I had two saves yesterday thanks to a rabbit about 1/4 mile ahead. Both K band.
In both instances the LEO was in a mobile coming at me. The RD burst was approxmately 2-3 seconds. I am curious what I was hit with.
Printable View
I had two saves yesterday thanks to a rabbit about 1/4 mile ahead. Both K band.
In both instances the LEO was in a mobile coming at me. The RD burst was approxmately 2-3 seconds. I am curious what I was hit with.
You were probably hit with instant-on. I believe quick trigger is defined as less than a second but it might be quicker than that.
I/O:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nbt_Q_j9crk]YouTube - Escort 9500ci and V1 3.813 vs. I/O Ka 34.7[/ame]
QT:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQsee1RrLAE]YouTube - Escort 9500ci and V1 3.813 vs. I/O Ka 35.5[/ame]
If you received it on a Belscort detector, it wasn't QT. ;)
I define QT as any radar shot that is too fast for your detector to alert to it. That could be anywhere from a fraction of a second to several seconds long.
Yes, It was recieved on a STi R. Would a V1 alert to it, albiet then too late?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
No way to tell from just the info you have given us. No detector is going to save you from point blank IO, whether you receive it or not. But the strength of the V1 is that it consistently picks up QT, so you can get the alerts as he shoots cars way ahead of yours.
Great illustrative vids snoopy. Should be required viewing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curti
I tested my STi-R with CFL and it did batter than any other belscort product I have tried. (Segmenting makes it even better against QT)
It's still not as consistent on QT as my V1 though.
Yes sir, and I can vouch for that..:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
In that case there's plenty of detector that would define C/O as QT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
I'd say Q/T is approx half a second, but defined as an officer using the minimum time possible to get a single speed reading.
Thats a terrific description.Quote:
Originally Posted by Motor OnIn that case there's plenty of detector that would define C/O as QT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
I'd say Q/T is approx half a second, but defined as an officer using the minimum time possible to get a single speed reading.
There are alot of variables including the Radar unit make, model, age and even the current weather conditions that affect the minimum time necessary to aquire a speed reading.
My old K55 X-Band needs a little over 1 second to display a speed under the best conditions while my Golden eagle gets consistent readings at .25 seconds in stationary mode. When in moving mode, the Golden Eagle takes closer to a full second to register a target speed as it first has to determine the patrol speed. Also, if the target speed is within a couple MPH of the patrol speed I just get "--" for a target speed initially........it then takes a few seconds to actually produce a target speed or I have to change my speed to get a reading at all. Hooking up the VSS cable would probably help improve Target aquistion times in moving mode by reducing the time necessary to find the patrol speed.
I've had 3 different Stalker Dual units and they varied from .25 seconds to 1 second in aquiring speeds in stationary mode. So there is variation even between units that are the same make and model. I believe the primary reason for this is as Radars pile up the power on hours the mixer diodes wear out and get noisy......thereby increasing the time necessary for the radar to produce a speed reading.
Weather conditions and even heavy traffic can also affect the time necessary for a radar to produce a speed reading. Just like worn diodes, the rain, moisture and numerous moving reflectors effectively create alot of background noise making it a little more difficult for the radar to sort through and lock onto a signal.
So this minimum time necessary to obtain a speed reading is certainly variable depending on the equipment, weather and traffic conditions.
Is IO actuated automatically by the LEO's gun when a target is spotted and QT physically 'triggered' by the LEO?
The earliest Police Radar units were all CO (Constant On) guns that transmitted a continuous signal so long as the gun was powered on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Curti
With the advent of Radar Detectors, radar manufacturers began incorporating triggers or transmit hold buttons into their units. They gave the term IO (Instant On) to units so equipped because the Radar could now be switched from non-transmitting mode to transmitting mode in an instant with a pull of the trigger or press of a button.
QT is really nothing more than a LEO pulling a very short duration "Instant On" shot with his radar. Consider it an Instant On activation followed very shortly by an Instant Off..........accomplished by just another pull on the trigger or press of the XMIT Hold button to turn off the source.
All very interesting information, thanks nine_c1.Quote:
Originally Posted by nine_c1
Ya, some units when Quick triggering using our under one second definition wont register speed at a ~.5 shot and other guns can register at ~.3.Quote:
Originally Posted by CarrotsAll very interesting information, thanks nine_c1.Quote:
Originally Posted by nine_c1
While generally 3 seconds and below is a faster then recommended (QT), one second and below fits our definition best.
"Recommended" by whom? Dude, you can't keep spouting this made-up propaganda until you find us a credible technical or LE source, in writing, that backs it up. If this is just your personal opinion of how LEOs ought to operate, then admit it to everyone. If you have an authoritative source that PROVES that IO shots are officially recommended to be greater than 3 seconds, we need to see it now.Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
No specific time frame is given.........the definition summary just says "reasonable amount of time".Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker"Recommended" by whom? Dude, you can't keep spouting this made-up propaganda until you find us a credible technical or LE source, in writing, that backs it up. If this is just your personal opinion of how LEOs ought to operate, then admit it to everyone. If you have an authoritative source that PROVES that IO shots are officially recommended to be greater than 3 seconds, we need to see it now.Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
If you read through all the attached information, any reasonable person would conclude that a valid tracking history requires a minimum of 3-5 seconds to obtain. Heck.........this is exactly why every radar manufacturer puts the track through lock feature on every unit made today.
However, the point is moot if the LEO is certified and all you have is "my RD never alerted........therefore he QT'd me and didn't get a valid traffic history". Since Radar Detectors do not have judicial notice and we are not considered an "expert" witness...........your a snowball in a very hot place with this argument.
Ref. Info:
Tracking History
Six supportive elements (audio and visual) are involved in the valid
identification of a target vehicle. Together, these supportive elements
comprise what is referred to as a complete tracking history. These six
elements are:
1) Visual Observation and Estimation of Speed. An operator must be
able to visually identify the target vehicle, and to estimate its speed at
greater than the speed limit.
2) Doppler Audio. An operator must correlate the tone of the Doppler
audio with visual observations and estimation of speed of a target
vehicle.
3) Target Speed Display. An operator must establish that the target
speed displayed corresponds with the visual estimation of speed and
the Doppler audio output.
4) Within Operational Area of the Beam. An operator must establish
that the target vehicle was within the operational area of the beam at
the time the target’s speed was displayed.
5) Patrol Speed Verification (moving mode only). An operator must
establish that the radar’s patrol speed display corresponds with the
independently calibrated patrol speedometer at the time a target
vehicle’s speed is being monitored.
6) Faster/Slower Mode Verification (same-direction mode only). An
operator, while monitoring a target vehicle’s speed in the samedirection
mode, must establish that the radar is clocking in the proper
Faster/Slower mode. By gradually varying the patrol speed up or
down a few mph, the operator shall verify that there is no
corresponding change in the target speed display. When the radar has
correctly computed the target speed, changes in the patrol vehicle
speed will not affect the target speed display. If the incorrect Faster/
Slower mode is being used, the target vehicle speed will
correspondingly go up and down with the acceleration and
deceleration of the patrol vehicle. Regardless of the cause, rapid target
window fluctuations are not acceptable for enforcement purposes.
The actual sequence in which the elements of the tracking history occur is unimportant. It is vital, however, that all of the necessary elements be present. It is also necessary that the tracking of the target vehicle take place over a reasonable amount of time, so the operator knows it is not a spurious reading.
BTW..........here is the link where I obtained the above definition. It is an EXCELLENT course on Police Radar.
Here is the LONG LONG Training module directly from the NHSTA.
Okay, using the reference that you provided -- which we both accept as authoritative -- let's put this QT debate to bed for good:
What that says is:Quote:
There have been claims that a power surge occurs when the RADAR unit is first switched on from the hold switch position and that this power surge will result in inaccurate and supposedly high readings. Recent tests conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) indicated that no false readings were noted during their tests. In digital type RADAR, the verification circuitry prohibits the RADAR reading from being displayed until a sampling is done over a period of time sufficient to analyze the signal to make certain that it is a Doppler signal rather than electrical noise. This precludes the RADAR from reading a high number, or any number in fact, until the signal is stabilized. The anti-detector switch effect is not a factor in modern RADAR operation, but it is emphasized that the target should be observed for a period of time prior to the reading being obtained and sufficient information should be obtained to develop target history to support any alleged violation.
1. Quick trigger results in consistently accurate readings.There you have it, folks. Straight from the authoritative source. This whole nonsense about QT being "illegal", "not allowed", "not recommended", "against the book", or any of the other hyperbole that the Escort fans keep pulling out of their backsides is a lie. It's a lie perpetrated by Escort and their fanboys in order to gloss over their serious inadequacies, rather than just fix them.
2. The RADAR unit itself computes what your "reasonable time" is to get an accurate reading, not you.
3. You do not have to trigger for any specific or prolonged period of time.
4. Quick trigger is not a factor in inaccurate readings.
5. All that is necessary to accompany your Quick Trigger readings is your visual estimation and audible tracking.
Just like nine_c1 said, even if the lie were truth, it would still be a moot point, because you're still going to get a ticket, and you're still going to lose in court. And the only way to prevent that is to buy the right detector in the first place.
[/debate]
LOL!Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
I told you it was great reference material and that's a terrific excerpt you quoted.
However, I think that really only pertains to the radar unit itself generating a spurious signal........or chirp.......when coming out of hold mode (I believe it is entirely accurate in that I have never seen a target speed reading fluctuate from the instant of coming off hold). There is still the possibility of outside interference or the radar itself bouncing between multiple returns which is why a tracking history is still advised. This is why the manufacturers still boast of the 3rd window on their units being capable of "read thru lock" which, in their own words, provides a superior tracking history.
But the final point is..........as you say..........a ticket that will stick.
Now as to what detector is best is still, in my opinion, somewhat tied to your geography and local police habits.......an argument much broader than just QT.
I know the characteristics of the V1 and RedLine very well and fully believe I'm better protected by the RedLine in my area. On the other hand, I would certainly not push that opionion on anyone in the Southwest or Texas unless your dealing with RedFlex Radar vans.;)
What's the difference between POP and QT? I've tried searching but can't find a post detailing the differences...
POP is a digital preprogramed signal burst that cannot be solely used to issue a ticket (ticket won't stick as discussed above)Quote:
Originally Posted by deljaso
Q/T is a user actuated
What he said. Although I disagree about the ticket not sticking.
See below, IMO its more of a generalization below 3 sec is QT. We were defining the time for our purpose, not debating QT. I don't believe QT is 3 seconds but as i stated QT at ~1 sec and below fits our purposes best as it has been stated before.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker"Recommended" by whom? Dude, you can't keep spouting this made-up propaganda until you find us a credible technical or LE source, in writing, that backs it up. If this is just your personal opinion of how LEOs ought to operate, then admit it to everyone. If you have an authoritative source that PROVES that IO shots are officially recommended to be greater than 3 seconds, we need to see it now.Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
1 sec and below fits our definition of QT, i know i wouldn't want the definition of QT to be up to 3 seconds.:cool:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucky225Ugh my google fu is not being nice to me, I can't find anything at the moment, but I'm fairly sure NIST/IACP standards say 3 seconds as well, I'll have to check later tho as I'm going to sleep maybe I'm wrong this time.. I did find an Australia NSW gov document that says it must be 3 seconds tho;Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
Quote:
Originally Posted by http://www.ombo.nsw.gov.au/publication/PDF/specialreport/Speedometers%20and%20speeding%20fines.pdf
Seems to me that long laundry list you shortened and spun supports a longer amount of time, supporting a recommended tracking of longer then 1 second at the very least. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
Well it won't stick the second someone brings the MPH manual into court that says POP is unreliable enough that it cannot be used to issue a citation. Of course you've got to prove it was POP, as a result of the guilty until proven innocent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
Exactly. No officer is going to admit that, so it's moot.
Microwave and Laser Radar
Typical Timing
.
Microwave and laser traffic radar minimum time (integration or sample period or time) to track a target varies with model from about a quarter of a second (250 milliseconds = 250 ms) to a half of a second (500 ms) or more.
250 ms = 1/4 sec = 4 samples / sec
333 ms = 1/3 sec = 3 samples / sec
500 ms = 1/2 sec = 2 samples / sec
Try clapping at the rate of 3 or 4 times per second to see how fast 3 or 4 samples per second really is, and how little time one has to react to such a short duration signal. In many cases a radar or ladar may require more than 1 sample period to establish a target's speed.
Police Traffic Radar Handbook
I found this info on the above site. It claims to be a handbook of sorts. I am sure somebody here has already looked at this, and I don't claim to be an expert or make claims that this is correct info, however it supports the theory that 250ms is possible. 1/2 second is more likely...
Are you saying cops lie? No way!!!! We had that much frittered out a long time ago, just read the LEO forums! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker
Bottom line: It doesn't matter if its legal or not, or if its in the books. A cop can give you a ticket for smelling bad if they want to.
If QT is used in your area get a V1 or Whistler. (Or maybe STi-R: http://www.radardetector.net/forums/...s-ka-k-qt.html)
Absolutely. However it does matter if its legal or not, if what hes doing is not legal you can get it thrown out and get the officer reprimanded. You just need the balls to do it, and be smart enough to prove it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide
Or you could just buy a competent radar detector in the first place, and avoid all the expense and hassle.Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
Very true! Too bad i haven't found one yet, but ill keep looking. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth StalkerOr you could just buy a competent radar detector in the first place, and avoid all the expense and hassle.Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
True, but the officer still succeeded at putting you through hell.Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238Absolutely. However it does matter if its legal or not, if what hes doing is not legal you can get it thrown out and get the officer reprimanded. You just need the balls to do it, and be smart enough to prove it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide
Alot of people add a V1 to an M3 remote to supplement. What do you think about adding a whistler 78SE?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth StalkerOr you could just buy a competent radar detector in the first place, and avoid all the expense and hassle.Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
Actually, the only problem with the V1 is that it is too competent! :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
Add it to what, the V1 or the M3?Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide
The M3Quote:
Originally Posted by Stealth StalkerActually, the only problem with the V1 is that it is too competent! :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by CJR238
Add it to what, the V1 or the M3?Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide
I don't see any advantage to running a V1 / Whistler combo as the V1 is superior in just about all aspects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide
An M3 / Whistler duo combines the outstanding range of the M3 with excellent reactivity of the Whistler..........a good mix.
The M3 / V1 combination still provides the ultimate in Radar protection provided the M3 is a remote model and it's a good install. If your like me and prefer windshield mounts, then running a combo is out of the question.........you have to pick one and bear your cross (less range or slower reactivity).
I meant an M3/78SE combo, the 78SE has a much shorter detection distance for the spectre than the V1Quote:
Originally Posted by nine_c1I don't see any advantage to running a V1 / Whistler combo as the V1 is superior in just about all aspects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide
An M3 / Whistler duo combines the outstanding range of the M3 with excellent reactivity of the Whistler..........a good mix.
The M3 / V1 combination still provides the ultimate in Radar protection provided the M3 is a remote model and it's a good install. If your like me and prefer windshield mounts, then running a combo is out of the question.........you have to pick one and bear your cross (less range or slower reactivity).
Ah yes.........sorry, I didn't see your previous response.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiptideI meant an M3/78SE combo, the 78SE has a much shorter detection distance for the spectre than the V1Quote:
Originally Posted by nine_c1I don't see any advantage to running a V1 / Whistler combo as the V1 is superior in just about all aspects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide
An M3 / Whistler duo combines the outstanding range of the M3 with excellent reactivity of the Whistler..........a good mix.
The M3 / V1 combination still provides the ultimate in Radar protection provided the M3 is a remote model and it's a good install. If your like me and prefer windshield mounts, then running a combo is out of the question.........you have to pick one and bear your cross (less range or slower reactivity).
I recently drove through VA with the RedLine and it did a fantastic job. Even though it's 100% stealth I was still paranoid as hell (a Sheriff road my tale for several miles).:p I'd have really been freaked out if I had a detectable RD in the car!
Haha yeah thats why I started with the STi-R, I know not that many cops have spectres but its more for my sanity/paranoia. I don't want to have to be like OMG cop hit kill switch quick...Quote:
Originally Posted by nine_c1Ah yes.........sorry, I didn't see your previous response.Quote:
Originally Posted by RiptideI meant an M3/78SE combo, the 78SE has a much shorter detection distance for the spectre than the V1Quote:
Originally Posted by nine_c1I don't see any advantage to running a V1 / Whistler combo as the V1 is superior in just about all aspects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide
An M3 / Whistler duo combines the outstanding range of the M3 with excellent reactivity of the Whistler..........a good mix.
The M3 / V1 combination still provides the ultimate in Radar protection provided the M3 is a remote model and it's a good install. If your like me and prefer windshield mounts, then running a combo is out of the question.........you have to pick one and bear your cross (less range or slower reactivity).
I recently drove through VA with the RedLine and it did a fantastic job. Even though it's 100% stealth I was still paranoid as hell (a Sheriff road my tale for several miles).:p I'd have really been freaked out if I had a detectable RD in the car!
As one forum member stated in a post where I asked where did quick trigger come from, the member stated, he read it a few years ago by someone, maybe who just described the action as a quick trigger, fast on the gun? To me, quick trigger is an action by an officer, only. Quick trigger is just a means to do a fast I/O-off. I get I/Oed by troopers and the radar burst will last 3-5 seconds, which is just a mode by that unit, manufactor settings. But I/O can be turned on and left on. Quick trigger has got connected to Stalker radars for the 1/2 second burst which is faster than normal I/O burst as we assume it. A quick trigger can be any length of time, same as I/O. To trigger something can be done by a lot of ways. The word I/O is used alot now but is it a real standard? QT is not a standard. Both can be any length according to that manufactor mode for a limited burst or fast on the trigger finger...:)