[ExI] the eagles are coming!
dsa at unsa.edu.ar
Thu Feb 11 18:00:57 UTC 2016
falcons vs pidgeos in dubai
perhaps drones could be vindicated by making one that can scare pidgeons
2016-02-10 17:43 GMT-03:00 Dan TheBookMan <danust2012 at gmail.com>:
> On Feb 10, 2016, at 10:38 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org>] *On Behalf Of *William Flynn
> >…Thanks for all the info but I think you ducked the question (pun
> intended). Or maybe you don't know just how low a radar can detect
> What I meant was that radar isn’t the right tool for spotting low and slow
> camera drones, the kind of stuff you can train eagles to foil. Radar waves
> are too long for that. Those are better at spotting planes way out there.
> For that kind of thing, you would use a microwave emitter/receiver, and
> move up from there. A toy drone would be easy to spot a mile away with a
> microwave detector, and the whole rig is small enough to fit in the back of
> a light pickup truck.
> If someone is speechifying and a bad guy wanted to launch from a couple km
> out, fly in close and hand her a small but deadly explosive device for
> instance, it would be easy to set up a dual spectrum or multispectrum
> detector and the means to foil that plan. I do hope this protection system
> is used.
> >…Is 'under the radar' still applicable? Or maybe it would be a
> satellite? I know they can read newspapers from up there. But can they
> scan for low flying drones? Our defense dept. has to be working on that.
> Ja there are some types of radar planes can get under, but consider what
> radar was developed for: seeing a bunch of WW2-style bombers coming in at a
> couple hundred knots while they were still far enough out there to man the
> battle stations. The attack on Pearl in 1941 would have turned out a lot
> differently had the Yankees been given one hour notice.
> The US did have radar and spotted the planes coming in, but communications
> and interpretations issues trumped that. The same can happen with more
> modern systems. I think the lesson of Pearl Harbor was more one of not
> looking for what you don't expect: the US was expecting sabotage not an air
> raid. So it looked for and planned against sabotage while ignoring signs of
> and planning against an air raid. But that is hindsight bias.
> A bigger lesson is that in order to not be surprised too often one has to
> be a little more imaginative and do a lot more intelligence collection. And
> the latter doesn't mean listening in on every phone call. It would've been
> far better to have a few spies in well placed positions in the Japanese
> government and military than listening in on every communication in Japan.
> Sample my Kindle books via:
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Diego.Saravia at gmail.com
NO FUNCIONA->dsa at unsa.edu.ar
"Disclaimer:" Haré lo que desee con los correos que reciba, quien no este
de acuerdo, que se abstenga de enviarme correo a mí o a las listas donde
En particular NO VALE ningun "disclaimer" que indique que el correo enviado
es privado o sujeto a normas de empresas, gobiernos, u organizaciones de
Con relación a los estados y sus leyes, analizare cualquier norma aplicable
en el territorio donde eventualmente actúe en el momento, escucho a
cualquiera que tenga algo que decir.
Con respecto en particular a los derechos de autor, salvo acuerdo previo,
gozaré plenamente de las 4 libertades con todo lo que reciba,
considerandolo, en cuanto a lo patrimonial,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat