I can see it know. Cops are chasing some sleaze. He's going at great speed
in traffic, causing a danger to everyone. Cops let loose with their RF gun
disabling sleaze's car, their own and fifteen others on the road. One of the
innocents affected is a 98 pound woman that can't control her car without
the power steering. She looses control causing a multicar pileup. Yep,
sounds safer to me.

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , Fractenna
writes
Also keeps those pesky UFO's in check:-)....

Hmmm..I though cars were better shielded than that.
Article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/arti...259138,00.html

73,
Chip N1IR

In the UK, we're not supposed to use 'unproved' commercial equipment in
modern cars (although I think we can still use homebrew). This is
supposedly to avoid the risk of interfering with the electronics
(although I can't really think why 'approved' equipment should be
better). It's all to do with being a part of the European Community, and
the rule-making bureaucrats in Brussels.

Obviously, the real solution to the problem would be to improve the
immunity of the car electronics (which costs), but you now have a good
reason to justify not doing this.

In the UK, we pay a TV licence. There are detector vans which track down
offenders. The obvious way was to look for the radiation of the local
oscillator in the tuner. However, a radiating local oscillator is a 'bad
thing' because it interferes with things. With modern sets, it's
probably easier to look for the rubbish from the switch-mode power
supplies (which is often worse when the set is in standby).

It used to be said that the TV manufacturers were actually willing to
improve their designs in order to reduce the radiation, but were
pressured not to do so! I'm not sure how true any of this is. I've a
sneaky feeling that costs again come into it somewhere.

Cheers,
Ian.
--

CW no adddress@spam free.com wrote:
I can see it know. Cops are chasing some sleaze. He's going at great speed
in traffic, causing a danger to everyone. Cops let loose with their RF gun
disabling sleaze's car, their own and fifteen others on the road. One of the
innocents affected is a 98 pound woman that can't control her car without
the power steering. She looses control causing a multicar pileup. Yep,
sounds safer to me.

Not to mention the guy with the pacemaker that causes yet another pileup
while clutching his chest.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove -spam-sux to reply.

Jim Pennino wrote,

CW no adddress@spam free.com wrote:
I can see it know. Cops are chasing some sleaze. He's going at great speed
in traffic, causing a danger to everyone. Cops let loose with their RF gun
disabling sleaze's car, their own and fifteen others on the road. One of
the
innocents affected is a 98 pound woman that can't control her car without
the power steering. She looses control causing a multicar pileup. Yep,
sounds safer to me.

Not to mention the guy with the pacemaker that causes yet another pileup
while clutching his chest.

--
Jim Pennino


You guys certainly are a cheerful bunch.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

Tdonaly wrote:
Jim Pennino wrote,

CW no adddress@spam free.com wrote:
I can see it know. Cops are chasing some sleaze. He's going at great speed
in traffic, causing a danger to everyone. Cops let loose with their RF gun
disabling sleaze's car, their own and fifteen others on the road. One of
the
innocents affected is a 98 pound woman that can't control her car without
the power steering. She looses control causing a multicar pileup. Yep,
sounds safer to me.

Not to mention the guy with the pacemaker that causes yet another pileup
while clutching his chest.

--
Jim Pennino


You guys certainly are a cheerful bunch.

Nah, just practical and realistic.

This is just another "mad scientist" project. Technologically
feasible... well, just maybe... but totally devoid of common sense.

The amazing thing is how easily such projects find powerful backers at
corporate and even governmental level [insert cross-references to the
Dotcom Boom and BPL here].


--
73 from Ian G3SEK 'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
http://www.ifwtech.co.uk/g3sek

Over the years I've seen quite a bit of this kind of thing. In my
experience, it's not the brain child of a "mad scientist" at all, but a
clever entrepreneur. He makes the idea sound plausible enough to get
technically naive investors (which can easily include the government) to
chip in, makes himself president and CEO of a company, and lives the
good life as long as he can before the investors finally realize there
won't be buckets of money at the end of the road and pull the plug.
Although not required, quite a few of the ones I've known have a Ph.D.,
which impresses the investors. Some leave a trail of crashed companies
behind them but manage to do it over and over, conning a new set of
marks each time.

It doesn't take a very careful look at some of the "miracle" antenna
proponents to identify a number of these operations at work right now.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Ian White, G3SEK wrote:

Nah, just practical and realistic.

This is just another "mad scientist" project. Technologically
feasible... well, just maybe... but totally devoid of common sense.

The amazing thing is how easily such projects find powerful backers at
corporate and even governmental level [insert cross-references to the
Dotcom Boom and BPL here].

Well, be that as it may (and granted, didnt keep vehicle from
resttarting), as two way tech for railroad, had complaint , and from
MECHANICS about their TRUCK! Said when talked on radio, it would come
to screeching halt, if they used their two way radio (160 mhz)! would
key radio in front of the shop- no problem, thought they NUTS! Said,
"Lets take for a test drive" And sure as all get out, ENGINE STALLED!
what was interesting was that no problem when first installed the radio
(*&$%*() truck then was around 20 years old, and that about 15 years
ago)! Turns out that they replaced the old POINTS- Coil, Distributor
with an Electronic ignition kit! Refitted it to the original, and no
further probs (no info on what kind of caps to get rid of the rf for the
original from the manufacturer !) -- But Roy is right-- after all,
Couple fellow's (Gates and Allen) are college DROPOUTS, and they worth
more bux than lotsa Ph D. s - combined! Only one PERSONALLY would trust
(Ph D ) is a fellow named T.J.Rodgers - founder of Cypress
Semiconductors! Most of the the others are exactly what Roy describes
!! Jim NN7K

Roy Lewallen wrote:
Over the years I've seen quite a bit of this kind of thing. In my
experience, it's not the brain child of a "mad scientist" at all, but a
clever entrepreneur. He makes the idea sound plausible enough to get
technically naive investors (which can easily include the government) to
chip in, makes himself president and CEO of a company, and lives the
good life as long as he can before the investors finally realize there
won't be buckets of money at the end of the road and pull the plug.
Although not required, quite a few of the ones I've known have a Ph.D.,
which impresses the investors. Some leave a trail of crashed companies
behind them but manage to do it over and over, conning a new set of
marks each time.

It doesn't take a very careful look at some of the "miracle" antenna
proponents to identify a number of these operations at work right now.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Unlike some in industry, we just look at the potential problems. To often,
things like this get pushed through due to the drive of money rather than
common sense. Often this results in the "acceptable loses" attitude when it
comes to the safety of the public.
"Tdonaly" wrote in message
news:20040718011930.22984.00001865@mb- You guys certainly are a cheerful
bunch.
73,
Tom Donaly, KA6RUH

CW wrote:

Unlike some in industry, we just look at the potential problems. To often,
things like this get pushed through due to the drive of money rather than
common sense. Often this results in the "acceptable loses" attitude when it
comes to the safety of the public.

Gotta disagree here CW

The reason that this sort of thing is going on is that they are trying
to lower those losses. The zapper may or may not be a practical device
(I tend to think of it as quite impractical for most of the reasons
already outlined) but it was brought about with the intention of
*saving* lives. "Acceptable losses" hover very near zero, perp or
innocent bystander. Otherwise a chase could be terminated very, very
quickly.

- Mike -

On 18 Jul 2004 05:19:30 GMT, (Tdonaly) wrote:

Jim Pennino wrote,

CW no adddress@spam free.com wrote:
I can see it know. Cops are chasing some sleaze. He's going at great speed
in traffic, causing a danger to everyone. Cops let loose with their RF gun
disabling sleaze's car, their own and fifteen others on the road. One of
the
innocents affected is a 98 pound woman that can't control her car without
the power steering. She looses control causing a multicar pileup. Yep,
sounds safer to me.

Not to mention the guy with the pacemaker that causes yet another pileup
while clutching his chest.


Hey, wait a minute -- we forgot to mention Parkinson's
patients with DBS electrodes in their brains and all the associated
electronics. :-)

On Sat, 17 Jul 2004 19:23:34 -0700, "CW" no adddress@spam free.com
wrote:

I can see it know. Cops are chasing some sleaze. He's going at great speed
in traffic, causing a danger to everyone. Cops let loose with their RF gun
disabling sleaze's car, their own and fifteen others on the road. One of the
innocents affected is a 98 pound woman that can't control her car without
the power steering. She looses control causing a multicar pileup. Yep,
sounds safer to me.


You have electronic power steering? When did they give up on
the vacuum/hydraulic systems?