Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Device Will Sense Through Concrete Walls
American Forces Press Service ^ | Jan 3, 2005 | Donna Miles

Posted on 01/03/2006 4:23:08 PM PST by SandRat

WASHINGTON, Jan. 3, 2006 – Troops conducting urban operations soon will have the capabilities of superheroes, being able to sense through 12 inches of concrete to determine if someone is inside a building.

The new "Radar Scope" will give warfighters searching a building the ability to tell within seconds if someone is in the next room, Edward Baranoski from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's Special Projects Office, told the American Forces Press Service.

By simply holding the portable, handheld device up to a wall, users will be able to detect movements as small as breathing, he said.

The Radar Scope, developed by DARPA, is expected to be fielded to troops in Iraq as soon as this spring, Baranoski said. The device is likely to be fielded to the squad level, for use by troops going door to door in search of terrorists.

The Radar Scope will give warfighters the capability to sense through a foot of concrete and 50 feet beyond that into a room, Baranoski explained.

It will bring to the fight what larger, commercially available motion detectors couldn't, he said. Weighing just a pound and a half, the Radar Scope will be about the size of a telephone handset and cost just about $1,000, making it light enough for a soldier to carry and inexpensive enough to be fielded widely.

The Radar Scope will be waterproof and rugged, and will run on AA batteries, he said.

"It may not change how four-man stacks go into a room (during clearing operations)," Baranoski said. "But as they go into a building, it can help them prioritize what rooms they go into. It will give them an extra degree of knowledge so they know if someone is inside."

Even as the organization hurries to get the devices to combat forces, DARPA already is laying groundwork for bigger plans that build on this technology.

Proposals are expected this week for the new "Visi Building" technology that's more than a motion detector. It will actually "see" through multiple walls, penetrating entire buildings to show floor plans, locations of occupants and placement of materials such as weapons caches, Baranoski said.

"It will give (troops) a lot of opportunity to stake out buildings and really see inside," he said. "It will go a long way in extending their surveillance capabilities."

The device is expected to take several years to develop. Ultimately, servicemembers will be able to use it simply by driving or flying by the structure under surveillance, Baranoski said.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: concrete; device; gnfi; new; porkys; sense; terahertzwaves; through; walls; will
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-114 next last
To: RegulatorCountry; GSlob
Jiffy-Pop Jihad.

Thankfully, the joke wasn't completely lost.

41 posted on 01/03/2006 7:10:40 PM PST by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

please put me on your ping list. Very good stuff.


42 posted on 01/03/2006 7:45:19 PM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale

The RATS will point out that these devices are being operated without a warrant and represent a severe violation of privacy.


43 posted on 01/03/2006 9:57:47 PM PST by coconutt2000 (NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!
The question is: will it sense through bikinis?

My eyes do that already!

I'm trying to understand why liberals reproduce next.

44 posted on 01/03/2006 10:04:00 PM PST by Randy Larsen (I BELIEVE CONGRESSMAN WELDON!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SandRat

BTTT


45 posted on 01/04/2006 3:06:05 AM PST by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ducks1944; Ragtime Cowgirl; Alamo-Girl; TrueBeliever9; maestro; TEXOKIE; My back yard; djreece; ...
By simply holding the portable, handheld device up to a wall, users will be able to detect movements as small as breathing, he said.

The Radar Scope, developed by DARPA, is expected to be fielded to troops in Iraq as soon as this spring, Baranoski said. The device is likely to be fielded to the squad level, for use by troops going door to door in search of terrorists.

The Radar Scope will give warfighters the capability to sense through a foot of concrete and 50 feet beyond that into a room, Baranoski explained.

46 posted on 01/04/2006 5:36:08 AM PST by Calpernia (Breederville.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SandRat; Mo1; Howlin; Peach; BeforeISleep; kimmie7; 4integrity; BigSkyFreeper; RandallFlagg; ...

Cool!


47 posted on 01/04/2006 6:35:37 AM PST by OXENinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
... unless it's my concrete wall, yikes! :oP
48 posted on 01/04/2006 7:35:40 AM PST by cyn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: mysterio; Aussiebabe; Badray
The Supreme Court was already called upon to answer the question of whether using sense enhancing technology to "view" the inside of a home was a "search" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Here's a link to the full case:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=000&invol=99-8508

"Held: Where, as here, the Government uses a device that is not in general public use, to explore details of a private home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a Fourth Amendment "search," and is presumptively unreasonable without a warrant. Pp. 3-13."


Ping to Badray
49 posted on 01/04/2006 7:48:52 AM PST by Conservative Goddess (Politiae legibus, non leges politiis, adaptandae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GSlob
What problem? If it is a radar, then by using aluminum foil for a wallpaper [and lining the floors and ceilings as well], the radar would be defeated.

Hmmm. Geez guys what's this big ole black spot on the radar? Let's check that out first.

50 posted on 01/04/2006 7:55:29 AM PST by numberonepal (Don't Even Think About Treading On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood; Cobra64; Normal4me; ArrogantBustard; Richard-SIA; Centurion2000; PeaceBeWithYou

I posted my reply too soon....after reading a number of subsequent posts, I see that many have concerns about the Fourth Amendment protections. I think they are unfounded based on the Supreme Court case, Kyllo v. US. Please see my post here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1551375/posts?page=49#49


51 posted on 01/04/2006 8:00:19 AM PST by Conservative Goddess (Politiae legibus, non leges politiis, adaptandae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Wormwood

I can see where this could have geat commercial utility in locating buried infrastructure.


52 posted on 01/04/2006 8:06:35 AM PST by Old Professer (Fix the problem, not the blame!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Goddess
Excellent! Kyllo involves a thermal imaging device: a passive sensor. The device in this thread is a RADAR, an active sensor. The reasoning in Kyllo, that scanning the structure with a passive device "not in common use" constitutes a "search" would seem to apply even more strongly to an active device.

The Fourth Amendment is obviously irrelevant to its use by soldiers in a foreign war.

53 posted on 01/04/2006 8:06:39 AM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilisation is aborting, buggering, and contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

Every now and then, the Supremes get one right. I seem to recall that this was a 5-4 decision...with the Chief Justice dissenting. It was a squeaker....so we must remain eternally vigilant.


54 posted on 01/04/2006 8:10:30 AM PST by Conservative Goddess (Politiae legibus, non leges politiis, adaptandae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia

Thanks for the ping!


55 posted on 01/04/2006 8:20:41 AM PST by Alamo-Girl (Monthly is the best way to donate to Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Goddess

Ah, to be young and trusting again!

Post 9-11 it seems ALL of our rights are merely formalities, subject to suspension at the whim of Gov. Org. and "Law Enforcement".

I have seen too many examples of "precedent" being ignored to have any faith in this tech not being abused daily.

What a brave new world the next generation will have to endure, and the really sad part is that will not even realize what has been lost.


56 posted on 01/04/2006 8:39:58 AM PST by Richard-SIA ("The natural progress of things is for government to gain ground and for liberty to yield" JEFFERSON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Richard-SIA

LOL....I'm not young, but God Bless you for suggesting that I am.....and I don't trust. Please see my post number 54......

"The price of LIBERTY is ETERNAL vigilance."

We simply have precedent on our side.....that's all.


57 posted on 01/04/2006 9:04:48 AM PST by Conservative Goddess (Politiae legibus, non leges politiis, adaptandae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: mysterio; Conservative Goddess; JTN; conservativehoney; Dan Evans

Thank you.

People are confusing terms. A 'reasonable' search is one that comports with the 4th Amendment requirements of a warrant backed by probable cause and a sworn affidavit.

An 'unreasonable' one is any one without a warrant. No simple law, no judicial ruling, and no executive order can change that. Only an amendment or a declaration of war against the American people can, or a lazy, complacent, and scared populace that will accept it. There is no off switch on the Constitution.


58 posted on 01/04/2006 9:46:52 AM PST by Badray (In the hands of bureaucrat, a clip board can be as dangerous to liberty as a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: SampleMan
Any wave penetrating 12" of concrete isn't simply going to refelect off of tinfoil.

I think it would. Some things are transparent to EM radiation and some things aren't. For example, you can see light through 12 inches of glass but not through a .001 inches of aluminum foil. It depends a lot on the wavelength.

59 posted on 01/04/2006 11:42:04 AM PST by Dan Evans
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Dan Evans

Right. It depends on the wavelength. That's all I was saying. The shorter the wavelength, the more likely it is to reflect or absorb.


60 posted on 01/04/2006 11:46:30 AM PST by SampleMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-114 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson