Please tell us how to defeat it

What language, C?…

@@leehewitt9559 the firmware was written in C and there was a bit of assembler for a few bits that needed to be really fast

@@nw8000 why would you want to defet it. They are there for your safty

@@richglist thought so👌

I was taught the long rectangular comb like radar is what we pilots call SSR, Secondary Surveillance Radar, That works with the transponder in the aircraft which is now MODE S but was previously Mode C and Mode A before that. Mode A was position only, Mode C introduced altitude encoding and Mode S is Speed, Alt and position with aircraft identifiers etc? The Lower dish type radar we call a Primary radar. The other system a friend of mine worked on was at RAF Fylingdales, which is called a phased array radar the workings of that system remain a mystery to me though, but it has a large 10 Nm HIRTA around it on the map and it looks very different to the Golf Balls we see around Croughton etc so I keep well away! I never really thought about radar being used in any other environment except Marine and aviation. We say you should learn something new every day, and I just learned something new, thanks👍 Just thinking out loud here, but is there any degradation in the system if the reflectors get contaminated with snow or rain? Or any other causes of reduced accuracy. What is the minimum number of reflectors needed for an acceptable fix? GPS needs 4 satellites at a minimum for an acceptable lock on, around 8 or 9 give much better accuracy. For aviation purposes we have WAAS which is the advanced form of DGPS, similar to the system described in this video for farmers. My thoughts on this system for road safety is not convincing. Clearly there is an issue as there have been a few deaths on UK smart motorways in situations this system seems to have been designed to prevent?

@@rogerblackwood8815 Hello Roger - yes indeed the rectangular antenna is MSSR (monopulse secondary surveillance radar) - sending probably modes 3/A, C and Mode S. Modes 3/A (ident - 'squawk') and C (barometrical altitude in 100ft increments) are slowly being phased out since there is no error correction and therefore other responses overlaying the desired signals can cause garbling and Mode S has a 'lockout' mechanism designed to reduce RF pollution on the 1030/1090 MHz band. Mode S has some error correction built-in and also contains ident and barometric altitude information (but in 25ft increments). FRUIT (false replies uncorrelated in time) is the enemy of correctly decoded replies, Mode S reduces FRUIT drastically. (It's well known that Frankfurt was one of the worst locations for FRUIT with 100 000 false replies per second.) Mode S radars can also be 'clustered' - so they intelligently decide among themselves which radar shall interrogate the aircraft. Mode S is so called because it can _selectively_ interrogate individual aircraft using the unique ICAO 24-bit aircraft address. Going back to MSSR, the "monopulse" feature allows the radar to locate the azimuth of the replying aircraft very accurately by using the phase relation of the returning signal plus the information from the rotational position encoder of the antenna. This allows the radar to accurately locate the aircraft. Additionally, many Mode S aircraft transponders can 'squitter' information spontaneously using ADS-B on 1090 MHz such as the current location of the aircraft and the quality of the GPS position fix. Mode S radars have an 'All call' feature where they solicit replies from all aircraft in range to build the list of aircraft that they can then selectively interrogate. Mode S interrogators transmit an interrogator code so that the transponder knows to which interrogator it has replied. Mode S doesn't directly transmit position, but does transmit speed & heading as well as advanced features like selected altitude (if on autopilot and in a climb, for example). The whole topic of Mode S and ADS-B are too big for this forum! Phased array radars send out pulses from Tx/Rx units (elements) which are controlled very accurately. Since a phased array radar uses many of these Tx/Rx units each controlling an antenna element. The phase of each pulse from each unit can be very accurately controlled, so that when all are triggered at the same time, the beam goes out straight, or the bottom ones before the top ones, then the wavefront (therefore also beam) is directed upward and eg. right ones before left ones then the wavefront is directed left etc. These can all be combined (computer controlled). So even a non-rotating phased array primary radar antenna can scan the sky up and down and from side to side. Incidentally we say "primary" for radars that work on the echo principle - they determine "is anything there?" Then, once we know there is something there and its azimuth from the radar, we can interrogate its transponder with the "secondary" radar to determine "who is there?". This is why military secondary antennas are sometimes skewed compared to the primary antenna, so as to allow for the processing delay of the primary plot and interrogate with secondary radar only slightly later as soon as we come to the appropriate azimuth. Sorry to go on - it's a huge topic. All the best, Rob in Switzerland

@@RobWhittlestone Thanks for the detailed explanation. As I said, a friend of mine was in the RAF based at Fylingdales. He called himself a scope dope, obviously his detail was watching the screens all day, he said he was primarily tasked with stuff way up in the sky, space junk etc. He tried to explain the system, but as you say it is a huge subject on its own, a bit like when people ask questions about flying, there aren't many questions with a simple answer! Even the simple one, how high are we? Well are we talking above ground, MSL or Flight Levels? I learnt to fly when ADF was still a thing published on most approaches. We had to learn the theory of the ILS systems, I think I learnt enough to pass! All that knowledge is now pretty much redundant, as are the VOR's etc, many have gone off line permanently. It would seem you are involved in the latest systems and we could probably spend many an hour in a bar discussing these things! One of my favourite memories of Primary Radar was a flight from Ostend to Stapleford, just south of Stansted in the late 90's. I was mid channel, about 60 miles out from the VOR with a solid DME readout at 5000'. Yet Kent Radar, based at Manston on the coast said they couldn't see me, even with a Squawk issued by the Belgians. That didn't give me much confidence contemplating an emergency! With the advent of Mode S the coverage is much more reliable now. How does it perform in mountainous areas, are there still dead spots, as it is still line of sight?

Not having a hard shoulder, no matter how amazing people think technology is, is F'in mad, just so the powers above can increase flow efficiency without investing in another costly lane. Its nuts and will continue to kill people. They've obviously done a cost/life analysis. And the money came first. Also notice that a lot of barriers have been installed to your left so you cant choose to ram your dying vehicle onto a grass verge to save human life. Disgusting murderous behaviour.

"Proper" hard shoulders are the most dangerous lane on the motorway. It is exceedingly rare to not be able to roll to a refuge area on all lane running motorways, and if you are off the carriage way, there will be no rush to your rescue, especially if you have not contacted the highways agency or police. If you are a member of a recovery organisation they will do nothing about recovering you until highways are informed and close a lane for them to work in. What you are supposed to do is move left, switch on hazard lights, exit the vehicle by the left hand doors, climb the bank and call 999 and ask for police. Ideally with the number on a nearby blue & white post. That will gain a much faster response than being off the carriageway, and thus is safer for everyone.

@@stevesmith7530 I'm sure you're right Steve. Having huge trucks expanding rapidly in your mirror, hearing them slam on the anchors and swerve round me in a blast of air-horns somewhat defeated my thought processes. Several times In fact, all this wonderful digital tech needed was a reboot - switch off and start up again, and the fault temporarily clears removing the rev limiter. It did keep recurring intermittently afterwards though. And the fix? A new pedal assembly - £510 plus labour, and there isn't one in the UK atm. What was wrong with analogue cars eh?

@@alastairbarkley6572 Well, in reverse order, the problem with analouge cars is the public learned they were not wanted. More and cleaner power from smaller engines, lots of electronic toys etc. You hit the nail on the head too, so many people do not consider what they should be doing, then any common sense they may have gets drowned in fear. Hence why thehighway code, driving tests, tv ad campaigns etc contain instructions on what to do, but so few people pay attention whilst or before driving.

@@stevesmith7530 it truly worries me that anybody thinks that the Hard shoulder of a UK motorway is in ANY way a safe place to stop. I have met too many police officers who have attended nasty accidents on the hard shoulder. - I even used to know one officer who was sadly heavily brain damaged when his car was hit by a lorry when stopping to protect a broken down car. His partner was unable to walk for over a year too. When my friends used to pass their driving test, I would always say, "if ever you break down on the hard shoulder, get out of the car and keep well away from it... NEVER stop unless broken down." This advice paid off one day when a European Lorry clipped a friends broken down car, spinning it round a few times and shunting it into the Hard Shoulder crash barrier. Had they been sat in the car, or on the barrier, it would have been very nasty.

Um no you're way off base... why would the system be down? The government implemented this to make things more efficient on the road. Obviously they have reliability and redundancy in mind. Get off your high horse, the government are just people and want what's best for society, obviously what this system is. I bet your the type to deny climate change, cell phones and probably believe the earth is flat! Get with the program, don't be a sheep! 🐑

I think you're referring to GNSS, GBAS is just a ground unit that gives GPS correction data in order to improve the accuracy for things like instrument approaches (it essentially sends something known as a FAS data block). However the more commonly used however now is SBAS (satellite based augmentation system) as it is more widespread requires less upfront costs (divided per use) and maintenance fees. Both GBAS and SBAS has created the RNP APCHs (Required navigation performance approaches) used now instead of traditional RNAV instrument approaches, being considerably more accurate (RNP APCHs can be up to 0.3nm accurate).

Agreed. Although technically interesting, the practical use on Smart Motorways is insufficient to prevent a collision, or stopped vehicle, from causing a dangerous situation. How long before human interaction can intervene and remove the danger? How many automatic overhead warning/speed restriction signage is required to cover what the radar can detect?

RTK is what we use for our gps kits on site because you can get around +-25mm precision on it, using a controller with a built in sim. Very handy, but expensive. I imagine these radars will be fitted with a similar system but knowing Highways England they’ll find a way to cut costs

This is the issue with so-called Smart motorways - I was travelling on the M6 southbound 2 weeks ago and saw a car broken down in lane 1 (the driver was stood at the back of the car in the middle of the live lane) All the signs said the lanes were clear just before and just after the broken down car, but less than 2 minutes down the motorway, the operators had seen fit to slow everyone down for 'report of person in the carriageway' - we saw nothing like it in the area they'd slowed the traffic down for. For the Smart motorway network to be covered by so many CCTV cameras, It seems ridiculous that they can't use the lane control correctly. In future, I think a call to the police might be in order to ensure they know there is a broken down vehicle in a live lane as I dread to think what could happen with a non observant driver ploughing into the stationary vehicle.

Smart highways are only built for the new world order.....WEF

Its used to scoop your remains up with. The peak is actually used as a scraper if that happens 😆

I would also imagine that during setup for one of these things, one can tell the software to ignore permanent things. They may also tie in to CCTV and thus have forms of object detection and removal as well, but that’s just a guess. If it were my system and I was designing it; I would pair each sensor up with CCTV nearby/next to the sensor, and an operator could use a mouse or tablet pen to simply paint over the objects you wish to make the system ignore, or similarly that you want the system to *never* ignore, such as any object that has been detected in a breakdown bay. I would want the system to fire off a notification the second it spots something-anything-in this part of the frame. An advantage of pairing it to CCTV is that when the system does fire a notification, an operator in a control room who clicks on the notification, will also be immediately taken to a live feed of that sensor, with that camera, already zoomed in and focused on the point of which the software generated the notification for. The operator will then have the decision to reject or action that notification, and when actioned, the operator will have access to CCTV footage starting, say, 30 seconds prior to the event that triggered the software. That and as you said, simply comparing a scan that it took just now, to scans taken at previous points in time. It shouldn’t take many scans for the software to work out that a given thing is a fixed object, and thus is to be discarded on future scans. P.S. having more of a think about this, I am almost certain that to set one of these up, you will have to tell the software how many lanes your piece of road has, how wide each lane is, perhaps the direction of those lanes, and similar pieces of data, which will then give the software some idea on where it should be looking and focusing its attention on, in each of these scans. I think that once you tell the software specific information about the piece of road it is responsible for, then scanning and mapping clutter for removal is fairly simple, and can be done decently reliably without much-if any-human intervention. Although, false positives may not always be a bad thing. For a safety-critical system like this, I would personally want to err *just* on the side of caution. You don’t want one of these spitting out false positive notifications every five seconds, but maybe two or three in one eight hour shift is something I would consider to be acceptable. It’s about finding a sweet spot between being more sensitive and thus kicking out alerts for something slightly out the ordinary, but not picking up a million and one different things in each scan. Also, jeez this turned into an essay, didn’t it! Sorry to do that! But the above ideas is how I would design things if you plopped a movie trope cash-laden briefcase on my desk and demanded I build you something like this for your motorway.

It's radar so it has depth perception. It doesn't see the world in 2d like a camera does. So one would assume it simply ignores objects like lamp posts because it knows they aren't in the lanes they are either to the left or to the right of the lanes.

I think it's looking for movement specifically.

It can ignore non moving stuff after a while

Ah cheers Duane! It’s always nice to learn

Yes SA was switched off in 2000.

@@RingwayManchester "It’s always nice to learn" Which is why I'm subscribed to your channel. Thanks for all the interesting content.

We had to re program the software for the Handheld units we manufactured for the outdoor market.

Thanks so much mate

nope. "Smart" will kill you !! just look at the stats!

If it is behind you, not really a problem. Contrary to common belief, the hard shoulder is the most dangerous lane on the motorway.

@@stevesmith7530 So if you have an emergency on a motorway you're much better off stopping in a live lane than you are on a hard shoulder? I'll let you test that one. You might even win a Darwin award for your efforts. Oh it might be worth considering what happens when the power goes off or there is some other fault which is basically nothing. If those signs aren't lit then all lanes are considered open at the national speed limit no matter what might be going on up ahead. Still best of luck to you.

@@binky_bun I work on the roads, respond to many, many incidents on them. If hard shoulders are so safe, why are the protocols for working on them exactly the same as any other lane? Cushion trucks, arrow boards, multiple well lit vehicles with high conspicuity markings etc. Given that nobody should be driving on the hard shoulder other than to stop or to rejoin the main carriageway, 12 fatalities a year for a practically zero traffic lane is horrendous, even with all the added protection frequently used. All lane running areas have both active and passive safety monitoring which regular motorway sections do not, they also have the ability to make any lanes effectively hard shoulders, even stop traffic completely that again regular motorway stretches do not. Look at the average outside lane collision, generally a few cars nose to tail with no serious injuries at middling speeds, and once the scene has stabilised itself, it is rare to have anyone else hit it, even from the higher speeds common in outer lanes. Yet the hard shoulder, well you are likely to be stationary and hit by something weighing in at 44 tonnes doing 56mph, that is not going to be pretty. As I have said elsewhere, if you break down in a live lane, follow the advice in the highway code, hazards on, exit the vehicle, and get well away from the carriageway then ring police with the number of the nearest marker post. Oddly, this is exactly the same advice as has been given for decades (pre-smart motorways) to people stopping on the hard shoulder, because it is an exceedingly dangerous place Emotionally smart motorways are dangerous, hard shoulders safer, but reality ignores what people feel, or think should be. The only danger is dumb drivers. If as many people who think they are dangerous treated them as being as dangerous as they believe they are, the collision rate would be near zero.

@@stevesmith7530 whatever you say. We didn't stop putting fire escapes in buildings when smoke detectors came along. When safety is the top priority we strive to make things safer with whatever technology becomes available. Smart motorways only exist to squeeze an extra lane in by removing a safety feature added when the motorway network was first built and trying to compensate for that with some fancy electronics that don't do anything when the power goes off. It's cost over safety and it's as simple as that. The money would have been better spent getting cars off the roads by encouraging telecommuting and improving rail freight services and public transport and communication infrastructure which would not only ease congestion and make existing roads safer but improve air quality and reduce dependence on fossil fuels. The whole smart motorway idea is just totally backwards in terms of priorities. If your main priority is bigger roads on the cheap smart motorways are the answer. The technology involved is just compromising for the lack of a shoulder otherwise they would be fitting that stuff everywhere

@@binky_bun When the first motorways were built, a 70mph crash was far more likely to be fatal. Modern car design, seatbelts, airbags, not to mention all the active features such as ABS, stability control etc make incidents more survivable. The most important safety factor by far is the nut behind the wheel. Get one that drives in an appropriate manner, at an appropriate speed, with appropriate gaps, appropriate observations and situational awareness and collision rates will plummet. Active motorways are like having a movable fire escape that can reach any floor, any window, rather than just one run up the side of a building. Smoke alarms are the warning like the gantry signs that tell you which escape is safe to use, how quickly you can safely and efficiently use it, even where the fire is so you can choose to go into a different building altogether because of a fire that may hinder you 20 miles/floors away. Smart motorways are not the problem. Dumb drivers are. If everyone drove at an appropriate speed, with an appropriate safety gap following the rules you could sunbathe nude in any lane you choose in safety, never mind break down in a 2 tonne steel box with warning lights on. The A road my driveway enters is far more dangerous by way of design and construction than any smart motorway, yet nobody makes a fuss about those rural dual carriageways with on-grade junctions that have no space to change to an appropriate speed to enter or leave the carriageway, limited sight lines, 70mph limits, no hard shoulders, often nothing at all between a car and a 100 year old tree. No regular patrols, no safety phones, no constant observation or monitoring. Stay off rural A roads I tell you, they really are dangerous for dumb drivers and all those around them. When people say "Smart motorways are dangerous" I all too often hear "I don't understand how to use roads, follow instructions or account for other idiots on the road" In other words, people who shouldn't really be on any type of roads. The facts stand, the hard shoulder is the single most dangerous lane on the motorway for the amount of traffic it does not carry. Just because you or however many others feel or do not think this should be a fact does not make it less of a fact All the safety protocols that exist for live lane working are simply copies of exactly the same protocols often much older ones for the hard shoulder. Plan for the most dangerous lane, and less dangerous lanes are even less of an issue. Done on the topic for a while. Truth is truth, like it or not.

Not much you can do about it, once your government has the means to do it it too will probably start its electronic enslavement program. Its explained in the Bible - progression toward the mark of the beast (beast is empire)... Its about, power, greed and worshiping money essentially and is foretold where it ends. Today they are even in your neurons, reading thoughts in your brain remotely and transmitting to them. Believe it or not the Bible calls it entering the temple of God (The living body)...

I feel like I'm living amongst a bunch of NPC's. Some of us are very aware but we're sadly a tiny minority.

There are videos available. Look for "Navtech Radar - ClearWay Demonstration"

The raw radar data did look like old fashion radar data with odd blobs and lines in a circle. But once a correctly scaled satellite map was placed below it. It was like magic. You could easily see what all the blobs were

I was wondering that too :) Thanks!

No?

Watch where you're going next time. The radar not working would have nothing to do with you rear ending a vehicle.

@@Ayrshore Sometimes you cannot sense movement , or lack of ,at approaching speeds. IF the radar, when working, stopped the lane as default , and operators had to clear the stop that would be better.