasergun is very small, so small that at close range it will only "see" a small part of the car. This small part could be only the left headlight or your mirror where the LEO is pointing his lasergun at. In this case the lasergun will not "see" the jammer, because it is outside its FOV. (field of view) The lasergun will see its own refected laser pulse perfectly, because the diverging laserbeam fits and is aligned perfectly within its field of view.

If I put my lasergun on a tripod and aim precisely at the mirror or headlight of a car at ranges less than 450ft. I get punch through at first try always. The jammer will be triggered, but is not able to jamm the lasergun because it is outside its field of view. If I do the same test at longer ranges, then as long as I point the lasergun at any part of the car the jammer will always be within the field of view of the gun, and it will always be jammed.

At much longer ranges, some jammers are simply not powerful enough. The reflected laserlight from the gun is now much stronger than the signal from the jammer. The receiver circuit of the lasergun is able to filter away the much weaker jammer signal. (This long range issue is typical for LED based jammers)

I measured the FOV of my JenOptic lasergun. Its field of view is slightly larger then the diverging angle of its laser. The JenOptic is a relative old design, I assume the newer guns to be better. (And practical tests support this assumption, although I did not measure this in my UltraLyte or other lasergun)

[Mthman30]

I think you're missing the point.

- If you stand behind a car at 150ft, you will see the rearlights from many different positions as long as the rearlights are within your field of view. The field of view of your eyes is very large (> 120 deg) You can see the rearlights because the light diverges. (almost 180 deg?). If the diverging angle of the rearlights is equal or more than your field of view, you will see them.
- Now imaging looking at the rear of that car through a very narrow pipe, or a camera with a huge telelens. You will only see the rearlight when you point that pipe or camera exactly at the position of that light.

The field of view of a lasergun is very small, so small that at close range it will only "see" a small part of the car. This small part could be only the left headlight or your mirror where the LEO is pointing his lasergun at. In this case the lasergun will not "see" the jammer, because it is outside its FOV. (field of view) The lasergun will see its own refected laser pulse perfectly, because the diverging laserbeam fits and is aligned perfectly within its field of view.

If I put my lasergun on a tripod and aim precisely at the mirror or headlight of a car at ranges less than 450ft. I get punch through at first try always. The jammer will be triggered, but is not able to jamm the lasergun because it is outside its field of view. If I do the same test at longer ranges, then as long as I point the lasergun at any part of the car the jammer will always be within the field of view of the gun, and it will always be jammed.

At much longer ranges, some jammers are simply not powerful enough. The reflected laserlight from the gun is now much stronger than the signal from the jammer. The receiver circuit of the lasergun is able to filter away the much weaker jammer signal. (This long range issue is typical for LED based jammers)

I measured the FOV of my JenOptic lasergun. Its field of view is slightly larger then the diverging angle of its laser. The JenOptic is a relative old design, I assume the newer guns to be better. (And practical tests support this assumption, although I did not measure this in my UltraLyte or other lasergun)

First of all, what kind of jammer are you using . :?: :?:

Second of all what is your point? None of our tests are valid? Should we all throw our jammers away, or should we mount 100 heads on our vehicles in order to be safe?

Maybe your jammer isn't working properly:?:

Some jammers are just better than others. Did you stop to think that you get instant PT. because the jammer you are using isn't doing its job very well?

Your arugument is that "The jammer will be triggered, but is not able to jam the lasergun because it is outside its field of view". Are you saying that this is true for all guns? Your statement really is that unless the jammer head is in the "hot part of the beam" when a tripod is being used you will get punchthrough on any gun on a 450FT or closer shot. I'm not trying to put words into your mouth but that's esentially what you are saying.

YOU ARE WRONG

The JenOptic is a more difficult gun to defeat but that is NOT your point is it? Any of the 100pps guns are. We all know that. The L.I kicked it's ass but by your calculations it won't matter unless the jammer head is being directly targeted, correct?

Maybe Elvis or someone else can help me with this one. I've noticed no one else even commented on this one.

Well that's not true jimbonzzz did, but I guess you didn't want to hear his thoughts either.

Or am I just wrong :?: :?: :cry:

[Baxter]

Your arugument is that "The jammer will be triggered, but is not able to jam the lasergun because it is outside its field of view".
...
YOU ARE WRONG

Why the hostility? He's got a sensible argument: If the gun doesn't see the jammers' laser output then it won't be jammed, no matter how hard the jammer is trying. Instead of bluntly claiming he's wrong, how about explaining WHY he's wrong. I.e. how can a gun be jammed by light it's not receiving?

And the point, as I see it, is simply to inform us that at least some guns have nearly as narrow a dection radius as their laser beam output and that this can cause problems (PTs) in close-range situations.

I, for one, welcome this information. I could have guessed it, but knowing is always better than guessing.

[Mthman30]

Your arugument is that "The jammer will be triggered, but is not able to jam the lasergun because it is outside its field of view".
...
YOU ARE WRONG

Why the hostility? He's got a sensible argument: If the gun doesn't see the jammers' laser output then it won't be jammed, no matter how hard the jammer is trying. Instead of bluntly claiming he's wrong, how about explaining WHY he's wrong. I.e. how can a gun be jammed by light it's not receiving?

And the point, as I see it, is simply to inform us that at least some guns have nearly as narrow a dection radius as their laser beam output and that this can cause problems (PTs) in close-range situations.

I, for one, welcome this information. I could have guessed it, but knowing is always better than guessing.

The hostility? That's your interpretation.

Your statement has nothing to do with what we are talking about. The topic is about close range shots. I love your argument. The statement and the conclusion are all included in the same sentence. It's like asking someone how they can see in the dark (withouts lights, the moon etc.). The answer is that they can't. Very clever: But that's not the question either.


The question is can a jammer that jams a particular gun from 2000FT. to 0 perform the same magic if the trigger is pulled at 450FT or less.

I've done some testing myself and I've done short shot tests on multiple vehicles. If you have a good laser jammer it does not matter how far out you shoot from. Either it jams or it does not. If it will JTG from 2000FT it will JTG against the same gun if you target at 250FT and pull the trigger. I have tested this theory from multiple angles, and I'm getting ready to test a few more guns. Testing is always better than guessing, which is why I test. I'm speaking from experience, I'm not just guessing.

jimbonzzz already made his statement. He has far more experience than any of us.

Is anyone else getting PT's on short range shots when they are normally getting JTG from farther distances?

[ELVATO]

From what I was saying before by jammer beams being divergant, I meant their spread was alot more than that of a laser gun. Think jammer=floodlight, laser gun=spotlight. Therefore, the laser gun doesn't have to be "looking" at the jammer head for the jammer to jam. As long as the divergant beam is stronger than the return beam from the laser gun, it will probably jam.

At least that is how I understand it. I could be wrong ops:

[crazyVOLVOrob]

From what I was saying before by jammer beams being divergant, I meant their spread was alot more than that of a laser gun. Think jammer=floodlight, laser gun=spotlight. Therefore, the laser gun doesn't have to be "looking" at the jammer head for the jammer to jam. As long as the divergant beam is stronger than the return beam from the laser gun, it will probably jam.

At least that is how I understand it. I could be wrong ops:

Thats how I understand it as well and your argument has been proven with the single head testing done at the GOL even with the diode jammers

[charles charlie charles]

From what I was saying before by jammer beams being divergant, I meant their spread was alot more than that of a laser gun. Think jammer=floodlight, laser gun=spotlight. Therefore, the laser gun doesn't have to be "looking" at the jammer head for the jammer to jam. As long as the divergant beam is stronger than the return beam from the laser gun, it will probably jam.

At least that is how I understand it. I could be wrong ops:

Certainly makes sense.

A good analogy (IMHO!) is to get a friend to stand in front of a car with its headlights on, and ask him/her to shine a torch at you from the number plate.

Can you make it out? Or is it's lower power beam drowned out by the divergent nature of the headlights?

I think you would struggle to see anything of the torch at any distance.