Status of proper FLIR subsystem and the actual ATFLIR pod?

[Harlikwin]

That. I got to play with a thermal camera recently and it was interesting to see that a running car's hood didn't appear hotter than the rest of it. The asphalt appeared hotter, but I think this was due to its own temperature + reflecting thermal radiation (?). Shadows also appeared brighter, any idea why?

 

My hillarious and unfortunately not so useful answer without actually seeing the video and knowing the conditions is going to be "it depends".

 

If you are refering to asphalt under the car, it will often reflect the heat from the engine, so you sometimes see that usually when its cold out, but less on a hot sunny day because the asphalt is just hotter than whatever energy its reflecting from the engine.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by shadows appearing brighter, that seems weird, were you in black hot or white hot mode?

 

In addition to its own "heat" the other variables, are known in IR land as emissivity, reflected background and transmissivity. From a practical standpoint, emissivity is how reflective or “infrared shiny” a surface is (how well it gives off thermal energy). Reflected background is the infrared energy that is coming from somewhere else, but reflecting off of that infrared shiny surface. Transmissivity is how much of the infrared energy can pass through the material.

 

For example...

 

 

That ring is the same "temperature" as the hand, but due to a lower emissivity value, the ring does not emit as much infrared towards the camera; it also reflects infrared energy from cooler areas, so low emissivity and high reflectivity make the ring appear significantly cooler.

[Harlikwin]

Wags,

 

After a second read, I've come to notice that somehow the team is linking the development of the ATFLIR to the implementation of this new FLIR render system, but giving a second thought, that should not be the case right? Or it is more complicated...

 

Meaning that, once this system is implemented the litening will not use it? Will it be necessary a revisit to the litening to adapt the new system that the Atflir will be using? Or it is just a matter that the team prefer to concentrate efforts in the new rendering before wasting time in another FLIR pod until that is completed?

 

Not Wags here from not eagle dynamics ;)

 

But if he doesn't answer, I would assume that the image shown in the MCPD is fairly independent from the various button pushing side of the implementation. Right now the code probably looks like, go pull this image with the "FLIR or CCD version", then overlay this symbology on it (based on whatever buttons are pressed). So I "think" when the new system comes it should be a mostly drop in fit for the older TPOD's because the draw calls are just gonna pull from the new engine generating the image. But IANAC...

[falcon_120]

Not Wags here from not eagle dynamics ;)

 

But if he doesn't answer, I would assume that the image shown in the MCPD is fairly independent from the various button pushing side of the implementation. Right now the code probably looks like, go pull this image with the "FLIR or CCD version", then overlay this symbology on it (based on whatever buttons are pressed). So I "think" when the new system comes it should be a mostly drop in fit for the older TPOD's because the draw calls are just gonna pull from the new engine generating the image. But IANAC...

 

Yes, that was my understanding on how a modular software should work (Symbology & Functionality totally decoupled from the grahpics engine rendering whatever it is rendered in the MFD), hence my question. I guess that the answer is more along the lines of "this is something we need to do and before introducing new TGPs with have to finish this", sort of.

[Harker]

@Harlikwin, thanks, that clarified it (the funny (or sad) think is that I'm a physicist and I've done some optics stuff during my studies, but it's been a while and I work on completely unrelated stuff).

That's a picture I took of the camera's display. I guess it's indeed a combination of the emissivity of the asphalt and how it reflects the heat radiating off of the car. It doesn't show well in the photo, but the asphalt below the car is brighter than the surrounding asphalt.

[Harlikwin]

@Harlikwin, thanks, that clarified it (the funny (or sad) think is that I'm a physicist and I've done some optics stuff during my studies, but it's been a while and I work on completely unrelated stuff).

That's a picture I took of the camera's display. I guess it's indeed a combination of the emissivity of the asphalt and how it reflects the heat radiating off of the car. It doesn't show well in the photo, but the asphalt below the car is brighter than the surrounding asphalt.

 

Yup, thats exactly what I would expect to see. And I would entirely agree with your interpretation.

 

The other fun thing with looking at stuff outside of the human range of vision, is often things don't look like what you expect often in funny ways. A good example is that while Gen2 NVG's with photocathodes that mostly work in the visible range you see stuff in a similar way you might expect with the naked eye. But when you use Gen3 devices with photocathodes that work more in the nearIR random everyday things all of sudden look different, some brighter than you expect some darker etc. Lots of military laundry detergent and camouflage uniforms had to be redesigned after the initial introduction of NVG's.

[RogueSqdn]

Also why BDUs, ABUs, ACUs, etc can't be starched anymore. In the Air Force we'd show up like a lit Christmas tree!

 

:eek:

[Harlikwin]

Also why BDUs, ABUs, ACUs, etc can't be starched anymore. In the Air Force we'd show up like a lit Christmas tree!

 

:eek:

 

Yeah and the various brightening agents in detergents.

 

 

I dunno, I always though the stupidest uniform decision was Navy-flage. Yes, you absolutely need this to hide on the (grey) ship, and make it harder to see you if you go overboard... :music_whistling:

 

[RogueSqdn]

My BDUs were better (this was 1999 at MacDill).

 

:thumbup:

[Harlikwin]

My BDUs were better (this was 1999 at MacDill).

 

:thumbup:

 

IIRC the old school US BDU's were actually ok under NVG's as long as they weren't starched/washed with brighteners.

[RogueSqdn]

You have NO IDEA how many cans of starch we went through with those BDUs.

 

:megalol:

[Harlikwin]

You have NO IDEA how many cans of starch we went through with those BDUs.

 

:megalol:

 

But you looked SHARP... :megalol:

[RogueSqdn]

Most of the time. At least my crease was sharp!

[gekoiq]

Those are THERMAL IMAGES NOT IR. One IS EVEN STATED TO BE A SIMULATION. I didn't even bother clicking on any of those videos you posted. IT EVEN SAYS THERMAL RIGHT IN THE VIDEO TITLE.

I've been a UAV pilot for the better part of TWO DECADES AND I'VE NEVER ONCE BEN ABLE TO SEE THROUGH SMOKE OR CLOUDS WITH ANY OF THE MILLION DOLLAR IR CAMERAS I'VE USED

 

THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR. HEAT ENERGY IS NOT INFRARED ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM WAVELENGTH ENERGY. TAKE SOME COLLEGE PHYSICS IF YOU NEED MORE LEARNIN'.

 

 

Whatcha got?

 

I'm curious, if "Thermal is not IR" could you please tell us which part of the light spectrum "Thermal" operates in?

[falcon_120]

Some good explanation over here:

 

https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/6869/what-is-the-difference-between-thermal-and-infrared-imaging

 

Particularly see the answer provided y Colin K

 

"....the crux to understand is....Infra Red or commonly referred as IR detects the heat generated by a body( which of course is there due to atomic vibrations), and generates a picture through a IR conversion tube. whereas Thermal Imaging device or commonly referred as TI detects the picture based upon temperature difference between the body and its immediate surroundings.....thus generating a picture. it involves use of high speed thermal scanner coupled with an IR detector, amplifier and Video Display. thus TI is not only eye safe as it offers indirect view and provides facility of storage and re production of video images as well"

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

Edited October 2, 2019 by falcon_120

[sobek]

I think you're all talking about the same thing, there's just different sensor technologies that are sensitive to different parts of the infrared spectrum.

[drPhibes]

THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR. HEAT ENERGY IS NOT INFRARED ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM WAVELENGTH ENERGY. TAKE SOME COLLEGE PHYSICS IF YOU NEED MORE LEARNIN'.

 

 

 

 

 

If that's what you learnt in college physics I suggest that you demand a refund. Thermal radiation IS electomagnetic radiation, just like UV, visible light, radio waves, gamma rays, x-rays etc. Thermal cameras typically operate in the LWIR part of the spectrum (λ = 8-14μm).

[Harlikwin]

Those are THERMAL IMAGES NOT IR. One IS EVEN STATED TO BE A SIMULATION. I didn't even bother clicking on any of those videos you posted. IT EVEN SAYS THERMAL RIGHT IN THE VIDEO TITLE.

I've been a UAV pilot for the better part of TWO DECADES AND I'VE NEVER ONCE BEN ABLE TO SEE THROUGH SMOKE OR CLOUDS WITH ANY OF THE MILLION DOLLAR IR CAMERAS I'VE USED

 

THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR REPEAT THERMAL IS NOT IR. HEAT ENERGY IS NOT INFRARED ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM WAVELENGTH ENERGY. TAKE SOME COLLEGE PHYSICS IF YOU NEED MORE LEARNIN'.

 

 

Whatcha got?

 

I dunno man. Its pretty clear to me and most of the other folks in this thread that you have no idea what you are talking about. If you "learned" this stuff in college I'd really suggest you contact whatever community college you went to and demand a refund. How about a wikipedia article explaining the basics for you. All of the targeting pods use "thermal". "IR" as you refer to it I infer might be image intensifiers working in the 700-900nm band but are more commonly called NVG's or LLTV, and those cannot see through clouds or smoke. Also, every FLIR device I ever looked through over the last few decades, from the ones that cost a few K to the ones that cost millions or more could see through smoke. Clouds no, because they aren't the same thing. But if you actually knew anything about "IR" or "PODS" or whatever you'd know that.

 

Here you go:

 

"Forward-looking infrared (FLIR) cameras, typically used on military and civilian aircraft, use a thermographic camera that senses infrared radiation."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward-looking_infrared

 

 

Oh look, I didn't have to use caps or bold or underline things.

Edited October 2, 2019 by Harlikwin

[Harlikwin]

If that's what you learnt in college physics I suggest that you demand a refund. Thermal radiation IS electomagnetic radiation, just like UV, visible light, radio waves, gamma rays, x-rays etc. Thermal cameras typically operate in the LWIR part of the spectrum (λ = 8-14μm).

 

:thumbup:

 

Though some military imagers work in the 3-5um range for various reasons.

[drPhibes]

:thumbup:

 

Though some military imagers work in the 3-5um range for various reasons.

 

 

The wavelength of blackbody radiation is inversely proportional to the temperature of the object, so MWIR would typically be suitable for detecting higher temperatures than those detecatble with a LWIR sensor (approx. -60 to +100°C).

[TLTeo]

The peak of black body radiation is at ~3*kT, where k is Boltzmann's constant and T is the temperature of the object you're looking at in Kelvin. The corresponding frequency is

 

f = 3kT/h,

 

where h is the Planck constant. Plug in the numbers for an object at 293 K (20 degrees Celsius) and you get ~1.7*10^13 Hz, which corresponds to a wavelength of ~2ish microns. Hence the military thermal imagers operating in that range.

 

And to the guy that said "heat energy is not infrared electromagnetic spectrum" - being an astrophysicist myself, if you had used any of that in an exam I would have failed you on the spot.

Edited October 2, 2019 by TLTeo

[Harlikwin]

The wavelength of blackbody radiation is inversely proportional to the temperature of the object, so MWIR would typically be suitable for detecting higher temperatures than those detecatble with a LWIR sensor (approx. -60 to +100°C).

 

Yes I know the various reasons, I just didn't want to belabor the thread with them. There is also less atmospheric attenuation, which is one of the reasons they were used for longer range detection of hot things...

[NineLine]

Anyone posts anymore of the silly childish namecalling I just removed, you will be visiting the penalty box. Stop it. Be nice.