Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Communist Hamster, Aug 31, 2005.
By which I take it you mean "drive within the speed limit"?
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
regardless of whatever newsweek said, the stealth bomber is neither radioactive nor 100% stealthy,it still makes a radar signal, a small one, but its big enough to see if the thing flies past a passive radar station.
The only radioactive substance in the aircraft is the depleated uranium balast, and possibly the munitions it carries.
Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The problem with coating a car with RAM is that the biggest return from a car other than the license plates is the radiator, which is a very large and vertical metal plate. So even with RAM coating the car would return a strong signal.
Thus the only car that would benefit from a coating of RAM would be the Corvette, which has a slanted radiator and already has a low radar cross section. The problem with coating a corvette in RAM is that it would add about 300-400 extra pounds to the car and reduce it's overall performance, not to mention it would be a flat coat and make the car look horrible.
So feasible? yes. Practical no. In addition, most highway patrol officers now use lasers instead of radar for more precision and less detection.
Hope this helps,
I don't see any cops using radar, it's all lasers now. Better off making friends with a judge, or taking compromising pictures of one.
Or dont speed.
I got $500 in tickets in the last 2 months.
I only speed in emergencies, like when I see road humps, you just fly, man.
Yeah, in a construction zone. Same one both times.
And get hit for littering and speeding? No thank you. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I heard a story one time of a guy who build a reverse amplifier. Basically, when it caught a signal from a radar gun, it amplified the signal and sent it back to the reciever, frying it.
I don't know if it was true, but it sounded cool as hell.
What state are you in? I'm in Indiana and rarely pick up laser on my fuzz buster. I constantly pick up radar, though.
My strategy is:
1. Always have a radar detector for highway travel.
2. If no one is in front of you, drive within ten miles of the speed limit.
3. If someone passes you, even if they're going 100 miles/hour, get behind them (I stay a few car lengths back so as not to tailgate), the police very rarely pull over more than one car.
4. If all of the above fails and you do get pulled over, act like you've never been pulled over before. Be polite. Do not have your license and registration ready. Act all nervous. Sort thru your glove compartment looking for your registration. The officer will think they don't need to give you a ticket and you may get off with a warning.
5. If you still actually get a ticket, always go to court. If the officer does not show up, you're off the hook. If he does show up, plead guilty, but ask if you can get the ticket dismissed in exchange for taking a class or something. This keeps your record clean and increases the chance you'll get a warning the next time you're pulled over. When a cop runs your license and finds a ticket, or a bunch of tickets, he definately will not give you a warning.
Good point. Spend $200 on a radar evading device to avoid paying ticketsPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Only in America.
I'm not a speeder and don't have many hwy miles do deal with daily. BUT! I run red lights all the time. I work late and the goddamn lights here in exurbia turn red whenever a car approaches, traffic or not. To sit & idle at a deserted intersection pisses me off so I blow them every chance I get. I have my license plate in the rear window, on purpose, so I can pull it to avoid the cameras getting my plate numberPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Eat Me Kansas & Missouri!
A radar detector is generally less than $100, which is less than the price of one ticket. It's a no brainer, IMO. I don't understand why it's not a standard option when you buy a car.
Last night on the news they advertised a device for $200 that evades all radar. The company also pays all tickets if you're not in a school or construction zone. Police groups are fighting to make it illegal in Missouri and Kansas. Not speeding is alot cheaper, easier on the car and safer.
Sure, you can pay that much, or more. But you don't have too.
And not speeding is easier, but slower. One of my offices if 75 miles from the other. I need to make time.
Holy Crap! I'd speed too I guess. I have city driving from home and out into the upscale suburbs so opportunities to speed usually aren't there. Plus I don't have a car that likes speed.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
if any new ideas come up let me know i had to post even though an old thread when i see poor advice being given i wanted it to be corrected so others who come across it latter aren't mislead. If your going to buy a top notch radar detector $350 plus my recommendation is the valentine1 but there are other high quality detectors buy the best or you wasting your money.
Because government and the corporations run this country, not the citizens. The auto manufacturers are gigantic corporations who want to get tax breaks and other favors from the government. They won't get them if they piss them off by making it easier for us to avoid paying fines.
It's already illegal in Virginia. The fine for exceeding 80mph (128kph and a perfectly reasonable speed for today's vehicles on today's freeways) is $300. They don't want to miss out on that.
Perhaps, but the effect on safety is difficult to measure. The primary causes of auto wrecks that result in death or serious injury in the USA are drunk drivers, incompetent drivers and poorly maintained vehicles. We could reduce drunk driving to near zero by installing a breathalyzer ignition interlock in every car at the factory, which wouldn't even be very expensive. We could get the incompetents off the road by making our licensing tests much stricter, as they are in many European countries where Americans have great difficulty passing them. As for the junk on the road (if you don't believe me just walk through any parking lot and measure the percentage of cars with bald tires and then extrapolate to dangers you can't see like brakes and alignment), more frequent vehicle inspections would help. Apparently the government doesn't really care about our safety because they don't do any of those things.
Of course Max would point out that if we were all just going slower, none of those things would be so dangerous. To which I respond, why should I spend more of my precious time on driving, as a favor to irresponsible people?
In any case, the motivation behind speed limits and draconian enforcement has almost nothing to do with Big Nanny's concern for our safety. It's an easy way to rake in revenue.
I got a ticket in Virginia a few years ago for an innocuous but technically illegal maneuver in the middle of the night on an empty street with a 25 mph speed limit. I bothered to take it to court, and they gave me a "break." They changed the charge from a state vehicle code violation and made it "inattentive operation," which is only a city law. That way it was not reported to the DMV or to my insurance company, as if I cared about that, since I hadn't had a ticket in 25 years. But it didn't reduce the fine and I still had to pay $80.
It's all about the money, boys. Nothing at all to do with safety.
Separate names with a comma.