Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rsatmans
DJ that is awesome I am glad that our "intense" course/ massive PT are generating dialogue and helping others rethink the testing of their setups. As far as your particular setup goes it is pretty slick. I definitely can appreciate the meticulous time and thought you have put into perfecting it. I am jealous of your professionally applied veil. Go do some testing on that extreme site and report back. :cool:
Gallons of water on the flame war. Bummer!
Then...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rsatmans
I'm not claiming to be the best lidar shooter ever. Actually, I am very humbled by what others have said. I just see it as something fun and exciting. However, to your comment I would doubt I would see many PT over 600ft if any depending on the course. But from the videos you have posted I am not impressed by your shooting skills :p. Who aims 10 inches from a jammer head and claims they are the stealthiest. WEAK WEAK WEAK
It's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!!! :D:D:D
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rsatmans
DJ that is awesome I am glad that our "intense" course/ massive PT are generating dialogue and helping others rethink the testing of their setups. As far as your particular setup goes it is pretty slick. I definitely can appreciate the meticulous time and thought you have put into perfecting it. I am jealous of your professionally applied veil. Go do some testing on that extreme site and report back. :cool:
I certainly will. I'll try every combination to see if I can determine how best to beat this type of scenario. I'm curious if one jammer or the other might be better for off-axis laser attacks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rsatmans
I'm not claiming to be the best lidar shooter ever. Actually, I am very humbled by what others have said. I just see it as something fun and exciting. However, to your comment I would doubt I would see many PT over 600ft if any depending on the course. But from the videos you have posted I am not impressed by your shooting skills :p. Who aims 10 inches from a jammer head and claims they are the stealthiest. WEAK WEAK WEAK
First off, my brother was the shooter there. I suppose my brother could defend his own shooting skills, but since he's a one post chump on this forum(djrams80_2), I'll have to do it for him. Also, you are mistaking laser skills with a camera in one hand and a laser gun in the other, for normal laser skills. Trust me when I tell you that my brother tries everything he can to get PT. :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by
M6D
Gallons of water on the flame war. Bummer!
Then...
It's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!!! :D:D:D
Well, you certainly are a troublemaker, now aren't you? :p
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
djrams80
I certainly will. I'll try every combination to see if I can determine how best to beat this type of scenario. I'm curious if one jammer or the other might be better for off-axis laser attacks.
First off, my brother was the shooter there. I suppose my brother could defend his own shooting skills, but since he's a one post chump on this forum(djrams80_2), I'll have to do it for him. Also, you are mistaking laser skills with a camera in one hand and a laser gun in the other, for normal laser skills. Trust me when I tell you that my brother tries everything he can to get PT. :D
Well, you certainly are a troublemaker, now aren't you? :p
This a very interesting point. It would be easy to test which has better reception but testing which has better jamming off axis would be tough. How do you plan to test this out?
I can understand using a camera rather than free hand is much harder. Even still in light of that fact,I am not impressed. ;)
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rsatmans
This a very interesting point. It would be easy to test which has better reception but testing which has better jamming off axis would be tough. How do you plan to test this out?
I'm just going to do a bunch of runs, some with just the LIs, some with just the ZR4s and some with both systems running together.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rsatmans
I can understand using a camera rather than free hand is much harder. Even still in light of that fact,I am not impressed. ;)
I'll let him know that his shooting skills have come under scrutiny. :D
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
djrams80
I'm just going to do a bunch of runs, some with just the LIs, some with just the ZR4s and some with both systems running together
That will not be consistent at all. Maybe pulling the heads off and using a bracket like GOL used for off axis lidar testing. Shoot from a hundred feet find out then move back.
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
djrams80
Well, you certainly are a troublemaker, now aren't you? :p
I've been accused of worse. :D
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
rsatmans
That will not be consistent at all. Maybe pulling the heads off and using a bracket like GOL used for off axis lidar testing. Shoot from a hundred feet find out then move back.
I have no idea how consistent or inconsistent the data will be, but I'm sure I can get a feel for how well each works in this type of scenario. Moving my sensors is obviously not an option.
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
MEM-TEK
We also discovered that rear plate mounted LI's perform better when mounted horizontally rather than vertically.
Any difference when this was done to the front (horizontally rather than vertically)?
Thank you for this important thread. This is much needed and very valuable information :)
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
One reason I believe we are able to get consistent PT"s also is that we do not try to video through the HUD. While nice to see I believe this is inherently faulty by introducing movement of the aim point into the equation.
Re: Atlanta Jammerfest 3 Results
Quote:
Originally Posted by
category4
One reason I believe we are able to get consistent PT"s also is that we do not try to video through the HUD. While nice to see I believe this is inherently faulty by introducing movement of the aim point into the equation.
I agree with this. We do almost all of our testing with no camera to bother the shooter and most camera shots are done at the end, when we're basically done testing. HUD shots are nice, but they do make for less effective testing overall, due to shooter instability.
