How to avoid being detected by Helicopters

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   
I know this has been discussed before and there may be suits out there or tricks to reduce your heat signature but that is all you are doing is reducing. Nothing is going to hide the heat for long.

I worked on these optics while in the military...Mostly the AH-64 and the OH-58D then went to a special op unit with Blackhawks and Little Birds.

You can try to hide and you may just do it but your chances really depend on how determined the guy is looking thru the FLIR




posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:35 PM
link   
hi
You guys are going off track, if you dont see the helicopter you wont know that it is time to deploy countermeasures, you could have the best IR defeating blanket but if you dont see/hear the heli, you are dead.

The thread is about detecting a heli that you cant see or hear not about IR countermeasures.
If you want to discuss defeating thermal imaging the thread is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

SO BACK ON TOPIC:
Usually chopper is 2-2.5 miles away and would shoot you based on your thermal signature and you wont even see it coming let alone try to hide your thermal image.

Before Radar they had these huge acoustic mirrors to try to detect incoming planes based on the noise their engine makes, but they are not portable and easily visually detectable.
www.andrewgrantham.co.uk...
Do you think those inexpensive portable homemade parabolic mics, perhaps with an amplifier be able to pick up the buzz of a choppers engine to alert you that a chopper is near so you can take counter measures????





[edit on 11-8-2009 by anonymouse11]



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I've seen some videos on youtube of anti flir technologies if you will.

Saab's Barracuda technologies camouflage system that can hide big vehicles, armor etc.. They say with the screen up it can hide from any know sensor





German company Texplorer camo clothing that uses a metallized fabric called Ghost that helps greatly reduces heat and nightvision signature



There was another one I remember seeing of a ghille suit defeating a flir system, but I can't find it but there's plenty of info on that out there. I also came across some stuff about how really thick dense foliage can defeat flir sometimes, just google for it.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by anonymouse11


SO BACK ON TOPIC:
Usually chopper is 2-2.5 miles away and would shoot you based on your thermal signature and you wont even see it coming let alone try to hide your thermal image.

Before Radar they had these huge acoustic mirrors to try to detect incoming planes based on the noise their engine makes, but they are not portable and easily visually detectable.
www.andrewgrantham.co.uk...
Do you think those inexpensive portable homemade parabolic mics, perhaps with an amplifier be able to pick up the buzz of a choppers engine to alert you that a chopper is near so you can take counter measures????





[edit on 11-8-2009 by anonymouse11]


No, the parabolic microphone isn't a sound solution. You will tie up at least one hand while you are using it. Due to its directional nature, you will have to constantly scan 360 Deg. You will have on headphones, or at least one earpiece in. Spinning like a top to listen all around, and concentrating on what you hear from the mic, you will be distracted by listening for helos. You will not be concentrating on your immediate tactical environment. Your movement, and that is not even considering tactical movement, will be impaired. How will you accomplish any other tasks as well, while you are listening? Simply, you will be unable to perform any but the most basic tasks.

Helos do make a fair amount of noise. If helos are your biggest fear, and you are willing to give up all of the above to hear them (and, naturally, to stop what you are doing and dig in or set up whatever countermeasures that you have in mind each and every time you think that you hear blades), you may still get popped by a loitering drone that you never heard.

Look at it this way. You could design a tank with armor more thick than the conning tower of an Iowa-class BB. No opposing Main Gun will ever penetrate it, but it would be a failure, because it is tactically unbalanced.



posted on Aug, 11 2009 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Viking04

Originally posted by anonymouse11


SO BACK ON TOPIC:
Usually chopper is 2-2.5 miles away and would shoot you based on your thermal signature and you wont even see it coming let alone try to hide your thermal image.

Before Radar they had these huge acoustic mirrors to try to detect incoming planes based on the noise their engine makes, but they are not portable and easily visually detectable.
www.andrewgrantham.co.uk...
Do you think those inexpensive portable homemade parabolic mics, perhaps with an amplifier be able to pick up the buzz of a choppers engine to alert you that a chopper is near so you can take counter measures????





[edit on 11-8-2009 by anonymouse11]


No, the parabolic microphone isn't a sound solution. You will tie up at least one hand while you are using it. Due to its directional nature, you will have to constantly scan 360 Deg. You will have on headphones, or at least one earpiece in. Spinning like a top to listen all around, and concentrating on what you hear from the mic, you will be distracted by listening for helos. You will not be concentrating on your immediate tactical environment. Your movement, and that is not even considering tactical movement, will be impaired. How will you accomplish any other tasks as well, while you are listening? Simply, you will be unable to perform any but the most basic tasks.

Helos do make a fair amount of noise. If helos are your biggest fear, and you are willing to give up all of the above to hear them (and, naturally, to stop what you are doing and dig in or set up whatever countermeasures that you have in mind each and every time you think that you hear blades), you may still get popped by a loitering drone that you never heard.

Look at it this way. You could design a tank with armor more thick than the conning tower of an Iowa-class BB. No opposing Main Gun will ever penetrate it, but it would be a failure, because it is tactically unbalanced.


I am just wondering about the viability of the method, you can be moving in a group and have one person be the spotter scanning 360 , that would be his job. So you think that would work ??
I just dont want to me hellfire meat like those insurgents.



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 01:06 AM
link   
reply to post by audas
 


I don't know what you're talking about - I previously pointed out to not put too much faith in those FLIR videos you see on YouTube, and you start talking about some crap about guerilla fighting success for 30 years?

Sooooo, FLIR hasn't completely wiped them out? You just validated my point by arguing for me while arguing against me.

One point you're entirely incorrect on. The Afghani's HAVE been defeated - by a Westerner. Alexander depopulated entire regions, but he certainly defeated them. You were saying . . .

You ask how often has a typical American come up against US tech? I'm assuming you have a point to make - but failed to?

While most Americans don't have experience milking or humping goats, surely you aren't suggesting that the millions of veterans, including decorated combat veterans - who live here in the US - the very ones who actually use/used such equipment - and they never learned a damned thing about American military technology?

Who better to know American military equipment than those American civilians who design, construct, train, and use that same equipment? Who happen to be Americans?

There goes your blatantly stupid supposition.

And no, don't tell me I don't have any idea. You spout AI drones, and technologies able to see through dust and water clouds from miles high, able to locate and monitor vehicles, ground weapons systems, tanks, small arms and personnel -

well, Slick - I have a question for you -

IF these detection systems are so great, then why in hell are we STILL in Afghanistan? After all, according to your bloated, pretentious, and erroneous claims of the enormous capabilities of these detection and weapons systems - every Taliban and guerilla should be dead by now - killed by your super drone and impossible to defeat detection system.

NOT a FACT.

Well?

Robotic warfare? This isn't a Predator movie, and you'll need to stop confusing science fiction with reality. There's a difference. Your authoritative stance is much akin to a veterinary chute for bulls. Yep. Right there on the ground.

Baghdad has the most aerial robots? What? An RC Model flying club? Because if they were any damned good at detection, there wouldn't be all the militants and militia groups able to traverse long distances while armed. So what's wrong with this picture?

Let me explain something sonny. If you'll go back to the early and mid sixties and read the Popular Mechanics or Popular Science periodicals, you'll find that we're all supposed to be driving flying cars, enjoying transatlantic ground effect flights, have vacation colonies on Mars and the moons of Saturn, have cured cancer and most degenerative diseases, be using free energy, and autobots are supposed to be driving our cars, keeping a sharp silicone chip lookout for nearsubsonic trains, and will take us to the undersea transatlantic tunnel from the US to Europe where you travel with pulsed air pressure.

Do you already have your personal deep water submarine that runs on resonant plasma? Yeah. I didn't think so.

Wiredforwar is just another dreambook. Geez.

So why don't you read up, and come back to the thread.

One other thing - never trust a single "authority" on anything.

A lot fewer disappointments that way.

We're supposed to have ray guns, and not even need helicopters right now. My God, this is the twenty-first Century.



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Did yourself some foxholes and hope they miss the first time?



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by anonymouse11
 


No, it still does not work. The second person is wasted, doing nothing by operating the mic. Futher, you have doubled your IR signature, and you still will not hear the drone that gets you.



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 10:33 AM
link   
Just a hint for the OP, if you want people to discuss the topic of detecting helicopters, than give your thread the title "detecting helicopters." It seems pretty childish that you're yelling at people for discussing "how to avoid being detected by helicopters" when the title you gave the thread is...

"How to avoid being detected by Helicopters."



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 




The OP just doesn't like the answers, because his situation is impossible. If you limit your response to the narrow scope that he elaborated, then the answer is "Kiss your azz Goodbye"!!!

There is no way to avoid a modern military force using all their available assets and technology once they are within 2.5 miles, and you are their sole target!!

The situation would never come to fruition, because they won't waste all those assets on one guy, and the subsequent responses were very appropriate and useful!!



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I don't think you're ever going to detect a Helicopter when it's miles off unless you happen to have a radar and that would just be the ultimate beacon like I said earlier glass or plexiglass is the best chance that way you can escape detection until the thing's practically on top of you and you can see it.

Detecting it is pointless anyway it's not like you can outrun it hiding is the name of the game I don't think parabolic's would be useful as you don't know from what direction it may be coming.

I'm thinking safest bet would be underground shelter with a huge sheet of plexiglass above it separated by a metre or so so it's at ambient temperature.



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
Just a hint for the OP, if you want people to discuss the topic of detecting helicopters, than give your thread the title "detecting helicopters." It seems pretty childish that you're yelling at people for discussing "how to avoid being detected by helicopters" when the title you gave the thread is...

"How to avoid being detected by Helicopters."


Hi, You are right I didn't word it properly, should I make a new thread ?



posted on Aug, 12 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
I think you can edit the title... Or have a moderator do it. Or heck, why not just go with the flow?

The sound thing would never work anyways. There are too many rogue factors in place to detect modern aircraft by sound alone. At 2 miles away, taking into consideration the speed and way they maneuver, by the time you detected they were there they would be somewhere else. Also, those microphones are designed to amplify sound sources, not locate them. You'd need at least 3, spread far enough apart to account for margin of error, to actually detect anything with them.

While not technically "stealth" aircraft, those things are designed and built to be difficult to detect even with modern, purpose-built technology. Short of highly advanced radar, you're just not going to have a good chance of seeing them coming.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
The sound thing would never work anyways. There are too many rogue factors in place to detect modern aircraft by sound alone. At 2 miles away, taking into consideration the speed and way they maneuver, by the time you detected they were there they would be somewhere else. Also, those microphones are designed to amplify sound sources, not locate them. .


By detect I mean just knowing there is a heli in the area and you go and hide.

So you think a parabolic mic would be able to pick up the sound of the rotors , even if it is a faint sound ?? You dont need the superduper clarity you would require if you were trying to listen to a conversation.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 04:49 AM
link   
You'd probably hear it, yeah, if you just happened to point the thing *RIGHT* at the helicopter. Which you likely would not do. Remember you aren't searching 360 degrees, you have "up" and "down" to worry about also. It's just an all around waste of time and energy and manpower to bother with, and besides that, they're still probably going to detect you before you detect them.

Think about it... if they've sent a helicopter into the middle of the wilderness, it means they already have a general idea of where you are.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 05:35 AM
link   
If you know it is there, and after you, hiding from it using concealment is just not really practical.

But you can always blind it with something like a flare gun. The extreme sensitivity of this equipment, then becomes it's greatest downfall.

And no.
Glass or plexiglass will not hide you.
What you need is something that reflects heat and light, like a space blanket, with the foil inwards as others have already suggested.

Putting a sheet of glass between yourself and the sun, does not make the sun become invisible, does it ?
Likewise, if you are (relatively) hot and glowing, it will not hide you in the slightest from IR sensitive equipment.

Double glazing only limits conducted heat, it offers no serious resistance to radiated heat. It is why double glazing is only effective in cold climates. It is never used in the tropics to keep the sun out.

Your best bet to hide if under attack, might be to light some really large grass fires that will grow and spread, if the terrain allows that..



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
You'd probably hear it, yeah, if you just happened to point the thing *RIGHT* at the helicopter.


A good point...Assuming the weapons-officer already has an IR/other thermal signature fix on you, they then see a 'device' pointed directly at them and a split-second threat-assessment decision is taken, which in a hostile environment would be to open fire and eliminate the potential threat

The best way to hide from aerial surveillance is to disguise yourself amongst a large body of other people.

As the chinese proveb says "wise man hide leaf in forest"



[edit on 13-8-2009 by Taikonaut]



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 07:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
You'd probably hear it, yeah, if you just happened to point the thing *RIGHT* at the helicopter. Which you likely would not do. Remember you aren't searching 360 degrees, you have "up" and "down" to worry about also. It's just an all around waste of time and energy and manpower to bother with, and besides that, they're still probably going to detect you before you detect them.

Think about it... if they've sent a helicopter into the middle of the wilderness, it means they already have a general idea of where you are.


Cool, can anyone make one and try pointing it at a distant heli and see if you can hear the distinct buzz of the rotor ? There aren't any choppers of any sort in my area.

The scenario is you have just hit a govt convoy for food supplies and weapons, you have to retreat they have called in airsupport, while retreating the heli can hit u while u are retreating and you wont even know it until u r dead. If one in the group is scanning using the parabolic mic and pick up a heli in the area, they can hide until it leaves.
1. Helis have like 30 mins fuel ??
2. If heli cant spot u , it will be doing sweeps and will make its position known.
3. If you are just walking along thinking you are safe, no helis in the area it will send a hellfire your way killing your whole group.



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
You're worried about being killed by something undetectable and far away? Never knew what hit you?
THEN WHY WORRY?!

Besides they dont waste Hellfire on individual you know. Soooo my advice would be dont stay with other people, if this is your biggest fear? Just be one guy in a house and by the time the helicopter gets within bullet range you should be able to hear...



posted on Aug, 13 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
OK I will play along with the OP here for a second and think outside the current "its-radar-or-nothing" box.

First off, if the helo is in contact with anyone, you should be able to roughly triangulate its location using a few guys with some ham radio antennas and some spare computing power. Just record bursts of noise on military bands and use a computer to calculate the difference in timing between the same noise burst received at different locations.

With this method, you should be able to cover entire regions with only a few guys running receiving stations. The problem is that it is very hard to distinguish between bursty encrypted military traffic and noise from lightening strikes. Expect the military to begin scheduling operations just before major storms in response.

Secondly, the rotors of a helo can produce a pretty strong electrostatic field. This field can be detected. I am not sure about the range but a whole collection of small, solar powered, e-field detectors could be scattered around a location and used to detect anomalous e-fields. Using an ad-hoc wireless network protocol, the simple devices can form a detection mesh that can be used to detect and track helos - especially during times of low humidity or in deserts.

This method also suffers from misreadings during thunderstorms due to electrical interference. I would guess that with good enough software, both systems (perhaps working together) could be made less susceptible to electrical storms.

In fact, the same sensor modules that read e-fields could also be designed with mics to monitor VLF sound for the rhythmic thumping of a chopper. Once again using an ad-hoc network and very simple software, the devices can work together to calculate the position, direction, and velocity of helos.

Any other outside-the-cage ideas?

Jon






top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join