KA More Responsive Settings (maybe K too?)

[Tallyho]

So the V1 can be reprogrammed as per the VR website to provide a more urgent ramp up and signal strength response for Ka:

1. Given the presence of low powered K band would this option be helpful to have on K band, or given that K pollution is omnipresent, would it be counter-productive?
2. Where does JBV1 replicate the above Ka setting?

 

[johnboy00]

Profile option, Ka Meter Responsiveness, Normal/High.

I can't make the firmware do it on K band.

 

[Tallyho]

Profile option, Ka Meter Responsiveness, Normal/High.

I can't make the firmware do it on K band.

Aha, there it is!

Do you think there would be any value to this for K or is that insane? (Not that it can be done through API, but maybe VR could implement)

 

[johnboy00]

Aha, there it is!

Do you think there would be any value to this for K or is that insane? (Not that it can be done through API, but maybe VR could implement)

From an app perspective, I think the alert data is coming in at too few samples per second to make it useful to identify BSM. Or, what did you have in mind?

 

[Tallyho]

From an app perspective, I think the alert data is coming in at too few samples per second to make it useful to identify BSM. Or, what did you have in mind?

I encountered some low powered K yesterday and was hoping for improved ramp up on K band, as is possible with Ka by changing the Ka "responsive" setting.

They only problem I see with this idea is that it could also increase the responsiveness with K band pollution and needlessly provide a higher responsive alert to them, which would be counter-productive.

Basically I'm wondering if anyone else thinks that trying to improve K responsiveness would be a double edged sword, whereas with Ka there is no such trade-off.

 

[johnboy00]

I encountered some low powered K yesterday and was hoping for improved ramp up on K band, as is possible with Ka by changing the Ka "responsive" setting.

They only problem I see with this idea is that it could also increase the responsiveness with K band pollution and needlessly provide a higher responsive alert to them, which would be counter-productive.

Basically I'm wondering if anyone else thinks that trying to improve K responsiveness would be a double edged sword, whereas with Ka there is no such trade-off.

If you were running JBV1 1.4.2+ with that encounter, would you send an alert log screenshot of the encounter? First, set Alert Log Extra to Ramp in Developer options, then go to the encounter in the alert log. PM it if you prefer.

 

[Tallyho]

If you were running JBV1 1.4.2+ with that encounter, would you send an alert log screenshot of the encounter? First, set Alert Log Extra to Ramp in Developer options, then go to the encounter in the alert log. PM it if you prefer.

Unfortunately, I wasn't at the time. I'll have to capture another encounter and send it over.

 

[NVR2FST]

I encountered some low powered K yesterday and was hoping for improved ramp up on K band, as is possible with Ka by changing the Ka "responsive" setting.

They only problem I see with this idea is that it could also increase the responsiveness with K band pollution and needlessly provide a higher responsive alert to them, which would be counter-productive.

Basically I'm wondering if anyone else thinks that trying to improve K responsiveness would be a double edged sword, whereas with Ka there is no such trade-off.

On the subject of K band, if the latest V1's sweep 23.900 to 24.272, what frequencies within this range are reasonably safe to mute with JBV1's box muting function in an attempt to quiet BSM falsing?

Posted from my Studio XL 2 using the RDF Mobile App!

 

[dchemist]

On the subject of K band, if the latest V1's sweep 23.900 to 24.272, what frequencies within this range are reasonably safe to mute with JBV1's box muting function in an attempt to quiet BSM falsing?

Posted from my Studio XL 2 using the RDF Mobile App!

Man, that's the million dollar question!

 

[johnboy00]

On the subject of K band, if the latest V1's sweep 23.900 to 24.272, what frequencies within this range are reasonably safe to mute with JBV1's box muting function in an attempt to quiet BSM falsing?

Posted from my Studio XL 2 using the RDF Mobile App!

I use the following K-band box settings:

Box 1: 24.090-24.195
Box 2: 24.123-24.127, Mute ITB, Mute Orientation REAR+SIDE
Mute OTB
Mute OTB Orientation ANY
Mute Punch Through when strength >= 6

So anything < 24.090 (some GM) and > 24.195 (Honda, etc) is muted, and anything to the side or rear between 24.123 and 24.127 (newer Mazda CX-5) is muted. The CX-5 uses a frequency common to LEO radar, so you need to be careful with that one. Same with GM in the 24.165-24.180 area, which I decided to not mute at all for the time being. LEO radar (excluding MRCD) outside of 24.090-24.195 is very rare.

When defining boxes within boxes as above, be sure all "container" boxes (the larger boxes that the smaller boxes fit inside of) are defined before the box(es) they contain.

I've been testing for a few days now to see if the data rate from V1 is high enough to identify any frequency modulation patterns within a 3-second K mute. I'm not yet encouraged, but I need more time on it. I may have better results with punch through on signal strength ramp (mute first, punch through later), but I need a lot of sample data from LEO encounters. You guys can help with that!

 

[NVR2FST]

Great info, JB! I had been wondering what effect creating a small box inside of a larger box would have, or if that was even allowed by the app.

Sent from my Studio XL 2 using Tapatalk

 

[Tallyho]

On the subject of K band, if the latest V1's sweep 23.900 to 24.272, what frequencies within this range are reasonably safe to mute with JBV1's box muting function in an attempt to quiet BSM falsing?

Posted from my Studio XL 2 using the RDF Mobile App!

Practically none! I regularly see 24.100 to 24.225 that is confirmed legitimate K band. I'll have to monitor sub 24.100 but unfortunately I haven't seen anything safe in the K band spectrum.

 

[johnboy00]

Practically none! I regularly see 24.100 to 24.225 that is confirmed legitimate K band. I'll have to monitor sub 24.100 but unfortunately I haven't seen anything safe in the K band spectrum.

You definitely need to know what's in use where you drive. I've never seen legit K band above about 24.190 myself.

 

[Brainstorm69]

I'm curious. Does anyone use the more responsive Ka setting? Given that everyone who runs the V1 loves its ramp, wouldn't that, at least somewhat, ruin it?

As for K-band, I know a lot of V1 users use the ability to create boxes and muting parameters so they can basically ignore certain low level alerts (e.g., BSM). Does that cause a problem with low-powered K such that you're left with either doing that and risking getting popped, or doing away with all that and being annoyed by a lot more BSMs?

 

[surprisinguy]

Does anyone use the more responsive Ka setting

I dont believe I could ever use that setting as I'm so accustomed to the regular ramp up that it would prob freak me out on an encounter.

 

[Tallyho]

I'm curious. Does anyone use the more responsive Ka setting? Given that everyone who runs the V1 loves its ramp, wouldn't that, at least somewhat, ruin it?

As for K-band, I know a lot of V1 users use the ability to create boxes and muting parameters so they can basically ignore certain low level alerts (e.g., BSM). Does that cause a problem with low-powered K such that you're left with either doing that and risking getting popped, or doing away with all that and being annoyed by a lot more BSMs?

Absolutely, I use it. It's far more accurate when it's on 35.5, which is a weak signal to detect anyway. And it helps provide a sense of urgency across the Ka spectrum. I find factory settings a bit too relaxed for my taste.

While I won't box K I suppose it's worth considering if you have enough confidence in your sample size. But it does leave you exposed if you encounter a new gun or aren't paying attention. Like anything it's a trade off and highly dependent on the user.

 

[InsipidMonkey]

As for K-band, I know a lot of V1 users use the ability to create boxes and muting parameters so they can basically ignore certain low level alerts (e.g., BSM). Does that cause a problem with low-powered K such that you're left with either doing that and risking getting popped, or doing away with all that and being annoyed by a lot more BSMs?

A short K band muting timer combined with frequency boxes keeps things quiet, and JBV1 has various "punch through" settings to allow for override of the muting in cases where the signal is ramping quickly. I personally have JBV1 set to visually display all alerts (including muted alerts) so I am aware of what's going on, and it works quite well for me.

My low-powered K band encounters have been like regular K band encounters but compressed, eg just a much faster ramp up from first detection to max signal at LOS. If the terrain was trickier I might have to revisit my settings, but such areas tend to be less populated so you could get away with less aggressive filtering.

 

[bikepoet]

I encountered some low powered K yesterday and was hoping for improved ramp up on K band, as is possible with Ka by changing the Ka "responsive" setting.

They only problem I see with this idea is that it could also increase the responsiveness with K band pollution and needlessly provide a higher responsive alert to them, which would be counter-productive.

Basically I'm wondering if anyone else thinks that trying to improve K responsiveness would be a double edged sword, whereas with Ka there is no such trade-off.

For this reason, I don't run any native K-muting on my V1, even the 3-sec mute. I want to be able to hear an instant-on blip from 1-2 miles down the road in case I'm the next recipient. Since I've been nabbed by instant-on before, this is always my biggest concern, and I feel much care should be taken in those specific situations. I figure Ka ramping or K ramping isn't a huge deal since I'm always responding to Ka 5/8 quickly, Ka 2 quick-ish, and K-band between 24.090-24.130 quick-ish too. I don't silence my K OOB, but just lever mute to about half-volume. The GM systems seem to come in pairs around 24.070 and 24.165, I've noticed, so I wonder if there is some app logic that could silence those like "if both K ranges are detected and below 4 bars, silence both".

You guys can help with that!

JB, I set my developer option to ramp, and I had a couple of Ka encounters this week, and many many stationary speed-check solar-powered fake-radar K-band devices on I-30 in Arkansas. What data can I send you, and where to?

 

[johnboy00]

The GM systems seem to come in pairs around 24.070 and 24.165, I've noticed, so I wonder if there is some app logic that could silence those like "if both K ranges are detected and below 4 bars, silence both".

JB, I set my developer option to ramp, and I had a couple of Ka encounters this week, and many many stationary speed-check solar-powered fake-radar K-band devices on I-30 in Arkansas. What data can I send you, and where to?

I've been working for a few weeks or so on how I might be able to distinguish BSM from LEO, with the data available to me, and I've noticed also that GM BSM often, but not always, comes in pairs. It may just depend on how close you get to it, or the direction to it from you. I'll be adding such a GM filter with an adjustable max strength.

You can PM me those encounters as alert log screenshots that show the ramp data on top of the signal strength. Thanks!

 

[Tallyho]

I've been working for a few weeks or so on how I might be able to distinguish BSM from LEO, with the data available to me, and I've noticed also that GM BSM often, but not always, comes in pairs. It may just depend on how close you get to it, or the direction to it from you. I'll be adding such a GM filter with an adjustable max strength.

You can PM me those encounters as alert log screenshots that show the ramp data on top of the signal strength. Thanks!

This is amazing work you are doing!