So I just got an Scott Eagle 320 and tear it down on the first day.
To my surprise the core isn't BAE SIM 500H.(As in Fraser's list:
here) It's Raytheon thermal-eye 4500AS instead...
Why? Is this the correct configuration? I'm a bit disappointed because even my Eagle 160 (BAE 500L) has a higher sensitivity.
Also, I cannot find spec sheet nor manual for 4500AS core, could anyone help?
I recently discovered the same as you:
Scott EI 320 | Eagle Imager 320 has the Raytheon 4500AS core
Model:
Easily disassembled:
I believe confusion is a result of lot's of "eagle"named camera's
- Eagle Imager II (the huge plastic cube with the non moving handle)
- Eagle X
- Eagle Attack
And that's just a few that are easy to find.
Thank you! What's the model in your tear down? The red case and 4 buttons seems not common...
The red unit may be the Eagle 320 with Tracker capability for finding downed fire fighters. The tracker uses 2.4GHz radio location technology.
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/3334505/eagle-imager-320-with-pak-tracker-brochure-english-scott-safetyNo idea why there is a Raytheon 4500AS core in the Eagle 320 and not a BAE SIM500 unit as I wrote my comments on the cores a long time ago. It was not uncommon for a thermal camera manufacturer to use different thermal imaging cores in a camera model over its product life due to parts availability, technology improvement or other issues effecting which core was used in a particular camera.
Fraser
I just checked my archives. I have a BAE SIM500 series core listed as coming from an Eagle 320 that was stripped for parts. No other data though. It may have been a very early release of the Eagle 320 ? Regret I can shed no further light on the matter. Having read the brochures for the Eagle 320 they clearly state that they have used a new technology A-Si thermal imaging core in the model. That would be the Raytheon 4500AS core as the BAE unit is a VOx technology core.
Regarding real world performance, the Raytheon 4500AS is a capable imaging core. That said, the A-Si technology has a lower Signal to Noise ratio at the Microbolometer and can exhibit more noise than a VOx microbolomter based core. The 4500AS was a later generation A-Si core but its Microbolometer is not as refined as more recent ULIS offerings. You also have to consider the fact that a used fire fighting thermal camera may contain faults and might not be performing as well as when new. SCOTT would be unlikely to deploy the 4500AS imaging core in their cameras if it was a poor performer compared to their Eagle 160. I find the BAE SIM500 series cores to be excellent performers. They were developed for demanding military weapon guidance applications so I am not surprised that they work well.
Fraser
I like you actually just updated your old post.
Our camera bottom label are same on the first line, then mine says below: 200744-01, EIC01043.
Yes, Fraser is right; it's the pak tracker model:
p.s. how do those inline expandable thumbnails work? (p.m.)
Do anyone knows how to increase the max gain on 4500AS? It's resolve ability for low delta scene is similar to a Seek camera, which is too low.
While the Seek camera performance is limited by noise, the 4500AS shows little noise, which make me think it's just not working hard enough.
By increase AGC limit, it would have much better picture.
Do you have the OEM configuration software for the 4500 core ? That provides as much configuration capability as is available to an OEM.
The 4500AS core is a very capable system so I am surprised that you are finding yours insensitive in low Delta T scenes.
Fraser
Do you have the OEM configuration software for the 4500 core ?
No, where can I get it?
Do you know if it provide such settings?
Thank you!
Sadly the OEM configuration utility is “controlled release” and I am away from base so cannot help you with it at the moment.
Fraser
Thank you.
I understand it's not public available. But could you send me a copy? I can pay if you want.
No need to rush, just whenever you have the chance to access your collections.
No fee for such a utility. I return to base end of August.
Fraser
I have sent you a PM
Fraser
Just adding another tombstone to the xxxx AS cores.
I compared it to my defective Carnis Viper (old Lockheed VOX), and the Lockheed one is noticeably better, with more contrast and details. 
For a 2000AS I am not surprised (depending on the defect of the Lockheed). Hardly apples with apples, an unstabilised gen1 160x120 ASi (and low power) vs a fully temperature stabilised 320x240 VOx that eats batteries for fun.
How they both came from the same US DoD requirement for a thermal rifle sight is difficult to believe, as for that matter did the Raytheon BST.
My AS3500 though stands up well, but only if given a sensible scene. It still suffered from a visual imagers' attempts at image presentation. The VOX was of course a far better basic detector so suffered less when subjected to some fairly clueless image processing algorithms.
The big positives for ASi was the low power (all FPGA, no peltier) and *
AT THE TIME - NOT NOW !!!* no export controls. As a wafer level packed sensor it was a long way ahead of its' time.
Bill
I can certainly state that my cameras that use the 4500AS core perform very well indeed. That core was a more refined design and I have seen it used in some thermally demanding applications where it met the need without difficulty. I have to suspect that there is something amiss with Logans 4500AS core or its configuration. With ex fire brigade equipment we have to consider the reason for the units retirement. Many have had a very hard life and suffer a failure or degradation in performance. At a certain age, the units are considered beyond economic repair and are retired. What we buy on the used market can be in good working order, dead or somewhere in between.
Fraser
Thank you guys!
I'm very sorry that I made a mistake during testing, so the result might be inaccurate.
I modified the post to strike it. (Actually I want to delete it, but since there's alreasy replies after, doing so will break the discussion)
I will do a better test later, and report back.
Okay folks, I just did a simple comparison again, this time I didn't make the mistake as last time.
The Carnis Viper is too unstable to compare, so I compared 4500AS with a newly arrived S300A BST core from Bullard TI.
On low-delta scenes, S300A and 4500AS give roughly same detail. S300A is more noisy and 4500AS is more flat.
I guess that's it, the 4500AS seems not malfunctioning, it's just me gave it too much expectation...
BTW, I found a few small tears near the center of the chopper wheel, does that mean the core has been disassembled before? Or is the film so fragile that an external shock may damage it?
BTW, I found a few small tears near the center of the chopper wheel, does that mean the core has been disassembled before? Or is the film so fragile that an external shock may damage it?
They go like that quite a lot, simple aging coupled with the environment. So the ones in Cadillac vehicle cameras are pretty bad, while a lot of the ones in my fire cameras are OK. A few small tears is OK, especially if out of the swept area of the sensor - where the spiral is.
I find amine tend to have pulled / torn away from the outer rim as well.
Bill