Police Radar Detection

[eeroborroc]

.

Edited September 13, 2013 by eeroborroc

[Absinthe]

I don't think that they can detect if you are using one or not. This would only be possible if it was emitting some kind of signal, ie. transmitting something, which I highly doubt for a "detector." As for the legality, they're probably illegal to use, but I'm not certain on this. Could be like musical airhorns, legal to buy, legal to own, but illegal to use in your car.

EDIT: Let us know how it goes if you try it. I was wondering a while ago if old one's would still work or perhaps the police are using different radar frequencies now...

[ 21. August 2005, 08:14: Message edited by: Cacti Master ]

[Torsten]

yes, they CAN indeed detect cloaked radar detectors. All radar detectors emit a frequency and are hence detectable. Cloaking was supposed to prevent this, but an australian company found a way around this and is selling the detector detector to authorities in australia, Canada and now the USA.

I haven't looked into this issue for about a year, so there may have been some changes since then. At the time there were no fully undetectable units available. There was an australian company trying to manufacture one, but I don't think they went ahead. None of the overseas companies were interested at the time because the new detector detector hadn't been exported anywhere. Now that the new tech is in use in Canada and possibly the USA I would expect new units to become available.

My partner Daniel was the first AND probably second person to be caught by the new technology. The first patrol car with the new tech was deployed in the Byron Shire for Highway duties. Because we use the highway every day he was caught the first day the new tech was on duty. He had to surrender the $1000 detector unit and was fined $1000 even though he was not speeding.

3 days later he borrowed my car and forgot to turn the detector off and got done again. $1000 detector gone and $1000 fine.

After losing $4000 we can say with all certainty that the detector detector units exist

[ 21. August 2005, 08:52: Message edited by: Torsten ]

[Skulking Lurker]

Ahh, the joy to be in WA, where they are legal to operate.

I've only been done twice in 15 years, and that was because the music was up too loud.

New units pay for themselves within a month or two.

[Torsten]

I am pretty sure they are not legal to operate in WA. I believe they are legal to own and import there. I bought my units from WA.

[apothecary]

Yes, they have radar detector detectors.

But a good quote is:

"Screw slowing down when the RD beeps, I just need it to know when to stash the blunt!"

[Evil Genius]

Some people i know sewed these devices into some spectacle cases so the police couldn´t see them. I´m pretty sure they can´t locate these devices technically. It´s getting problematic when the police spots them so you better hide them.

[Torsten]

Evil Genius - the detector detector can pin point the exact car that the detector is mounted in, even in relatively dense traffic. In fact, it can detect the locations exactly as accurately as it can detect the speed of each car.

Once the cop has a reading he then has the right to search your car - to the point of ripping bits off. My detector was in 4 parts. One small sensor mounted into a bracket of the bumper bar - totally invisible without taking the bumper off. The switch was one of the buttons on my radio. The beeper was mounted into the headrest, and the control unit was screwed in behind the fusebox. It took a professional radar detector installer 2 hours to find all the part once! But that all didn't help all that much. The cop actually doesn't have to take the whole unit. He will happily walk away with the controller alone and issue you with a 7 day notice to surrender. We still had a couple of old obsolete units at home so we simply handed those in and got replacement controllers

btw, if the cop doesn't find your detector and you won't surrender it then he can impound your car. If the detector is found you have to pay for the towing, mechanic, the whole detector and the fine. This happened to another friend of mine. He got flashed while not speeding. He managed to turf the controller out the window without being seen. The told the cop he didn't have a detector, thinking that a non-working set up would not count. he took the matter to court and lost. The main reason was that the actual illegal part is the sensor, not the processor

Even though I don't really speed, I always liked the detector. After all they often sit in real nasty spots designed to catch accidental speeders. For years I always upgraded to the latest model to stay ahead of the detector detectors. After that double fuck up we gave up. All my friends were getting busted too. It just wasn't worth it anymore.

If you think you want to risk it you can buy my Bel-975sti for $200. Current retail about $1000. Perfect working condition except one cable missing (or cut, can't remember). As mentioned above, controller brand new!

http://www.olbis.com.au/ap_template/parent...tpage_radar.asp

All current detectors still list VG2 as their only cloaking. This is the last generation detector detection mode and will not protect from the new system "Spectre III". VG2 cloak is an obsolete technology on the east coast, but I don't think Spectre III is used in SA, NT, Tas and WA yet, so the old units are still fine there.

Just found out that there is one australian manufacturer who has a model that has beaten the Spectre III system. It is also very efficient at POP detection - the very reason why everyone should have a radar detector. The unit costs about $2000......

[Evil Genius]

Torsten:

the detector detector can pin point the exact car that the detector is mounted in, even in relatively dense traffic. In fact, it can detect the locations exactly as accurately as it can detect the speed of each car.

Thanks for the Info! That´s new to me. What a false sense of security i had about that!It seems that i underestimated the Budget of our law enforcement officers.

[ 21. August 2005, 19:39: Message edited by: Evil Genius ]

[dc]

Ive been running a radar detector in my car for the past 12 months, its made in australia and is built into the car, police would have to rip off my front bumper bar to find part of it, even then it looks nothing like any detector ive seen before. They are aparently undetectable, in instructions it tells you to angle the sensor down so its harder to be picked up. The thing has saved me 3 or 4 times already, well worth the $1600 outlay in my books.

Ive just imported a LCD screen that goes over your number plate and when a voltage is sent through its clear, when the current is taken away the glass turns opaque. im currently getting a batch made up for australian plate sizes.

[Torsten]

what's the brand and model of detector you have and what state are you in?

[eeroborroc]

.

Edited September 13, 2013 by eeroborroc

[blog]

Ive just imported a LCD screen that goes over your number plate and when a voltage is sent through its clear, when the current is taken away the glass turns opaque. im currently getting a batch made up for australian plate sizes.

I reckon I"ve thought of a possible way to beat those speed cameras that use the infra red flash guns at night. You'd have a detector that detects the burst of infra red light which triggers a flash unit in the rear window to fire. You could just use a conventional flash with over exposed 35mm negative film(ie 100% black) as a filter to block the visible light l but allow the IR light to pass. If the flash was right next to the number plate it would definitely blow out the picture and obscure the number plate but that's not practical, though even if was located at the bottom of the rear window it may still do enough damage.

You may think by the time the speed camera has taken it's shot the shutter would have already closed by the time my flash fires back, but this isn't a new principal, photographers have been using this technique to take photos for decades. The slave flash units detect the light from the primary flash gun and fire in sync.

I got that idea when I was using a camera in night shot mode and another guy with a nightshot camera filmed me as I was filming him . The infra red LED's on both cameras completely overload the picture.

[dc]

I forget the brand name Torsen but my friend sells them and installed mine, i will get the name for you next week. I am in victoria. He also has laser jammers, made by the same company, basically you hear that youve been targeted by the laser gun and you have a 5 second gap to slow down, it aparently makes the speed reading jump around. I havent yet invested in one but i will in the near future, my friend swears by it and if its half as good as the radar detector then it will be well worth the money.

[Legba]

myth or fact?

15 yrs ago i heard of gadgets that would send bak a signal amplified to cook the pigs unit. also, one that sent bak an adjusted signal that read 60 wen ur really doin whateva. but that was then...

its a big business now. couse, in my day, there were less cars and they were heavier and slower, on average. and we could drink with the pigs at the pub then drive home. how things have changed.

speeding is now frowned upon like drinkin was. apparently, it is a contributing factor in alot of fatal accidents.

i was weened on drink and speed so i should be allowed to do it but the rest of u shouldnt til u prove u can. they should have a test track so u could prove your abilities in a safe environment. then u could get an endorsement. a point 2.00 rating with a mj endorsement, perhaps...

ok, i suppose i should sit the test too. no worries. drive safe, ppls.

(appologies to any pigs out there for the pig reference but i cant spell police) :D

[Torsten]

Speed is only one factor in fatalities, but certainly not the main one. In germany there used to be no speed restriction on the highways. People would cruise on 160 or 180 in the same cars that are only allowed to do 110 in Oz. Obviously some cars would go MUCH faster. The accident and fatality rate at the time was lower than in australia though where speeds had already been limited to 100 (this is before the 110 freeway limit).

So obviously speed was not the main factor in fatalities. But then what was? The best clue came just after the reunification of germany. The roads in east germany were VERY badly maintained by the communist government and the main car available there was a piece of shit. Neither roads nor cars allowed speeds of over 100 and hence this was the top limit in the east. Then suddenly people who had never been over 100 were allowed to drive on the excellent roads in the west and the rate of fatalities skyrocketed. It was clear that driver skill was the main contributor.

The other problem was that drivers from the west would overestimate the roads in the east and cause accidents by losing control in badly designed bends, poorly maintained surfaces and with poorly skilled other drivers on the road.

Germany was forced to apply speed limits on many roads that were previously unlimited.

This social experiment shows clearly that driver skill and road conditions were far more important factors than speed itself. However, it also shows that a lowering of speed will prevent fatalities in the face of poor driver skills and crappy roads.

So what does that tell us about australian road statistics? Simple. Either improve driver skill and road condition, or decrease speed limit. A government that choses the latter is taking the easy way out, but is not actually addressing the core problem.

Driver skill is one of my main gripes. In australia drivers licenses are literally handed out to unskilled kids. In comparison to germany (and many other countries) where obtaining your license is an expensive privilege which you do not take lightly, the process in australia is a joke. In other countries it's a rite of passage in a way.

For example, how did my ex girlfriend get a license without being able to go through a roundabout (I had to teach her that and it almost cost me my car)? How can anyone get a license without being taken out on the highway? How come most people can't answer the most simple questions about road rules.

Because of the serious impact it has on everyone around you, driving should be a privilege rather than a right. But enforcement is so focused on financial gain rather than actually improving skill levels.

I think one of the best ways to improve skill levels is to modify the point system, where skill demerits (for failing to keep left, not being able to negotiate roundabouts, tailgating, etc) do not make you lose your license, but rather force you to be retrained. The current point system is all about punishment and financial gain rather than actually addressing the problem.

Also, there is one VERY big lie behind those road statistics. Sure, the extra 20km/h will increase the fatalities, but if you have a look at the full statistics you will see that a decrease in speed does not decrease the overall number of lives ruined. The 10 or 20% reduction in fatalities is usually simply redistributed onto the vegetable list. One needs to question the true advantages of this.....

[Legba]

in 1990, th icac report into driver testing came out. it indicate that the examiners were poolin th bribes by then. many instructors were bribing th ppl to get licences for their clients/victims/prey.

so if u wonder where did 'they' get there licence? australia, mate. :D

now th system is so silly, the rta dart driver test, that a clerk that doesnt have a licence to drive can do th testing.

retesting and proper training is a great ideal. not enuf ppl to do it. easier to fine ppl and just let the bad ones die off seems to be their attitude. shame about th innocent.

th fundamental problem,imho, is attitude. most think theyre better than they are, and get away with it until they dont. its amazing how fast 60 kms/hr feels goin sideways towards a power pole.

every time i get behind th wheel now, i remind myself someones gonna try and kill me on th road today. i see plenty of idiots, but early enuf to keep em at a distance. i treat this as a game, to maintain interest in it. i prefer this to th get outa my way you bastard game or th get there faster than th last time game. more relaxin, safer, and fun always. attitude.

[eeroborroc]

.

Edited September 13, 2013 by eeroborroc

[Legba]

...180 downhill

the test is like 15 minutes on th road. lol

and whos teachin who? i saw an examiner rip into a p plater that was teachin an l plater. he saw him in th test area 1/2 hr b4 th test.

comments ive heard examiners say to applicants after the test:

"do you remember wen th car was skidding..."

"their was a sign that said 'left turn on red permitted after stopping.' mate, you didnt even slow down!"

"...you nearly hit a truck!"

so speedin makes it harder to see th idiots that cant 'drive too good' in time. it fun on th track, thou.

[2b]

Pissed or sober , if you hit a tree at 60kph chances are you'll be alright , hit the same tree at 160kph your f@#cked. It's not how pissed you are but how fast your going that kills.

Compulsory roadworthy certificates should be submitted with your registration renewal every year.The age and condition of the average car in Australia is years behind Europe. This is not only a saftey issue , but modern cars don't have such a negative impact on the planet.

Why is every one so keen to beat the speed cameras ? I do 1,000km a week to and from work . I get radared at least once a week , and i hardley ever get caught. If you travel faster than 60khm in a 60 zone your a dickhead , these zones exist to protect pedestrians and children.I don't have an issue if you want to open it up on the open roads (with in reason), between towns (padock roads) but people speeding in towns deserve to be fined and the fines should be higher than what they are. I hate to state the obvious (but my avatar does warn) wisdom comes with age , and i can't expect a P plate driver to grasp this concept .

[Amulte]

i read this shit when i worked in the hospital, but some study said a drunk person not wearing a seatbelt crashing at above 150kph has more of a survival chance than a sober peron with a seatbelt in the exact same conditions. a "pickled" human will bounce before a bone breaks.

i wouldnt try it though.

[occidentalis]

Pissed or sober , if you hit a tree at 60kph chances are you'll be alright , hit the same tree at 160kph your f@#cked. It's not how pissed you are but how fast your going that kills.

You're right that extra speed increases the damage caused by an accident, but on the whole this is not how the speed issue has been presented (the 'wipe off 5' campaigns in some states are an exception). Unless you are going ridiculously fast or are a very bad driver (or any mix of the two), speeding does not increase your chances of crashing in the first place. Being under the influence does. So why do police put in so much effort to prevent people from doing 75 or 80 in a 70 zone? When conditions are safe (clear weather, not too much traffic, no pedestrians etc), good drivers will be able to drive safely at speeds higher than the marked limit. And just so you don't think I'm a speedfreak - I've been driving 5 years and have never had any traffic infringements. Essentially, there is 'speeding', as defined by the police, and there is speeding - as defined by anyone with a brain and any degree of driving skill.

Compulsory roadworthy certificates should be submitted with your registration renewal every year.The age and condition of the average car in Australia is years behind Europe. This is not only a saftey issue , but modern cars don't have such a negative impact on the planet.

You have a point but it's much more complex than this. Up until earlier this year I had an old car which I drove very ocassionally because of environmental considerations and because I live in an urban area where I have other transport opportunities. My car would not have passed a roadworthy inspection (mainly due to rust), but up until the last few months when I knew I was going to sell it, I maintained it very carefully (serviced every 5000km). That car was as environmentally sustainable as it was ever going to be without an entire recondition. It is possible to keep and maintain old cars without them becoming too environmentally damaging, and IMO this is preferable than causing an entire new car to be built (1 ton of metal and plastic ain't cheap ecologically).

[eeroborroc]

.

Edited September 13, 2013 by eeroborroc

[Torsten]

creach, even the best maintained old car (15+) will have emissions 5 to 20 times as high as a car less than 5 years old. If you compare just the first 5 minutes of each drive (which accounts for that vast majority of a car's emissions) then the factor is something like a hundred times higher.

I do understand the argument that new cars pollute because of their production, but at some point there is a cut off point - not sure where exactly.

Was your car unleaded? If not then your agument is moot anyway. This is one of my pet peeves. I live in a hippy area, but most hippies still drive high polluting leaded cars.

[occidentalis]

I do understand the argument that new cars pollute because of their production, but at some point there is a cut off point - not sure where exactly.

Yeah definitely. There's no doubt my car was more polluting than a new model. I rationalised it (although buying a new car is not an option financially for me) because I drove very little. The car was only used to transport plants and other heavy things around the city and go on ocassional bush trips. The overall amount of emissions was probably less than someone who drives every day in a new car.

Was your car unleaded? If not then your agument is moot anyway. This is one of my pet peeves. I live in a hippy area, but most hippies still drive high polluting leaded cars.

No, it was leaded, but I was under the impression the LRP petrol was not significantly more damaging than ULP. Or are you referring to catalytic conversion?