From: jeffj@krfiny.uucp (J. Jonas)
Subject: Re: Radar Detectors, and Radar Detector Detectors
Summary: no need to escalate the situation
Keywords: Radar
Organization: Jeff's house of computer pieces
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 16:06:52 GMT

>In article <92Jul23.162259edt.176@orasis.vis.toronto.edu>
	oliverb@vis.toronto.edu (Oliver Bengtsson) writes:
>>   Could someone out there please tell me how a radar detector detector
>>works? I thought that a radar detector was a passive device, nothing more
>>than a receiver tuned into detect a certain radio frequency used in radar
>>guns. If this is the case, how can they be detected?

Yes, it is a receiver.  No, it is NOT totally passive.
Superhetrodyne receivers have a local oscillator.
It tranamits a very weak signal, but it's very real and detectable.


In article <1992Jul23.204831.28487@news.columbia.edu>
	gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>>  Further, is it possible to detect radar detector detectors?

>I'm sure it is....maybe we'll soon have combination radar detectors and
>radar detector detector detectors.  The cops will, of course, be
>equipped with radar, radar detector detectors, and radar detector detector
>detector detectors.

This is starting to sound like a "Get Smart" episode
with the anti-anti-anti missle missle.
I believe that the cost of each level of counter measure is higher
than the level it's detecting, and its accuracy is lower.
Each detector radiates less power, requiring a more sensitive
detector to detect it.  There is a point of diminishing returns.

Football strategists understand this.
You have somebody with the ball.
There are opponents trying to tackle him.
You thwart the offense
1) indirectly: fake or deceive the offense to out their effort elsewhere
2) directly: block the offense
Try to take it a level beyond that and you have to take manpower
away from the direct objective into purely support roles.
That's why there's a limit on the number of players on the field
at any time.

Military thinking doesn't understand such things as limits on
manpower, supplies or money, but that's another story.
So don't declare electronic warfare on the traffic radars.

Why I don't enjoy speed traps, I feel that it is very wasteful to
wage war on police radar.  The radar is only a tool for law enforcement.
If the countermeasures get sophistocated (detectors, jammers, stealth)
then the police will up the ante and spend megabucks
on more equipment and specialists.
I'd much rather the police put their efforts into crime prevention,
but if radar is rendered effectiveless they will try other methods
of enforcing the speeding laws.  Please don't bring this upon yourself.

>Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings
>gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of
>N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
>72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877

Ah yes, Western Union.
I recently worked across the street from their building in lower Manhattan.
The building speaks of a spendor and elegance that's long past.
My grandfather was a Western Union telegraph operator so there's
some affection for the company that didn't see the handwriting on the wall...

-- Jeffrey Jonas
jeffj@synsys.uucp
-- 
-- 
Jeffrey Jonas

jeffj@synsys.uucp
Newsgroups: sci.electronics