@daves,
This matter has come up for discussion previously but I think all my input was deleted by me during my major self-deletion event.
Thermal camera technology has been controlled due to its military applications. It is a VERY effective tool to help kill people (believe me, I know). It can be very hard to hide your thermal 'footprint' in theatre and the military realised this.
Thermal camera technology was the preserve of the military, fire fighting services and industry. It was both extremely expensive technology and heavily controlled to prevent our enemies obtaining it and using it against our forces. Over time the technology has developed and become both more compact and available to the public. In order to allow public use the cameras used to be provided direct from the manufacturer to the customer after background security checks had been completed and a licence issued.
In more recent years the US Government decided that thermal cameras should be available to a wider marketplace but with Caveats. The caveats were that medium resolution, high frame rate cameras could only be sold to persons who had been subject to background checks and who were not considered a threat to NATO. What was permitted was the supply of medium resolution low frame rate thermal cameras to the public without background checks. Export controls still apply to such devices in terms of selling or supplying them to enemies of NATO.
The agreement on the international transportation and supply of devices that may forma part of a weapons system is INTERNATIONAL and part of the Wassenaar Arrangement. Europe complies with the contents of this agreement (Including Estonia !)
http://www.wassenaar.org/http://www.wassenaar.org/controllists/index.html Section 6 applies (6.3 onwards)
Note that required performance limiters are
not supposed to be non-removable in order to comply with the arrangement ! This would suggest that FLIR would have to hard code certain specs into the chipset as already suspected by Mike and others.
There has been discussion on why a 9fps camera is OK yet a 30fps or 60fps is not. I regret I cannot comment on this but needless to say it relates to weapon system capability. I am fully aware that it is possible to illegally or covertly obtain thermal camera technology. That is not a reason to make the higher capability technology freely available to all however. Why make like easy for your enemies ?
There was a recent auction in the UK for a 1280 x 1024 60fps weapons grade thermal camera. It was being sold by an official MoD disposal contractor and a mistake had been made. I advised the contractor of the status of the thermal camera as a prohibited item for public sale and it was immediately withdrawn. I am still amazed at the hostility vented on me for taking this action. Some people do not get the bigger picture and do not realise that some of us are duty bound to take action.
I think it only fair to advise that I am not impartial on the matter of making >9fps thermal cameras easily available to all. If you are in the security & weapons systems industry you understand the implications. If you are not in the security and weapons industry, it can be hard to accept but I am afraid that is just life.
There may be a case for relaxing the thermal camera restrictions but as many will know, changes in national security and military policy takes time and needs an adequate incentive, Such does not exist at this time.
In time the Chinese will develop better thermal camera cores....but remember China is NOT an enemy of NATO
With regard to your ARGUS..... I know the cameras well
The ARGUS 1 is the first Generation ARGUS fire fighting camera, recognisable by its yellow case and round image. It is a pyro-electric vidicon based camera with relatively low line count (around 200 lines) and low sensitivity, meaning low range. It was perfect for the fire fighter however and easily sees through smoke. The ARGUS 1 is low performance compared to later technologies and is not ITAR liable. Technical information on these early Pyro-Vidicon based units is releasable to the public under an NDA.
The ARGUS 2 introduced the first BST FPA detector into the range. It is normally to be found in a black case with a standard 4:3 aspect ratio display. It uses a Raytheon BST thermal engine and IS a Raytheon NDA controlled device. The thermal engine is 320x240 30fps high performance unit. It is a very capable tool and performed well in the fire fighting services. No technical details of the unit may be released to the public.
The ARGUS 3 is available in two versions....Blue case and Yellow case. They both use 320x240 30fps thermal engines. The yellow cased version uses a Raytheon thermal engine and IS an ITAR controlled device. I do not have details of the Blue cased units thermal engine. No technical details of the unit may be released to the public.
The ARGUS series continues to this day and now uses Micro-bolometers. They remain a controlled product due to their capabilities. No technical details of the unit may be released to the public.
I am aware that these cameras appear on auction sites....that is where I bought some of mine. Strictly speaking the sale of the units is not permitted but the sellers do not realise this. If you own one, it is not an illegal item to have. You just need to be aware that if you sell it, especially to an enemy of NATO, you could get into hot water with your own governments 'agencies'.
In truth, old ex fire brigade BST cameras are of little interest to the authorities these days. More modern Micro-bolometer high resolution, high frame rate thrmal cameras ARE of interest to them.
Also note that the ARGUS 3 is still supported by E2V. Faulty units often have dead thermal engines that make them uneconomic to repair. Be careful if buying one that is not shown working.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
Poll
