I found this video today because of YouTube's weird algorithm. It's in a different langauge but this guy has stickers and puts them over the numbers in his license plate where It can't be detected on a camera? Idk if its real but the first thing that comes to mind is free Tollways lmao
Interesting concept, but the design (if I understand) requires a white plate with black characters over which their special black tape is applied. What if my jurisdiction has plates with a different color combination? Also is there any independent testing.AntiRadar Stickers - How To Beat A Speeding Ticket - Protection From Photo Radar, Red Light Cameras, and Speed Cameras for Cars, Motorbikes or trucks. Stealth License Plates For Vehicle Registration Whatsapp +55 11 934665377en.acessorios-anti-radar.com
Anything to good to be true usually ain't true.Interesting concept, but the design (if I understand) requires a white plate with black characters over which their special black tape is applied. What if my jurisdiction has plates with a different color combination? Also is there any independent testing.
It's a simple concept that looks too good to be true.
It's Russian... And likely a scam.I found this video today because of YouTube's weird algorithm. It's in a different langauge but this guy has stickers and puts them over the numbers in his license plate where It can't be detected on a camera? Idk if its real but the first thing that comes to mind is free Tollways lmao
To be commercially successful, you would need to reliably show:
1) That it actually works. And by works, I mean that it significantly reduces range at all common radar frequencies. Given the range of current detectors, 10-20% reduction is not all that exciting, while a 40 -80% would be! Naturally, the higher the price, the more effective it must be; and
2) That it does not significantly alter the appearance of the vehicle. A clear film would be ideal, because it would like rock chip protection film.
Also, by the time you got it down by ~5dB, you would need to start worrying about the reflection from inside of the car, the wheel reflections and the resonance of the undercarriage bouncing back. I seriously doubt anyone would want to drive around in a car that had even been treated to get a few dB less RCS!The range of current detectors is less relevant when dealing with I/O and an officer that understands how to use it. Moderate to light traffic and an officer that only triggers I/O when they suspect a target is well over the limit can make for low probability of RD activation before you are in the kill zone.
Below I am just pulling numbers for examples and math, everything is "correct", but based on the example max range, and that max detection range quoted is not a real number, just an example used to convey the concept. It may be applicable to some situations, but not others. The relative values are real.
If an officer expects to get a radar return at 1500 feet on an average size vehicle, and waits until the target is well inside the kill zone, say at 1000 feet, but a RAM (Radar Absorbing / Ablative Material) applied reduces the RCS so that the tracking range is less than half, like 500 feet, then the driver would get an extra 500 feet to react/respond before they are cooked. Of course, that is not a long way when moving at speed, but it is better than nothing.
What does that mean in real terms? In order to reduce the detection range from 1500 feet to 500 feet you need to reduce the RCS by about 9.5 dB. That is around an 89% reduction in RCS. i.e. a target with an RCS of 10 square meters must be reduced to slightly over 1 square meter. To half the range, take 1500 feet down to 750 feet, you need to reduce the RCS by 6 dB, or by 75%.
And that just ain't going to happen.
This is not going to be a quick, colorless spray on material, or a thin clear film like a wrap. The required materials in the RAM used are going to have color, visual opacity, and some kind of texture. Of course it could be pigmented, to yield the color desired. But the physical depth will be significantly greater than the ~8 mil thickness of a PPF and a lot thicker than the ~2 mil depth of an average clear coat.
If you designed the material to work at K and Ka band, disregarding X band, it would probably be more visually acceptable to a larger group of users.
The upshot of this all is that it absolutely could be done. Without changing the shape of the vehicle or the vehicles construction materials a coating could be applied that might reduce the RCS by a significant factor. 6 dB, or more (at a quick guess something on the order of ~10 dB should be possible, but I honestly have not looked that deeply into it), of reduction in RCS should be possible by coatings only, reducing maximum detection range significantly. Of course an approach addressing vehicle shapes, construction materials, and coatings, would yield better results.
It would not be cheap and it would probably be visually apparent. Also, how the material weathers might not be acceptable to the average driver, it would almost certainly be more fragile than automotive finishes typically are.