Do out of band ir light/laser divices even exist for civilian purchase? I've heard of the Mawl CLAD but cant find any info on it.

-Mike

Like everything else that doesn't suck

suppressor companies try to push for deregulation of cans. Does TNVC or anyone else in the industry do the same for IR Kit?

As much as I’d like to have that unit. In this case I think it may be more about preserving our advantage on the battlefield. It’s probably going to be a whole before we see OOB technology filter down and become prominent in the civilian world. At that point the Gov will be playing with something even better we don’t know about yet.

In any case to the OP, I’m sure others may chime in but I know some members have made some home brew OOB units by swapping emitters or something.

LOFL... Good luck on that.... Im pretty sure half the reason you can own a civiy apital is that no one in fed gov worth a shit knows or cares right now.

Homebrew route is easiest. Before having an OOB laser or illuminator, having something that sees the OOB source is the first step. Th Sionyx camera is particularly good at it.

Yeah I'm pretty tempted to play with this kinda stuff at home.  Being a software engineer I should be able to figure somethin out.

That and its the joy of figuring things out when companies don't sell to the public.

Yup, you guys did a good job, And Im sure someone will be along to throw you gus under the bus for only getting class 1 units.

I suspect most of the companies would support it, but my personal opinion is that our society is too fucked for over the counter non-eye safe IR lasers.    They could probably do a better job on how illuminators are measured, though.

It seems like digital will take over one day in the likely somewhat distant future, so I suppose seeing out of band is another pro for digital as well. Will be awesome to see what the future holds.

It's interesting if the tunable laser/filter tech used in modern ROADMs ever make it into IR systems.

Like a tunable laser you could set to 600nm to zero in daylight, then tune it to a wavelength in near IR at night. Maybe a tunable pass filter to go on NVGs that blocks out a little slice but will pass one wavelength. Then use both items so only your IR laser and not team members lasers looks bright

Tunable lasers could also be used with like the demultiplexers in a flex grid system, the whole thing could be fixed and encased in epoxy and by tuning the laser you set the zero.

Why don't you tell us what your interest and use of having an oob nvd and illuminiator/laser is, and what you will use it for?

I bet thats right. The relevant agencies are probably working off some cold war era playbook that says to confiscate guns from military veterans and deplatform people like Alex Jones. When they notice there is a civillian night vision and IR targetting device market they will shit themselves and start a massive media boogieman campaign.

I'm told that (at least some) gen 2 tubes as well as digital can see out of band. So it kind of feels more the dead end route to me than the next big thing.

Farmer John down the road with budget NV can see OOB, but our SOF can't with their 31's & 18's. Quite the strange scenario.

I still want to know details about the mawl-x1

Hmm. All this time I was thinking maybe it was a UHP of sorts. A MAWL version of the LA-5C UHP if you will. But now you got me wondering if maybe it has some OOB abilities

Great info Augee. I find it interesting also the transition in our technology as we have to transition from non-State fairly low tech enemies to 1st world adversaries.

https://www.repairfaq.org/sam/laserpic/glpdpics.htm

So just take the KTP intracavity frequency doubler out of a green laser and have an 1064nm diode there

That future is coming sooner than you think.

Sionyx is already gen 2 competitive and they're saying that they can double the performance with a different lens.

I see you've never been inside a green laser pointer.

Gen 2 competitive under relatively bright ambient conditions. A good Gen 2 tube utterly smokes it. A tired 30 year old MX-9916 tube from a PVS-5 still outperforms the Sionyx. Forming an image when it's very dark vs. just seeing noise, not even a hint of an image or outlines of some shape. As cool as the Sionyx is, it's cool only in its own right. Limitations are severe enough that extrapolating future performance as being on par with good Gen 2 or Gen 3 just a nonstarter.

No but what I have seen done is a piece of floppy disk in front of a green pointer, and enough IR light is still present from the first stages that works as an IR laser.

I suspect you're right that the OOB push is an evolutionary dead end. When all is said and done, it'll be looked back on as an intermediate band aid during a time when others are (quickly) playing catch up to US NV supremacy. Same goes with the few other products out there that are pushing the OOB advantage to other wavelengths.

There's at least one rifle scope that I've stumbled across that relies on a 1550nm illuminator to form an image. Advantage is wholly limited to 1550nm imaging sensors being something that's not routinely produced. With an illuminator that outputs several hundred milliwatts or more, detecting whether one is being lit up or not is not a huge challenge, even relying on essentially off the shelf consumer technologies. None of these alternative technologies, be it silicon sensors that can see at 1064nm or so (like the Sionyx) or InGaAs sensors that see 1550nm and beyond are as sensitive as good old Gen 2 or Gen 3 NV so there will be an IR illuminator involved somewhere in the mix. There are still advantages that these technologies can offer, such as better visibility under certain obscuring conditions, but they are not image intensification replacements, just complementary products. Everything other than analog NV is also incredibly power hungry, even without running an illuminator.

I see the evolution of thermal as being the great equalizer. Everyone glows like a Christmas tree under thermal so as the technology advances and other parties gain all the advantages (an eventual inevitability), the advantage and superiority of having the ability to hide in the dark yet be able to see (which is what traditional NV offers) will wane. There'll be less of a downside to running around with NIR lasers and illuminators when the typical adversary at this future point in time will still see you on thermal, no matter what. So why push towards OOB solutions, except in certain limited cases, then? Thermal aiming lasers will probably emerge as somewhat standard items at this point in time as well. Again, why shy away from running around with a thermal laser for aiming when you're seen no matter what? If anything, a quick and lucky shot of a thermal aiming laser from beyond typical engagement distances can blind your opponent's imaging systems and allow for a momentary advantage to be gained.

All speculation, I freely admit it. If anyone has been looking into these emerging technologies or knows more than what's typically talked about, I would love some feedback.

Yup but that also lets thru a lot of the 808nm light from the pump laser.

The frequency doubler is in intimate contact with the 1064nm crystal and some lasers may rely on a 1064nm crystal that is sufficiently nonlinear to function as a frequency doubler itself (to produce green). Removing the doubler from laser pointers is just not viable. I've only had luck relying on a quality 1064nm bandpass filter to let the 1064nm light leak out and block everything else. Any broadband IR filter also lets out the pump source which typically tends to dominate in terms of leaked power output and is an almost perfect match to the peak spectral response of Gen 3 tubes.

Awesome info. Got a sheet of sticky IR pass film a while back for blacking out an illuminator, and feel like playing with a streamlight TLR green laser now

not specific to this thread, as there have been other low post count or new account holders asking for borderline things on this board -

I think that there are many people here in the night vision community that want to share knowledge and other information out to others that are perceived to have an interest in 'restricted' or otherwise not civilian obtainable items.

however, I want to remind everyone that not everyone that may be asking for this information may have a 'legitimate' reason for asking for, or using this information.

there have been people in the past that have asked for things to skate itar, possibly get information on how to do currently illegal  activities, etc. while some might have innocent reasons for asking for this information, there have been some seeking to catch the forum in promoting illegal activities, possibly do illegal transfers of technology, or distribute information that would cause problems in the wrong hands.

without turning this into GD, be careful about answering questions, as there are leftist and others that frequent this forum too.

There is no shortage of high-powered IR lasers outside the US, so ITAR isn't really an issue with respect to this topic - The problem is endemic to the US.

In fact, I can't even import a low-power green laser here in Australia because it's highly illegal, but as long as it's for military applications, the laws don't apply and I can have and use any military type Visible/IR type laser I can import.

The problem I think is that OOB is an emerging topic recently pushed due to the 4G photocathode and digital systems, and as such, it makes a lot of sense that this kind of equipment isn't available in the US.

I'm not even sure how far US citizens can go on DIY. If you make one, I wouldn't recommend showing it around.

I just spent the evening putting some OOB equipment together, designed specifically to evade US-type Gen3 detection. It's not hard to make - or expensive - but you need to have a clear goal in mind.

David.

A piece of Gallium Arsenide lens blank should do the trick nicely as a bandpass filter and could be polished up at home.

David.

It's been a while, so I'll be a little more forthcoming.

This is not quite the case that it's an intermediate bandaid. The concepts were well established by the US back in 1998, and subsequently lost over the following decade. Most people don't even realize there were PVS-5Cs that had out-of-band capabilities. The US was pretty much blindsided by the development of non-US Out Of Band development. I had a chat back in 2016 with the guy from RDECom who the NVESD reports to about it. The gist of the discussion was that the NVESD completely missed the development of new capabilities in this area. It was actually the Chinese who were the first to notice it and to take action in 2013, but they too don't have the technology as they had switched to Gen3.

The US response at the time was to focus on development of hybrid systems such as EBAPS, but there's some serious practical problems with the technology that the US can't resolve that don't technically affect EBCMOS technology. A well designed OOB system will be very difficult to overcome with any digital based technology of today.

1550nm illuminators are not "Out of band" in the traditional sense ( of IITs ). They are well and truly in-band for all SWIR equipment. After all, no one goes around calling 8 micron thermal "Out Of Band" - well, except in the case of the TCAD, but there's more to that than just a thermal laser.

It's been a while so I'll link to a paper I wrote and presented back at the 2016 Future Land Forces conference. This has been published, so is not in violation of ITAR, though the subject matter possibly is, which is why I'm being a little vague on descriptions.

http://aunv.blackice.com.au/userfiles/david-FLFC16-Paper-Submission-Template_-_Out_Of_Band_Accepted_v7.pdf

US development of OOB in 2017 was heavily focused on the TCAD and the Virtual Laser Pointer, and all development of intensified OOB technology had pretty much died with the InGaAs tube. Neither technology solves illuminations requirements and advantages. I believe they realize the issue at the moment however and are working more on OOB development than in previous years.

OOB isn't limited to lasers or aiming devices. It's greatest advantages are in environment where an absolute assymetric advantage can be realized against an opponent equipped with Gen3. Those situations manifest more frequently than you might imagine.

Regards
David

David, if I’m reading your last paragraph correctly, you’re basically stating that an opponent with OOB capablilty has a similar advantage vs a Gen 3 equipped opponent as that Gen 3 opponent would have vs an unequipped (I2 wise) opponent? Or is it closer to Gen1?

Thanks

In context, an opponent equipped with OOB technology has a similar advantage over a Gen3 user, that a Gen3 user has over an opponent with no night vision equipment at all.

It's possible, in tactical situations that regularly occur, to gain a 100% assymetric advantage over a Gen3 ( or A Gen2 ) equipped opponent.

Or, if you wanted to look at it another way, The Gen3 equipment wouldn't be any more useful than having a flashlight.

But I have to stress that this statement is made in a specific context that occurs in the field. In other situations, it's a tactical aid that allows the user to avoid detection, or to enhance operations without giving their position away.

The easiest way I can describe it without specifics - Imagine if the US was the only country that had Thermal and Gen3 and everyone else had Gen3... It's not a perfect solution in every situation, but at times, the conflict would be entirely asymmetric.

David.

Active emissions will always offer an adversary the potential for detection. The military will have succes with OOB devices for some time, but any peer or near peer adversary will be able to identify the spectrum, and adapt to be able to detect that spectrum. Tunable lasers may extend the utility of "OOB" via frequency selection, just like frequency hopping in comms - change your unit's bandwidth to keep the adversary guessing and limit their detection capability will aid survival.

Once an adversary has identified your operating spectrum and reacted to that threat, your "OOB" is suddenly "In band" and near-peer's don't have to operate fully OOB to detect, fix, and send artillery/CAS/pain&suffering on your position. Detection is enough.

The ONLY solution to what I am going to call "The spectrum wars" is to operate fully passively.

The future of visual augmentation systems will be digital based augmented reality goggles utilizing a virtual laser.

On a long enough timeline, there is simply no other way.

This is primarily where the US is headed - augmented reality with virtual lasers... Just as they already have the gunsight overlay concepts operating at the moment. There are problems with refresh rate, but it's still pretty impressive.

However such systems use wireless radio signals to communicate, which in turn is an even bigger problem as radio can be detected and triangulated automatically over very long distances.

Spread spectrum and ultra-wideband systems try to minimize this, but it's still the same problem.

Anyway, you were partially correct. The US has continuous coverage of spectrum from 500nm to 3500nm which covers all bands that we'd consider "out of band". The biggest flaw in that strategy is that it's one dimensional. Emerging out-of-band concepts are two-dimensional.

Again, I won't go into specifics, but it's easier to hide in a forrest than it is to hide in an open plain. There's a spectral equivalent of that situation that needs to be considered as well as just "band".

David.

Thank you for contributing, David. Good info and lots of good tidbits that I was not aware of. I know this is a subject you've researched in depth and have practical working knowledge with. Added your paper to my collection.

Couple of tangential questions based on what you said. Feel free not to answer.

Was the OOB capability of some PVS-5Cs purposeful or was it an artifact of the particular PC or construction methods used on those units? Was there a dedicated aiming laser or illuminator that could be paired with those units?

Have InGasAs tubes ever been fielded? Have never heard of the US operating an InGaAs tube in anything other than a target designator (1064nm).

Just a hobbyist obsessed with the technical aspects of NV. Have a full time job in an industry that has nothing to do with NV or optics.

SWIR cameras in use
MWIR cameras in use
The LWIR is what the thermals we currently use are operating within.

Lasers exist within these bands as well just not to civilians.
https://www.flir.de/globalassets/imported-assets/document/16-0423-oem-datasheet-updates-clip-swir.pdf

To not be seen does not have to be out of band only. Think of camouflage. It’s all within the visible band and works to hide stuff or people very well in some situations.

There are some VERY impressive and interesting developments happening as we speak.

See recently released patent: US10062554

A very meaningful development, expanding your detection range both through the visual spectrum into long-wave thermal using the very same image intensifier tube.
This solves a couple of the big issues for thermal devices today, no more processing lag, huge boost in resolution, significantly less power usage... to name a few.
It opens up the door for thermal head-worn goggles. And your only band limitation is your objective. You literally jump two generations ahead on current thermal technology, thats how significant this development is.

However, as has been pointed out here, simply going out of band isn't that big of an advantage, the advantage manifests itself once you have the ability to band-hop, similarly to how frequency-hopping works on encrypted radio communication, adding the second dimension. This band hopping can then be synchronised between both sensor system and emitter, adding even a third dimension.

And on the topic regarding OOB lasers, messing around with a DPSS green laser is rather cumbersome. It is much easier to swap the laser diode in a regular red laser designator. Chances are high that there is a 5.6mm TO-can red laser diode in there, swap it for something like a 1182nm 5.6mm TO-can IR laser diode at a similar power rating and you are good to go. (this can also be done using 850nm laser diodes )
(Pro TIP: make sure you wear ESD protection, laser diodes hate static electricity)

OOB capabilities of the PVS-5C was only ever residual. There's definitely trace evidence that it was deliberately left out in some literature of the era, especially literature intended to provide a basis for the US move away from Gen2 development (entirely) but the motive is unclear - It could just be extremely sloppy work by those who wanted the papers to have a particular spin so as to support their objectives, or it might have been intentional simply because it didn't support their objectives. But the PVS-5C (Extended Red) spectral sensitivity chart actually crosses over Gen3 above 940nm and the PVS-5C is more sensitive at those wavelengths. It was never intended or used for practical applications that I am aware of, but it does make for some interesting testing if you have the equipment.

InGaAs was fielded in the AN/PVS-13. It was pretty much intended for covert operations. A modified Aquilla scope, specifically for covert operations. Don't ask me for details, because those operations are probably still classified secret, so there's no chance anyone is going to tell me what they were, though I found some references to those operations in the past along with the intention of use with the 1064nm target designator. Some of that came out when they created the TCAD, and they got a little more specific with the requirements that were needed to replace the AN/PVS-13. Specifically, it needed to be useful on either bare human skin, and specific enemy uniforms. Even without that, the fact that it was designed for use on sniper platforms, and had little other value as a night vision device probably tells more about the intent behind it's manufacture.  It wasn't really useful for beacons or general illumination operation though. Beacons in the 1024nm range are a relatively new development.

Here's a comparison between the full spec 4G tube. I know there's been a lot of talk about Echo having OOB characteristics, and they probably do, but the official line from the photonis factory is that some of them, specifically those intended for the US market, are nerfed. Apparently this is technology they don't necessarily want non-military people using. Which ones are nerfed and which ones are OK? No idea. While it's true that they are the exact same tube before failing production line testing, they did mention what they did to nerf them to me, and I can't discuss that much as it was confidential- but it definitely would have worked and would have been very cheap for them to do. Are they still nerfing them? No idea. Certainly people are claiming that Photonis USA are saying they are full-band OOB, so maybe they are not nerfing them now. It's been a while since I had that discussion with Photonis so it's possible.



This is pretty much, comparatively, how the 4G stacks up against Gen3 with respect to OOB. I didn't map it much past 1000nm, and this chart IS NORMALIZED - Not absolute. It's normalized for all three photocathodes. I think InGaAs and 4G cross over, but generally 4G follows, more or less, the InGaAs line for a while. I hear some crazy stories about people un-official OOB experiments... How crazy? 1200nm crazy. I've never verified it. But the 4G photocathode is like someone took all the best bits of the S20ER, Gen3 and InGaAs photocathodes and mashed them together.  Anyway, for that chart to be correct, you need to compare a 4G tube to a Gen3 tube with the same S/N since it's all normalized around the 2856K light curve.

How did this new OOB band come about? Well, way back 6 years ago, due to a marketing error.... Ummm. Actually, I'm not sure if I can tell that story either. There's only a handfull of things with respect to 4G I can't talk about, and Photonis isn't really hiding anything that's not outright secret but there's still a few things they politely asked me not to repeat. Actually, they tend to understate the technology they have. Deliberately so. All I can say is there's more to these tubes than OOB...Well, OOB does occur at both ends of the spectrum. I'll leave it at that.

Anyway, for those selecting 4G for experiments - I really do recommend going the full INTENS tube. They cost a lot more. There are reasons for that. They also have other technological advancements intended for military applications.

And, I do *not* recommend EBAPS technology for OOB research ( US citizens, including the US Military, are prevented from buying EBCMOS technology which can theoretically do full intensified OOB, but they presently aren't available and may never be a product line variation. )

There are grades of 4G tube, just like there are grades of Gen3. It's easy to think of Filmed, Thin Film and Filmless as different capabilities, but in truth, performance of each can be similar. In practice, they have huge envelopes each - It's possible to get filmless tubes sub-20-S/N. Well, the same sort of rules apply to Photonis. There are reasons that there is such a spread of performance in Photonis products. You can actually get tubes from Photonis that can compete directly with L3 filmless, but they are not Echo's :) Still, the Echo's are probably outperforming the older Night Enforcers that were so popular about 10 years ago, so if they are coming out with full OOB capabilities now, then they would still be excellent for home experimentation. I will clarify that I haven't asked the factory lately if they are still nerfing them.

There's other factors to OOB technology also - For example, the test parameters of night vision are based around the 2856K light source. This has been used for decades, but the latest generation of L3 technology is starting to push up sensitivity above 900nm, so they are realizing that this standard works against L3's filmless tech now. Estimates are that specs on Filmless are underreading by as much as 4 to 5 percent. It's so widespread that some are recommending that this performance increase be automatically considered in terms of published specs, because it represents a real capability increase in the field.  OOB systems like full-spec 4G also gains from this - About 10 to 20 percent. It's not a small number.

It's somewhat due to the 2856K curve no longer following the extended night sky spectrum when the response from 900nm to 1050nm is included.
eg;

The airglow/moonlight curve is what people used to use for NV experiments, so the 2856K curve was pretty good. Now we're going into darker environments, the 2007 dark sky survey is more useful, and shows up the limitations of the 2856K curve for NV testing.

But most of the advantages from OOB come from tactical differences. Being able to better spot enemy uniforms at night. Being able to leverage asymmetric options in combat, especially assault and defensing operations. Being able to use covert lights to read maps and the like, or illuminate signs, or, as my example made clear, spot enemy hidden in shadows. The rules of camouflage still work at night, but bending the spectrum alone helps, and adding more light cements the advantage.

There's more, and some I can't talk about and some I'm still holding back because I don't want every bit of what I know getting out into the public domain yet, even if it's not controlled, because some of it could potentially harm US and Australian soldiers. The above comes from the published articles from three years ago. I'm not trying to start a Photonis/L3 war. I like L3 tubes, and they have some amazing characteristics. But the OOB characteristics of the 4G lend themselves to new military tactics that aren't supported by Gen3 - or rather, that are specifically useful against Gen3.

Anyway, rumor is that the US NV research guys took something out of my research a few years back and then figured it all out for themselves and SF are now buying some Photonis tubes and have been doing so for the past couple of years. Is there any truth to the rumors? I don't know. But it makes sense. And if anyone has an old Aquilla scope that needs a new tube, definitely go have a look at a MX10160 4G Intens tube - :) Make up a super-AN/PVS-13 ! :)

This concludes everything that was published back in 2016 and that I can talk about. Well, some of what I can talk about at least. None of it will be a surprise to anyone who attended the conference at least.

David.

Thank you for sharing the patent details. It will be interesting to see if they can develop a single lens capable of handling that - some previous designs for such lenses have used dichroic reflectors to separate bands and focus them independently. Though good lenses for the 700 to 1700 micron range are possible, though the US is definitely lagging the rest of the world in that area. Five years ago, I found more than a dozen countries developing such lenses. Mostly those countries capable of making silicon chips.

For what it's worth, it is possible to just go and buy a dedicated narrow-band 1060nm laser diode and build it also. They cost a few hundred dollars. If you go onto a laser diode supply website and filter with sort by band, there's a whole world of new bands possible with different diodes. Add a COTS driver and Boom! (Bang? Snap? Crackle?) Instant laser.

I just mentioned using GaAs blanks as a filter as they can sometimes be had for a few dollars in the US and a lot of people have cheap green lasers already.

David

I don't see them developing a single lens being able to both properly handle visible and LWIR, so far I don't know of a lens material that is transparent on both visible and thermal bands not to mention the same refractive index. But I agree, some kind of multi lens system (think reversed PVS-7 via dichroic reflectors/prism) is a likely solution.

Now that is some out of the box thinking, I love it

I love this thread! Tons of great information from multiple people

You guys need to watch spectral on Netflix. Right inline with this thread lol

out of band is cool and all but what about different states of matter like Bose-Einstein condensate? Lol

beyond that I just want class 3b stuff to be cash and carry