Re: Laser [quattro-digest V3 #1010]

[dan_masi@MENTORG.COM (Dan Masi)]

On Sep 10,  8:09pm, Igor Kessel wrote:

> No, I had deliberately elected to buy it [Valentine-1]
> without one [laser detection option]. It is about as important
> as a cupholder on any car this side of a Toyota Camry. I do
> not believe in  avoiding a laser trap, this is years of studying
> Optical Quantum Generators (aka "lasers") speaking. The laser beam
> is highly focused and coherent, which means it does not scatter...
> So, virtually no chance of getting a stray signal bounced
> off some letargic Roadmaster fearlessly doing 67 in a 65 mile
> zone in the fast lane in front of you.

Whether it is focused or not, whether it is wavelenght-coherent
or not, has nothing (on a large scale) to do with whether or
not it will be reflected off another surface.  It will.

> Also the light travels at 300000km/sec. What is your best
> reaction time?

True, but you could make the same argument for RADAR, which also
travels at 300000km/sec in free space.  Why bother with radar
(or laser) detectors when the signals travel that fast?
Because (1) you can detect emmisions reflected off of other
vehicles, (2) you can detect emmisions arriving at your vehicle
at levels that are still too low to make it back to the
radar/laser receiver, and (3) the radar/laser gun typically
takes multiple readings and thus takes a long time, relative
to the speed of the signals, to come up with a speed reading.

I agree that laser detectors have very limited use compared
to radar detectors, but I do not agree that they are useless.

Dan Masi
'96 A4Q, V-1/laser equipped