7 ms·
Hyperspectral camouflage is needed to hide from new electronic sensors
- AlbertCory 4y agohttps://archive.ph/4QSNv https://archive.ph/4QSNv
- sschueller 4y agoSad that from the title I initially thought this had to do with people surveillance. The time is now that we need laws to protect privacy and prevent governments and private companies from mass surveillance using AI etc. without any safeguards. It should be forbidden to use face recognition in public. - [US] https://www.banfacialrecognition.com/ https://www.banfacialrecognition.com/ - [EU] https://reclaimyourface.eu/ https://reclaimyourface.eu/ - [CH] https://www.gesichtserkennung-stoppen.ch/ https://www.gesichtserkennung-stoppen.ch/
- ovi256 4y ago> It should be forbidden to use face recognition in public Why ? Not that I'm for more government surveillance, I'm just curious what's the argument about face recognition ? Is there something about it worse or is it a generic "let's stop any advance in gov surveillance" ?
- mrtnmcc 4y agoMight as well just put a bunch of dirt on the tank.
- pcl 4y agoFrom the end of the article: > “Giorgio Licciardi, an expert on collecting hyperspectral data from orbit at the Italian Space Agency, in Rome, says the technology even detects buried anti-tank mines. (Soil on top of them is typically drier.)”
- mrtnmcc 4y agoMaybe in a controlled setting they can detect mines, but there are plenty of other reasons for dry soil, i.e. hard to detect consistently without false positives. For tank camouflage that's all you need, something that blends in with false positives.
- XorNot 4y agoNo you need enough false positives that your adversary won't find it cost-effective to just commit a missile to all of them.
- snovv_crash 4y agoWouldn't a 50cal round be more cost effective?
- ale42 4y agoYes but you can't launch it from far away...
- Tommstein 4y agoNo, that won't even tickle a tank.
- hutzlibu 4y agoIt could destroy some sensors and even the tracks if lucky, but I think parent poster meant the burried mines.
- 1letterunixname 4y agoBefore the M2 Bradley, US APCs generally lacked meaningful armor. 50 BMG would sail right through.
- rbanffy 4y ago
- dendrite9 4y agoWar on the rocks has a good article about camouflage and the various different forms needed in the current environment. The training tanks that fold up for storage but can be remotely driven and generate appropriate thermal signatures are clever. But the manufacturer's website doesn't offer much to the public. https://warontherocks.com/2021/04/to-survive-deceive-decoys-in-land-warfare/ https://warontherocks.com/2021/04/to-survive-deceive-decoys-...
- L_226 4y agoUS (and Israeli) citizens can actually buy some of this stuff: https://fibrotexusa.com/ https://fibrotexusa.com/
- kavalg 4y agoGood luck hiding in the far infrared 10-15 um when the weather is cold
- yetihehe 4y agoPeltier camouflage tiles to the rescue. You will be cold on outside AND you can keep warm on the inside. There were demos where a tank was camouflaged in infrared as a cow or a car.
- 1letterunixname 4y agoOther side's tank commander looks in the thermal at a field at night: "Is that a herd of cows or a herd of tanks?"
- noir_lord 4y agoSir, the Cow is doing 25mph backwards.
- yetihehe 4y agoIn demo, they camouflaged a moving tank as a small compact car.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agoAh! Sounds like hesitation! If you are hesitating to ID a target that could mean you're about to die or you're lucky. Camouflage doesn't need to be perfect, it buys time. Those with better camouflage are more likely to have the advantage of seeing their target first. It's also why stealth aircraft don't need to be perfect- they are more likely to see their enemy first.
- wallflower 4y ago> Gargoyles are no fun to talk to. They never finish a sentence. They are adrift in a laser-drawn world, scanning retinas in all directions, doing background checks on everyone within a thousand yards, seeing everything in visual light, infrared, millimeter-wave radar, and ultrasound all at once. “Snow Crash” (1992) by Neal Stephenson
- grw_ 4y ago> Thermal sensors are a case in point. Today, one that costs about $1,000 and weighs as little as five sachets of sugar Seriously, we're using _sachets of sugar_ to convey weight? Later in the article: > Two decades ago, he adds, a less sensitive thermal sensor weighing a kilogram cost ten times as much And: > A poncho called Noa lite, developed by Fibrotex, an Israeli firm that supplies America’s army, weighs less than 700g Why do journalists do this?
- rbanffy 4y ago> Seriously, we're using _sachets of sugar_ to convey weight? Anything but metric. I get the reason - it conveys the notion on an emotional level. But how many sparrows are that?
- smcl 4y agoWeird thing is that I don't actually have a connection to five sachets of sugar. People might frequently handle one or two sachets at a time and can conceive of the idea that five isn't that much heavier but at that point we might as well write "... and weighs as little as 20 grams, or roughly five sachets of sugar"
- rbanffy 4y agoI've been using sweeteners for years now and, while some go to great lengths to have the same volume "per sweetness" as sugar, they weight much less.
- smcl 4y agoAh that's something I didn't even consider - and I guess a lot of people don't even consume things that we normally add individual sachets of sugar to. At least giving the weight in grams gives you something to go by. Ultimately it's not a huge deal, it is still a little odd though!
- traceroute66 4y ago> Why do journalists do this? I know ! It must be a special part of the curriculum at Journalist School. I imagine the conversation goes something like this.... "No Mr Young Journalist, you cannot use the metric system, and no Mr Young Journalist, you cannot use the imperial system. You must ALWAYS refer to items in relative proportion to some random object of your choice be that swimming pools, football pitches, jumbo jets or bags of sugar ... whatever takes your fancy when you get out of bed that morning, but it must NEVER be metric or imperial measurements".