Відео

This was a decent rain. Not pounding rain, dumping buckets level. Not light rain. Just a normal good solid rain. I’ve also recorded through extremely heavy downpours, like, borderline monsoon level that caused flooding, and the results were very similar to here. Very little interference. As to snowstorms/blizzards, I recorded the following in white out blizzard conditions with visibility of ten feet. The blizzard was far more impacting on thermal signature detection at distance than rain was. ua-cam.com/video/dALqjIsDuRo/v-deo.htmlsi=f5sA7qR9k5Nqpjcr

@@ThatThermalGuy oh wow. Interesting. Thanks for the link!

@@ThatThermalGuy woah, the blizzard didn't have the effect that I was picturing in my mind at all lol.

@@defenderofdemocracy2231 no, actually, I really don’t. LOL. But I appreciate the thinking. I honestly dont care what the temperature is. I’ve operated 6 different thermal devices of different resolutions and sensitivities for five years now, including one that exactly matches the resolution of the thermal supposedly used to film that movie, and I have logged hundreds of hours behind the lens in conditions from -15F to 115F, and I can definitively tell you that modern thermal equipment can see you from 10 feet away no matter what the ambient temperature or climate is, whether you smear mud on yourself or not. Period. Predator pretended that a thin layer of mud will mask you from thermal observation 10 feet away, and it straight up cannot. The myth that mud will hide you from thermal sprung up from this, and people truly think it will work in todays world against todays technology because of this, and it simply won’t. Not at any reasonable range. If we’re talking a mile or two away, it might have a chance. Lol. But that’s not what people talk about with this. You would likely have to have darn near labratory controlled conditions to perfect the ambient temperature and mud temperature to body temperature and have equipment positioned hundreds of yards away to get a maybe positive result under controlled conditions for a short period of time. None of which could be replicated reliably in the real world under tactical conditions in an expeditious manner to have any meaningful positive effect. If you have a temperature controlled setting and temperature controlled mud in the perfect climate with thermal equipment staged at long distances, then sure, it might get pulled off. But at short distances, short of being literally being buried under a foot of mud, it’s not going to work for even a short period of time against close range observation as shown in the movie (5’ to 10’ distance). Modern thermal equipment is orders of magnitude more sensitive than the old equipment used in filming. And I would argue they probably decolorized the original footage anyway to top it all off.

Wait till November and say that

I think you are missing the point. Criminals HAVE thermal and night vision technology. Gangs, cartels, etc. So do average Joes, hunters, private investigators, etc. there are plenty of lawful reasons to want to know how this technology works and how to reduce its effectiveness beyond military/paramilitary training simulation events (paintball/airsoft/training) which you derogatorily refer to as “LARPing”.

I’ve done some testing with some different materials. Burlap and jute. Those kinds of things. I also experiment a lot with nylons, I think a silverized nylon is what proapto is actually based on (their thermal blocking suit, not their ghillie) Here’s a link to one of my experimental videos where I test four different patterns and materials in one go. ua-cam.com/video/2cKuq5tc5oE/v-deo.htmlsi=56abmX0UAO_GNRXe Check out my other videos. I actually spend a lot of time testing everything from wool to jute to bubble wrap to copper mesh and on and on.

Interesting thank you!

You do realize the purpose of this channel don't you? Its not to tell people to go buy thousand dollar gear that is often law enforcement or military restricted and impossible to obtain for certain civilians. I test common everyday readily available materials for their effectiveness for the common person who is curious about how these things image on thermal. I also myth-test materials that urban legend says are effective, but maybe are not. This particular video, is a myth test. This video is looking at commonly held myths about the absolute effectiveness of space blankets against thermal in any conditions and at any range. Most people have no idea what they actually look like on thermal. I can argue with people over space blankets until I'm blue in the face, or, I can just record it and show people from a somewhat neutral perspective so they can figure it out on their own. Like I did here. You were apparently so anxious to name-drop top-shelf brand-name military grade gear to try to look smart, that you completely missed the whole point of the video. Bravo. Slow clap. lol. Next, those things you are touting above, ProApto, Saab., etc., have limited usefulness and function as well. There are many DIY signature suppression methods that are darn near as effective as those three you mentioned, or roughly equivalent in effectiveness, for a fraction of the cost, and that don't come with civilian restrictions. ProApto even came over and left comments in my channel awhile back trying to challenge me and my findings saying basically the exact same thing you did with the same look-down-their-nose connotation you did, just buy their stuff because its better. Well guess what, when I challenged them to put up or shut up, and let me do a real world side by side with their gear and some of my experimental designs, under real world conditions and without their ability to veto publishing my findings, guess who tucked tail and ran. ProApto. Suddenly they had nothing to say. Because the real answer is that all this military grade and high end stuff is on average only about 85% effective at signature suppression. Which is roughly the same numbers generated with good civilian experimentation. these manufacturers are all carefully crafted showings and restricted results showings under their specific guidelines and circumstances. But the reality is that when you hit the field and you're out in the real world, things are different. Have you actually looked at Saab's design, their material? From inches away? I have. I know what it looks like and how much signature suppression is gained from it. At distance, under thermal, in the real world, there is a difference between civilian and professional signature suppression modalities, yes, but its nowhere near the difference you apparently think it is if its being designed by someone who actually looked at and studied this stuff. And the difference in price, hundreds to thousands of dollars, for a couple percentage points of difference, that really means little to no difference in the real world, makes no sense to the common person, who, lets face it, is the person watching my videos. Hello common person. The perfect comparison is night vision. I own gen 3, autogated, OMNI VIII, L3, unfilmed, white phosphor, aviation grade, 2500+ FOM night vision. Essentially the top shelf. I own own lower end, gen 1 and gen 2 night vision. I used middle grade Gen 3 night vision as a cop. I've used other peoples middle grade gen 3 night vision. I know, firsthand, experience, moving through darkness, multiple terrains, operating weaponry, etc., how these differences perform. And I can honestly say, buying a good average gen 3 night vision at roughly $3 grand, you will be able to do pretty much everything you can do if you bought the $5 grand tube. Only you'll have an extra two grand. Thermal signature suppression is just like night vision. There is a curve whereby spending more money will get you better results, but that curve flattens after a point, and you can continue to throw huge amounts of money at it, and the returns become more and more diminishing after a point. That's just reality. You don't actually gain that much more buying the best of the best. A Daniel Defense rifle will still fail sometimes. A Trijicon optic can break. A Steiner IR laser can get fuzzy. And its still possible I see your signature at 100 yards whether you are in off the shelf DIY signature suppression gear or name brand Saab thermal suppression gear. Its just reality. Thanks for stopping by.

And if you really veg it up with 550 like you were going on a true stock does that make a difference because I hear the insurgents and Iraq used wall blankets to be our flir

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't it get down into the 20's in Flagstaff, and 30's to 40's in Phoenix? I would say you would be just fine in this. This was probably filmed in approximately those temps. If it was summer here during filming, I wouldn't be wearing this much blocking. You don't need this much blocking when its warm. You need it when its cold. Body heat shows up much easier when your background and ambient temperatures are freezing. You have a temperature differential of almost a hundred degrees on an imager that is sensitive to differences of less than one degree, and there is going to be nothing in the environment around you even somewhat close to your temp to help obscure your signature. Of course you need more blocking materials. However, when its baking hot outside, like 100-105 in the shade, you don't need the massive blocking materials because your body temp of 98.6 is already basically ambient temp. There's only a couple degrees of difference, and those couple degrees of difference will be shared by numerous objects in the environment around you absorbing, radiating and reflecting temperatures in the same range as your body heat, from rocks and concrete to car body metal and fence posts. It takes much less effort to mask your signature in such a thermally cluttered environment. Thermal signature evasion is never a one size fits all approach. You have to do something appropriate to the environment you are in. Its just like camouflage. There is no one size fits all approach. You don't wear dark green and black woodland pattern and stand in a sea of uniformly light brown dry grasses and expect to be hidden. Likewise, you don't wear snow print camo while in the jungle. Your comparison is pretty much exactly this. I showed an example of snow pattern and you said it wouldn't work in the jungle. Well, yeah. And? lol. That shouldn't be surprising to anyone. lol. :) I guess the root of the problem is there is a fundamental misunderstanding of thermal evasion concepts and the thermal technology generally in the mind of the public. But that's okay. No one starts off knowing everything. That's why people come to channels like this. So they can learn. :) Have a great day, thanks for watching, and thanks for creating an interesting opportunity for discussion and for learning to take place.

Shouldn't heat up

Thanks! Life interfered. How rude of it! Lol. Still have plans to begin Making more vids. Just time gets in the way. I’ll probably try to force something out, just to get things rolling again. It’s easier if I’m already regularly making vids. Its a psychological hump to get over when it’s been awhile. Ah well. I’m here, and it’s good to see you too!

okay, im curious... what did you see? You can't drop something like that and walk away! :D As to your question, no. The aurora did not image at all. I brought the thermal and night vision out ebcause I wanted to get footage of the aurora on both. Only, once I used them both, i realized the aurora didn't image at all. I actually wound up useing the thermal to differentiate clouds from aurora because the clouds imaged brilliantly, and the aurora was simply not there on thermal, it was just clear sky. So I was able to determine what was could and what was aurora, even when the aurora was only white and had no color, and was diffuse and hazy and not moving much and just kinda looked like clouds. Before it kicked into high gear and turned colors and started beboppin' at higher speed.

PS, for the record, I've seen some stuff I can't explain on thermal and night vision too. So no worries about judgment here.

@ThatThermalGuy yeah I was just glassing across my pasture one night, I'm sure you're familiar with what that looks like, set on white hot, cool evening, grass showing up black, tree trunks/limbs all white. I'm scanning back and forth, and slowly, what looks like a beam of light starts showing up in the thermal shining from east to west across the pasture, and it was fairly focused. It lasted several minutes and then it just slowly faded out. It was wild. Like a focused beam of heat.

my thermal didnt pick up anything unusual in the sky, just clouds, i was more so using it to keep an eye out for freaking coyotes that kept coming around to check me out

@@ThatThermalGuy also for the record, while watching a commercial jet fly over head through thermal i saw one object seemingly fly from the left of the plane to just below it and then off to the right straight and fast and made no sound. at first i thought i was being distracted by a bird, but a split second later i was like wtf was that? i checked pubic info radar sites about air traific over head and the "ufo" was not listed. i know its sometimes hard to judge depth and therefore speed of an object but this thing was silent, fast and flew perfectly straight until it was too small to see and this was at 1am. i looked up what sort of birds fly at night and landed on nothing. i want to see what a small dji drone looks like through thermal, but man it felt like it was too fast for that, and was evenly lit up, not at the four corners like id think a drone would be. also, i see a lot of air craft and satellites with IR that are not listed anywhere that can find. im guessing us military on the air craft, and chinese or russian satellites on the other stuff

I also saw it in WA on may 10-11. Today I finally found what it was 🎉

Oh man!! I’m so sorry! It wasn’t a constant thing, like, the first two hours I was out there I honestly had trouble being able to tell what was clouds and what was Aurora. Both white. Both hazy, both moving slowly. Both in the sky. I actually went back inside and grabbed a thermal camera. Because Aurora are charged particles, while clouds are moisture. The clouds imaged in thermal camera. The Aurora did not. For two hours of sitting out there, that’s how I could tell which was which they looked so similar. I finally gave up and went back inside, only to have a friend text me and tell me to go back outside. When I did, I looked up and it was purple and green. And that lasted for like, 10 minutes. Lol. So they are very finicky picky things and are very much dependent on being in the right place at the right time. I’m sorry it was a low pan out for you. Next time maybe. I know I’ve been waiting since last October/November. My neighbor got a purple and green picture right over my house and I missed the whole thing. I was very upset and I’ve been waiting half a year for this one, and almost missed it too. :)

Thanks for watchin'!

I've seen something questionable that was higher than typical airliner altitude during the daytime.

Yeah, I've seen that stuff too. More often than I expected. There are satellite tracking maps that HAM radio guys use, free use, on the internet, so you can map everything in the sky above you at a certain time. There are also air traffic control map you can access for free to show flight paths over your place at a certain time. Whats really interesting, is when you capture odd things on scope, and then go and cross check those maps, and there was nothing officially there!!

@@ThatThermalGuy yep, and here in Alaska the flight paths are few and fairly static so it's easy to tell something is out of the flight path. The sweeping turns and right angle turns at that speed make me think. Drone? Black project craft? Or actual UFO?

Thanks! Its fun seeing the world through a new perspective. :D

Love finding neat things. :)