Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Disclosure - Contingencies - Additional Information [Abstract]
Contingencies	Contingencies The Company and its subsidiary, Indigo Systems Corporation (now known as FLIR Commercial Systems, Inc.) (together, the “FLIR Parties”), were named in a lawsuit filed by Raytheon Company (“Raytheon”) on March 2, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Raytheon's complaint, as amended, asserted claims for tortious interference, patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, unfair competition, breach of contract and fraudulent concealment. The FLIR Parties filed an answer to the complaint on September 2, 2008, in which they denied all material allegations. On October 27, 2010, the FLIR Parties and Raytheon entered into a settlement agreement that resolved the patent infringement claims (the "Patent Claims") pursuant to which the FLIR Parties paid $3 million to Raytheon and entitles the FLIR Parties to certain license rights in the patents that were the subject of the Patent Claims. On October 28, 2014, a four-week trial began with respect to Raytheon's remaining claims of misappropriations of trade secrets and claims related to 31 alleged trade secrets. On November 24, 2014, a jury in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas rejected Raytheon’s claims and determined that 27 of the alleged trade secrets were not in fact trade secrets and that neither Indigo, prior to its acquisition by the Company, nor the Company infringed any of the trade secrets claimed and awarded Raytheon no damages. The Court has yet to rule on the Company’s motion for an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $28 million as a prevailing party under the Texas Theft Liability Act. The matter remains ongoing and is subject to appeal and the Company is unable to estimate the amount or range of potential loss or recovery, if any, which might result if the final determination of this matter is favorable or unfavorable, but an adverse ruling on the merits of the original claims against the FLIR parties, while remote, could be material. The Company is also subject to other legal proceedings, claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company makes a provision for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company believes it has recorded adequate provisions for any probable and estimable losses. While the outcome of these matters is currently not determinable, the Company does not expect that the ultimate costs to resolve such matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2014

Disclosure - Contingencies - Additional Information [Abstract]

The Company and its subsidiary, Indigo Systems Corporation (now known as FLIR Commercial Systems, Inc.) (together, the “FLIR Parties”), were named in a lawsuit filed by Raytheon Company (“Raytheon”) on March 2, 2007 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Raytheon's complaint, as amended, asserted claims for tortious interference, patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, unfair competition, breach of contract and fraudulent concealment. The FLIR Parties filed an answer to the complaint on September 2, 2008, in which they denied all material allegations. On October 27, 2010, the FLIR Parties and Raytheon entered into a settlement agreement that resolved the patent infringement claims (the "Patent Claims") pursuant to which the FLIR Parties paid $3 million to Raytheon and entitles the FLIR Parties to certain license rights in the patents that were the subject of the Patent Claims. On October 28, 2014, a four-week trial began with respect to Raytheon's remaining claims of misappropriations of trade secrets and claims related to 31 alleged trade secrets. On November 24, 2014, a jury in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas rejected Raytheon’s claims and determined that 27 of the alleged trade secrets were not in fact trade secrets and that neither Indigo, prior to its acquisition by the Company, nor the Company infringed any of the trade secrets claimed and awarded Raytheon no damages. The Court has yet to rule on the Company’s motion for an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of $28 million as a prevailing party under the Texas Theft Liability Act. The matter remains ongoing and is subject to appeal and the Company is unable to estimate the amount or range of potential loss or recovery, if any, which might result if the final determination of this matter is favorable or unfavorable, but an adverse ruling on the merits of the original claims against the FLIR parties, while remote, could be material.

The Company is also subject to other legal proceedings, claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company makes a provision for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company believes it has recorded adequate provisions for any probable and estimable losses. While the outcome of these matters is currently not determinable, the Company does not expect that the ultimate costs to resolve such matters will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.