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 a year 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.

▲

0_____0 10 months ago | parent | next [-]

If you want more points downrange, you design your scanner to work on a smaller FOV. Some things change - you need an optical design that scans a small area in front of it somehow (faceted mirrors are popular), and at some point you need a laser source of higher quality, possibly moving away from diode lasers and towards things like fiber laser sources. This isn't conjecture BTW, this is what players like Waymo do and is evident from studying the sensor package if you're curious.

▲

jeffreygoesto a year ago | parent | prev [-]

Roughly like in this paper https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/RadarScenes:-A-Real-Wo...

	▲	rightbyte a year ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks. Spot on!

▲

itishappy a year ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'd be curious if the design of the Cybertruck affects readings at all. It's got angles straight outta an F-117.

▲

0_____0 a year ago | parent | next [-]

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.

▲

itishappy a year ago | parent [-]

Here's the closest thing to data I've been able to find. I have no idea what to do with this info.

https://x.com/jwt0625/status/1848218860513628203

	▲	0_____0 a year ago \| parent [-]
		The polar plot at the end would be useful if there were plots for other cars and trucks to compare to. I'm assuming that it's a simulation?

▲

rightbyte a year ago | parent | prev [-]

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 a year ago \| parent [-]
		It's cooler than that these days - under the paint are antennas plated? printed? onto the skin panels that are tuned to absorb specific frequencies of interest.

▲

ndileas a year ago | parent | prev [-]

"Size" might be as simple as radar cross section. Not necessarily a good thing for us squishy blobs.