Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (32849)	6/22/2002 9:24:36 AM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 281500

Hi twfowler; The purpose of my post was to demonstrate that antiaircraft technology has become so widespread that to assume that the 3rd world is never going to figure it out is silly. This same argument applies to a lot of other stuff: By the way, other examples of 1st world technology that eventually leaked or will eventually leak into the 3rd world with important political consequences include (at least) the following: major production Technology Invented 1st world 3rd world --------------- -------- --------- --------- Machine gun 1860s 1880s 1940s Nuclear bomb 1930s 1940s 1990s Ballistic missile 1950s 1960s Armored vehicle 1910s 1940s 1990s Chemical warfare 1910s 1910s 1980s Biological war 1950s 1960s not yet Tactical nukes 1960s 1970s not yet AA missile 1950s 1960s 1990s Fighter Aircraft 1910s 1910s 1960s Stealth 1970s 1980s not yet The 3rd world is manufacturing antiaircraft technology, but they're just beginning to do this. They're mostly using Russian designs, just like they did with a lot of other stuff in the above list. Re: "So it can lock in on the sun but can it lock in on and track an aircraft?" I doubt it. In fact I'd think that making rockets that can shoot down aircraft, and then publicizing it on the internet would be a quick way to get a visit from friendly FBI agents. If you're an engineer, you'll know what the issues are for building a heat seeking (or image seeking) missile guidance unit. Suffice it to say that while it was rocket science back in the 1950s, it's the kind of thing that a lot of bright high school kids could do now. Here's some 1.5" square infrared TV cameras for $85: gatewayelex.com These TV cameras are probably going to have a CCD inside, along with some circuitry that creates a standard (civilian) 60Hz interlaced image. For missile use, you'll want to rebuild them at a higher rate (possibly with lower resolution). To do this, buy one and find out what model of CCD chip it has. Then look up the data sheet on the web. For example, here's a typical CCD image sensor (336x244 for low-cost B/W TV applications) from Texas Instruments: www-s.ti.com If you'll read the above data sheet, you'll note that even if you use the full image area you can run the device at 150Hz. If you're going to be making something for feedback guidance of a missile, I'd suggest pushing that number a bit higher, and consider reducing the amount of image that you shift out, thereby reducing resolution. To do this, decrease the number of SRG pulses per SAG pulse (decreases resolution in the horizontal direction) and decrease the number of SRG pulses per IAG (vertical direction). The resulting reduced image will have a frame rate higher than 150Hz according to how much you reduce the number of pulses (approximately). You'll need to convert the analog voltage from the device to some sort of digital, and there are a lot of ways to do this. Then you'll need to digitally examine the image to look for the target. There are a bunch of ways of doing that too. Suffice it to say that it's a hell of a lot easier to build a tracking system that follows a 747 against a clear blue sky from underneath than it is to build a tracking system that follows an F-16 against ground noise from above. If you want to achieve the latter, there are time tested ways of doing this too. I'd suggest doing some sort of statistical autocorrelation with previous images in order to remove the moving terrain part of the picture. (Did I mention that computer speeds are up about a million times since heat seeking missiles were first built?) Is the above TI infrared imaging chip military hardware that's subject to US regulations on export? No. In fact, it's in the Connectix QuickCam, which is commonly available for $24: pricewatch.com -- Carl

To: TimF who wrote (32849)	6/23/2002 11:37:06 AM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Great!!... So we have amateur rocketeers out there who might develop the ability to locate, track, and intercept an aircraft.... But without the ability to carry a significant warhead, as well as the proximity fuzing technology, it's like my old fixed cat... He'd get himself all wound up and in position, but when he had the "target" where he wanted it, he couldn't make an "impact".... :0) And when you load a rocket with at 1.2kg of HE (or greater, if trying to take down a multi-engined jetliner), it makes it more difficult to maneuver and control... But I would agree that they could be effective during take-off (high heat from max thrust)... I've long believed we need to install heat-producing "spoofers" along the take-off path of major airports as a means of deterring heat-seeking missiles in such a vulnerable stage of flight. But who will pay for them?? Hawk