From: mikkelhaaheim@gmail.com   
      
   Le vendredi 29 juillet 2016 15:18:19 UTC+2, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) a écrit :   
      
   >    
   > 	The point being that taking out the sensors isn't stealth, any more    
   > than I'm invisible because I poked you in the eye. I have to poke    
   > EVERYONE in the eye to do it, and I'm quite visible while I'm trying.   
      
   No. Taking out the sensors isn't stealth. Poking out an eye is not stealth.   
   Exploiting the reduced sensory capabilities with the assistence of   
   low-observable techniques and materials IS. Tip towing behind a blinded   
   opponent in order to deliver a killing    
   IS (don't forget that the blind opponent can still hear).   
      
      
   >    
      
   >    
   > 	In what way? Astronomers look for particular phenomena. Military types    
   > look for others. An astronomer isn't the person who's going to be trying    
   > to recognize your ship, it's the security people. They may use the same    
   > EQUIPMENT but what they do with it, and what they know how to recognize,    
   > will be very different.   
      
   Astronomers are neverthelessattempting to locate threats. They know what they   
   are looking for, and how to recognise it, but it is still difficult due to   
   processing limitations. The military ALSO have such processing limitations.   
      
      
   >    
   > 	Note that smart video detection, tracking, classification, and    
   > identification are things I've done a fair amount of work with, and I    
   > know the military's doing a lot of it for space-based objects and    
   > phenomena of interest.   
   >    
      
   Yes. Advances are being made. The issue of processing limitations remains   
   valid. You yourself have pointed this out with the hot jungle IR and   
   obstructed sonar scenarios.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)