| ▲ | xnx 13 hours ago |
| I believe automotive radar has a cone of sensitivity that is read as a single "pixel" worth of data. Even if the radar spun like lidar, the radar cone of sensitivity is thousands of times wider than the lidar beam so you can't make much of a picture with radar. |
|
| ▲ | 0_____0 11 hours ago | parent [-] |
| IIRC the data coming out of the Conti radars was preprocessed to give bearing, distance, and size of an object in the FOV of the unit. I don't know if I ever saw the true raw data out of one of them, but I'm curious what it looks like. |
| |
| ▲ | rightbyte 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Ye I have a hard time imaganing how a car radar image looks like. On boat radars it seems like the radar have really high resolution (can see much further than lidars) but have worse accuracy. I.e. things looks like blobs. A lidar image at 50+ meters is very sparse. | |
| ▲ | itishappy 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I'd be curious if the design of the Cybertruck affects readings at all. It's got angles straight outta an F-117. | | |
| ▲ | rightbyte 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I think "stealth" planes assumes the radar is under the plane on the ground? For the geometry. And they have some color or alloy that reflect less. | |
| ▲ | 0_____0 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I reckon it's probably not that bad, there are big surfaces that are almost normal to what would be incoming radio energy. Stealth shapes tend to reflect energy in a completely different direction from the source. | | |
|
|
