I want to share a drink with you Cappy

I have to ask; what do your neighbors think you do, when you film yourself “in the field”?

oh it blocks radio? why not use the ancient arcane technology of an antenna?

Thanks. I'd love to win one.

And I do not see the link in the descriptions. Did you forget to add it?

How about converting that heat into electricity?

Also, it's the kind of energy that's often hard to do anything with. It's not like you're producing near-IR light that could be focused into a beam and fired off into the distance in the opposite direction to where the enemy is likely to be, instead it's low grade heat that's spread out all through the vehicle which isn't very useful or easy to work with.

@@Red-238that would be incredibly difficult as the heat is dispersed throughout the vehicle

What about putting a spike or plate in or the ground and transfer the heat onto it or a cable that runs to a mannequin deer 😅

@@Red-238we sound like Steve Jobs back in the 90s “I want my entire record collection in this small phone!!!! Get on it!!!”

Surely the russians wouldnt shoot an ice cream truck!

@@etienne8110 Yes, but at what cost?

​@edl5731 he just mentioned the costs

@@etienne8110You mean, as opposed to other war mongers?

Both sides already target any operating vehicle near the front lines, because both sides rely heavily on civilian vehicles.

Back in the late 1990s/early 2000s, Peltiers were a popular choice for cooling down your CPU for some extra overclocking. Back when a desktop CPU running full bore only consumed about 30-40 watts, it was pretty straightforward to do. They indeed absolutely guzzled electricity, but these were the days when CPU speed was still measured in MHz. Back when you could play a video game, or listen to an MP3, but not both at the same time without putting a decent dent in your framerate. When you didn't use a desktop background image because they took up too much RAM.

Yep, that's correct but you have to consider usage scenarios. You don't need to cool down\heat entire vehicle to extreme temps, you work with pretty limited surface area(and mass) and only need to lower temp or heat it up few dozen of degrees, so probably don't need so much power. But yeah, I do remember doing a small fridge basically a size of a few coke cans using CPU cooler to cool the Paltier, and I have to run the radiator fan at about 50% all the time just to drop the temp inside the fridge to something like 4C. The efficiency is terrible on those things, and it takes a lots of amp just to move a bit of heat energy.

@@edew9180 No, it's all about thermal capacity of those panels. The lower the capacity, the faster you can heat/cool it down with less energy required. Think of Paltier panel one side of it wrapped in isolating material so it would not loose/take heat from air contact but transparent to IR. You can cool it down to 0 basically instantly and hold it there with very little energy needed and thus with little excess energy. So i would think it really comes down to materials. Paltier takes a lots of energy when you need to cool down some mass, if mass is nearly nothing then the energy consumption will be tolerable i think.

@@xerxeslv true, its not about moving the heat away which would be a giant energy hole, its making the outer most layer cool enough to blend in with its surrounding. Tanks and vehicles could probably benefit from extra radiators to move heat into the air as quickly as possible, but yeah its easy to get lost in the wrong objective when discussing thermal efficiency.

@@megalonoobiacinc4863 Stepping into this with zero degrees in anything physics related and I hate it when maths co-opts English because it can't find its own numbers, but wouldn't extra radiators create a larger heat plume that would identify a nearby "coldspot" as being an anomaly and therefore your likely target?

No shit I've heard of you guys before but never seen any dedicated content about the job. 2 questions How big was the antenna. How quick could you track the shells back to the gun. Seems like it'd have to be almost instant for it to be effective.

One would think that just tucking it in a little brush would be *Relatively* effective at breaking up the signature without interfering with Comms. And if it just a small pile of grass or leaflitter hampers signal... Well, ground Radios have always been spotty before being broken in in particular for troop use, but if solid dedicated radios aren't used for 'base line' level and are interfered with by a relatively moderate amount of some amount of natural foliage or other camo... Someone needs to yell in the military's ears about properly upgrading communications equipment.

A radar when transmitting is easily tracked.... kw output pulse or doppler or even spread spectrum, still visible.. a target.

@@darkjill2007The radar was an AN/MPQ-4. I think there is a video on it out here somewhere. Tube-based electronics with an analog computer (mostly mechanical like an old cash register). Its primary mission was to spot enemy mortars but it also was very good at back-tracking artillery as well. We also acted as observers for our arty. These have since been replaced with TPQ-36/37 (solid state) which I never worked with. These are currently in use in Ukraine, I believe. The Q-4s were touchy sons of bitches that if you looked at them wrong, they would go down.

@@andreaskampe9143We were rarely on the air for more than 2 minutes. The joke was, if you caught a blip on your scope and it didn't deviate, run like hell from the antenna! A shell was riding it down to you!

sir, we are very certain missiles came from this defense sector, but there is only an ice cream truck there.. it even advertises russian ice cream flavors on its side.

You guys really think we dont know about IR camo, even tho we be using it since syria

@@xWizardxRF Everybody knows Russians are out of tanks, missiles and bullets, and now they're sending in toothless prison inmates in human waves with only trench spades. The experts on TV told us so!

Simple solution, just make it look like the nasty is happening sould do the trick😅 they may begin to question things after 10 mins tho so I'll have to switch to after cig time ect

Doesn’t really matter when you only have to cool a super thin piece of metal.

What I learned of IR camouflage when we trialed some Barracuda stuff in the 90s, was that air itself doesn't radiate much IR, so you can easily vent away heat as long as you can hide the hot exhaust material. One way of working the problem is to have several layers, with a separating layer of air, that can also move and carry heat out. Each outer layer needs to cover more area on the edges so as to shield the edges of underlying layers from view. For every layer built outwards, if the ventilation works, the temperature of the layer material is going to be a bit lower than in the layer below, approaching balance with the outside temperature.

@@Zoroff74 fascinating. thanks for the anecdote.

​@@Zoroff74Seems like the obvious solution. I wonder why we haven't seen stuff like that.

note: if you have a battery to capture charge in, you can tame much of that through other means

My guess would be to make the enemy use less effective weapons against you , you aren't going to use the same weapons against a humvee vs a MBT , so camo as weaker vehicles and make the enemy think you have a armored car meanwhile you have a mbt

@@ulforcemegamon3094 152 mm HE shell no matter what to destroy MBT or Humvee it will be same effect

​@@tsugumorihoney2288Indeed. But if all you see is an armored car why not just use the rpg or mg you've been hauling around all day? No need to bother the nice folks at arty town for such a relatively soft target.

@@7Rendar arty town fuck me dystopia gonna go hard

I think this design is only going to result in more civilian casualties Soldiers: "omg it's a passenger car looking like a small familie on vacation, what do we do!? It could be a tank!?" Commander: "FIRE!"

LOL. The Cold Warriors leading you guys back then were so funny. They were more tank obsessed than the former whermacht soldiers they had in NATO and completely missed the giant and far more important artillery advantage the Soviets had across the board that would render even those hundreds is tanks spread out here or there irrelevant and smoking craters.

Promising idea. You could disguise tank(s) as Santa and his sleigh. Surely the Russians wouldn't fire on Santa and his sleigh or whole fleet of sleighs, especially if it was near Christmas? You'd obviously need to check the dates carefully as they don't all agree about when Christmas is in that part of of the world.

I also saw that video on Discovery Channel, or maybe History. The vehicle was parked on a hill, with the sky behind it. The lighting cover blanket blended the vehicle into the background. This would only work in a similar situation, where there is a bright background. In the dark, or darker scene, the system won't work.

Huh

@@emitindustries8304they're not actual lights, I'm sure they were reflective or simply white in color. The idea is to make the white dots diffuse light and confuse whoever was looking at it. It probably won't work against electronic targeting systems but to the human eye it probably would look like an unidentifiable blur or blob. At night, I suspect that it would just be normal camo netting.

You can buy a decent thermal optic for around a 1000 dollars now.

@@donutperson9027 Yeah military has always be more expensive for real imageninded reason. But the eastern germans just used wet blankets to hide from early thermals.

​@@donutperson9027yeah but we want the special forces 3-D IR/NV goggles that seal team 6 uses.

@@larryc16163D?

​​​​​​​@@westphalianstallion4293This is often a gross misunderstanding of why military equipment is so expensive. For one its highly specialized so only the armed forces buy it which means lower production runs and higher per unit cost. Secondly, military thermals and NVGs are more advanced than civilian counterparts in fidelity and sensitivity and newer systems have combined multi-spectrum capabilities with outline and augmented reality features. It will be at least a few years before any of these feature enter civilian markets. Often times the military funds new tech which costs more than civilian reproducing the same finished product. Afterall the military already did the hard work researching AR and multi-spectrum nods. All the civvie market do is set up production lines, no R&D cost. More over, military kit needs to be rugged as its seeing combat and used by troops crawling in dirt and sand. Your typical civilian nods wouldn't last a day in such environment. Lastly, it needs to be easy to use, so majority of your average infantryman don't have to fiddle with it where as civilians can add whatever they are individually comfortable with. Also cheap countermeasures for expensive kit is always the norm. Cheap flares and chaff vs missiles. MANPADS vs helicopters, ATGM vs tanks, a bullet vs infantry etc. These NVG are still critical for night combat despite that. Nothing else allow troops to maneuver and engage the enemy at night.

For real! Love it when he gets back to what he used to do. Hahaha

I agree

Ok he pulls up

So wow

Cappy is an op, why else would YT recommend him these days...

im hoping I can do some geopolitical videos in the field around the world in 2024 thats my goal

I head a story from the Vietnam war, where vietcong indeed tried to swim through a river hiding their heads in pumpkins. The problem was, that when the Americans saw the floating pumpkins, they had the idea of making a shooting competition, shooting at the pumpkins from a bridge. So they found out soon what was going on, by hazard.

It would just cause soldiers to target all pumpkins...

Even the cheap thermal cameras are amazing. I hired one to do a building survey and I noticed that even walking through the house wearing shoes (which weren't warm like bare feet) I'd leave a trail of footprints that were slightly warmer than the rest of the floor. It seemed to work on any surface as well, with carpet, vinyl, tile, and concrete all showing similar footprints that were surprisingly long-lasting.

Neat

@@trolleriffic I was able to spot which vehicle just did a shooting on a checkpoint North of us using thermals. This car had three guys in it, it's brakes and engine was much hotter than the other cars, and I could see little dots all over the floorboard. Those dots were hot shell casings from a couple AK-47s. And I saw the hot barrels of to AKs. That was in 2007. I was amazed at the intel I was able to gather from it and so was my squad leader. No one taught us to use it like that but it worked.

​@@trollerifficwhere you trying to get a building WELL certified or just tracking leaks?

I brought a small imager last year and was blown away at how sensitive these are to even tiny differences in temperature, like the fact that you can put your hand on the surface, and leave a 'heat print', so cool, and very useful for diagnosing short circuit faults in electronics.

I have seen a few videos of that type of camo ,in one they pick a random car and the plastic+cardboard makes it looks like a Leopard tank , and i guess you could make it so that the engine produces enough heat to fool the systems into believing it is a tank

@@ulforcemegamon3094 Or if you know the specific wavelength of IR the opposing optics is looking for, you could theoretically use LEDs to emit only that wavelength and be much more energy efficient.

Or use wired headphones

Like an antenna connected by an extension/cable to the radio?

We used to connect field phones to remote radios. There is a tighter limit to how far you can remote the antenna from a radio. Some of this was Vietnam Era tech that was still in use in the late '80's and early '90's.

Signal loss depends on the form of data transmission.

@@Hizsoo should be negligible if sent digitally between head unit and the transceiver unit, if gigabit ethernet can run 200m why not for radio comm

It's hardly the same thing as painting a red cross on the side of your tank. Russia doesn't seem to care much about distinguishing between combatants & civilians, they just try to bomb the shit out of anything that moves anyway.

It's not a war crime, the FIRST time.....

​@NinaCohen-dl4hm It also depends on how useful it is. Especially to major powers.

@@mill2712 it won't be useful for anyone, as to "disable" the enemy camo all you need to do is to turn off your thermals

@@mekolayn At night?

Defeated by common sense..

It’s not being prepared for an open field of trees and rolling hills…

You wouldn't use this during a mass tank battle, but it would be useful technology for ambush hunting. A civilian car or truck parked at the side of the road or abandoned somewhere is a pretty common sight in a lot of places, especially during a conflict.

@@trolleriffic Why pretending that you are a Toyota Hillux, when you can use actual Hillux? It would be much cheaper, and probaly more effective

​@TheRelativy more useful than a tank? Lol what are you smoking

The space pen vs. pencil is a misunderstood thing! Graphite pencils are actually a terrible thing to use inside a spacecraft. Electrically conductive graphite dust plus microgravity doesn't play nicely with electronics. Furthermore, NASA never spent any money on developing the space pen, neither directly nor via subcontracting. It was developed by Paul Fisher and his private company, the Fisher Pen Company. NASA subsequently started purchasing these pens for use on its spacecraft.

@@SeanCMonahan the concept though. You get the concept, right? The idea behind it? Regardless of reality. You do know EXACTLY what I’m talking about, right?

@@zero11010 oh, absolutely! I just wanted to share some info about the space pen story haha

And the best part is, russians didn't use pencil - they were buying the same space pen from americans.

In my case "remembering" would be the big box that was mounted on the turret, next to the gun of the Leopard 1 I was building with my father (second ever scale model project) because that's what we fielded at the time and Puckapunyal wasn't too far away. The first shared project was Darth Vader's Tie-fighter.

It's great technology but it's implementation is wrong. This will not cause soldiers to not engage tanks because they think it's a car. This will cause soldiers to engage all cars in fear it's a tank. This technology will increase civilian casualties and it will not protect tanks. Because if every car could be a potential tank a soldier will simply fire at every car out of self protection. Whoever design these things don't have the slightest clue about how ground units adept to life threatening situations.

It’s like saying cars are more advanced then they were 10 years ago no shit mate

Staying a head will be name of the game just like armor vs fire power

My 2016 BMW X5M has thermal imaging, from the factory!!!

@@rayanalzahrani8756 the advancement is crazy quick tho. Right now you can buy a better thermal camera in a 2000$ drone than what is available in Russia's best tanks.

What does that even mean? Most advanced compared to what? The past when we had worse technology? No duh.

There is litteraly footage in this video of the CV90 moving at full speed with no artefacts

@@cgnovice2969 then you my friend need your eyes checked because I saw that when it was camouflaged. wouldn't have posted this comment otherwise.

The mylar blanket makes you pretty obvious in the visible range.

Mylar is pretty obvious in the infrared too, because now you are a cold spot.

@@veldin25 yes possibly, hence “Mylar type” material. I’m sure, in the whizz tech world, there’s a better solution? Interestingly tho, with an air space/gap shielding you, the material would more easily pick up the ambient air temperature? Also, the ultra light portability while maintaining shape would be another great asset?

surely you still have the issue of heat build up? That heat still has to go somewhere, and if you're full enclosed it'll kill you. Unless I'm completely not getting the concept you're saying in which can I apologise. You have to have a vent somewhere, or at least the camoflage can only work from one direction if you want sustained cover.

@@__-fm5qv it’s an umbrella concept - complete air circulation as thermal barrier, camouflaged to the terrain, thermal protective paint, pointed in the direction of a threat, mobile to enable movement under a heat sensing drone and retractable when not needed. A mobile shield if you will?

@@Keiseru thats cool i had no idea it was saabs tech i need to learn more haha.

Lol, shoulda just finished the video. You already brought this up ;)

Water tank, dump the heat onto the ground. Will last until water runs out

@@afwaller well yeah, but then you got a nice big bucket of white hot next to your tank. Like he says, physics can’t be neat, the heat has to go somewhere. Maybe if you ran coolant lines far enough away? But that’s a lot of setup. There probably won’t ever be a perfect solution.

​@@majorbones251use the heat to make decoys

@@majorbones251 not a bucket, I’m saying it leaves a trail of water as it drives. If you disguise it as a truck it will just look a truck leaking oil or coolant on thermals. Don’t want to leave the trail or vent hot water? Turn off the thermal camoflage. You can dump heat this way no problem until you run out of water.

And I just watched Brandon Mitchell experimenting with some Ukrainian soldiers. Inexpensive thermal scopes and ghillie suits.

Is the heat moving or stationary?

Flamethrowers

Like with radars ? I remember that some russian attack helicopters are equipped with a system that when targetting a radar , show lots of targets in the radar , meaning that if you rely in the radar , hitting it is harder since all of sudden there are lots of targets and you have no idea which one is the real one

Forever war had a tech also, but it had serious drawbacks.

Meanwhile, in real life the sensors were fooled by two marines in a cardboard box, someone who cosplayed as a tree, and a madlad who somersaulted for several kilometres.

NO. The degradation in effectiveness would be more gradual - you wouldnt jump from Great! to Terrible! more like .. Great! ..not so great, mmm ok, better than nothing! WTF ALSO, having it means you could avoid much of that damage in the first place

I concur.

A good topic to ponder for sure that appears to have little public discussion, and thank you for your service.

Or you let liquid nitrogen boil off and absorb the heat into the atmosphere. Won't be perfect, but I bet you could make yourself harder to protect. May not be practical for an individual, but maybe a tank.

Congratulations, you now are a cold spot and still easily visible haha

Mud also heats up after not too long, I remember this got tested on MythBusters

In cluttered populated areas though that could be enough to deprioritize itself as a target, since quite a few working civilian vehicles would be left about and randomly used by anyone who can get it started.

@@doujinflip a additional flaw is the tank crews could just shoot a little infront of the vehicle. Since the camoflauged vehicle is bigger than the civ vehicle its camoflauged as, shooting a little infront of the suspected vehicle could prove a way to "test" for camo. And if it IS a civ vehicle, the round would miss.

LIDAR works by bouncing a far-infrared laser off an object and timing how long it takes to return to figure out how far away the point is. It then does this millions of times over an area to create a cloud of points at varying distances. With proper processing of the point cloud, you would definitely see the geometry of a flat or crinkly surface as being different from the natural world around. The problem with using LIDAR is that its an active emission, a pretty bright one as well. You basically are a bright beacon of laser beams scanning an area and anyone with imaging equipment in that optical range could detect it. FLIR is nice because it merely receives radiation, emitting nothing for the enemy to locate.

@@TheRealBanana Thank you very much, I appreciate it.🤘🤘🤘

comment hits different after looking at pfp for some reason

Batteries produce heat while discharging( being used) or while charging, the vehicle's electronics generate heat, enough heat that they need fans to cool them down. Just look at your pc and count the heatsinks and fans for that cpu an the graphics card.

electric cars can overheat. As batteries discharge, they generate heat, and under harsh conditions, the heat generated can be too much for the vehicle's components. with that said, most electric car motors are air cooled, but you can also use a liquid-cooled motor. with liquid cooling, temperature is never an issue. an electric motor has an efficiency of about 90%, so 10% of the energy you use is dissipated as heat.

Thermal vision highlights temperature differential between objects and the background, and vehicle parts like wheels and tracks get warm enough to really stand out. The difference in thermal energy radiation between vehicle and background materials (everything above absolute zero radiates) also means vehicles will look different from their surroundings.

You'd have to do something like use the vehicle's fuel as a heat dump (which is what aircraft often do), or have a water reservoir or other working fluid which can absorb that heat for a while and then be pumped through a radiator and cooled back down later on when it's safe to do so.

It always works like this. Bad idea comparing thermal optics for infantry. Government can hardly be caught dead spending 10k on anything for them. Yet will drop a billion on something else. I never understood it. Maybe since you still will need the same amount of troops. Anyway whoever can see and reach out first wins.

@@dianapennepacker6854 that's the government for us

Militaries need to focus on both and select the right tools for the job. The Ukraine war has also shown the devastating power of weapons like HiMARS/GMLRS and Storm Shadow which are anything but simple and cheap.

You don’t need a thermally camouflaged tank, when all your enemie’s got left is t-34s after a 3 day special operation….

The money you sent to Ukraine is 5% of the annual Defense budget or 0.02% of your government budget.

lol, its 0,4% of budget thats used to paralyzing russian army. how about caring about the rest of 99,6% of budget? russians arent complaining when they are using 35% of their budget into ukraine, and increasing military budget to 10% of budget, and still not getting results, or that In January 2023, the median russian salary was 43,500 rubles or $630 per month, and 71% of the country's inhabitants are dissatisfied with their earnings.