...40 Watt Range

Status
Not open for further replies.

TechBrute

Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
3,264
Location
DFW, TX
http://us.gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/ray-gun-headed-for-iraq-battlefield-154499.php

Ray Gun Headed for Iraq Battlefield

The United States Army is testing lasers on the battlefield. Ionatron, Inc. of Tucson has developed a weapon called a femtosecond laser, which creates light pulses that last less than 10 trillionths of a second. These pulses carve a channel of ionized oxygen in the air which can conduct electricity. Then, the weapon blasts lightning bolts through these 30-foot channels of conductivity. This is said to be especially good at neutralizing bombs. Ionatron’s CEO says his company will be sending 12 of these units to Iraq, the first one by the end of July.

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002170.html

I was skeptical, when I first heard about the idea of using lasers and man-made lightning to detonate explosives at a distance. Not only did the technology sound fantastic. But the company pushing the real-life ray gun, Tucscon's Ionatron Inc., seemed so damn squirrely -- long on press releases and shady political connections, short on specifics about how their technology really worked. And that's before you start digging into the questionable stock deals and patent violations. So I wrote Ionatron off for while, despite more and more headlines about the firm and its "Joint IED Neutralizer" -- JIN, for short.

Then, over the summer, I got a call from an Army general who had seen the thing in action. By using femtosecond lasers – light pulses that last less than a ten-trillionth of a second – JIN could carve conductive channels of ionized oxygen in the air. Through these thirty-foot channels, Ionatron's blaster sent man-made lighting bolts. And they actually seem to work at neutralizing bombs. "We understand the physics of what we're trying to do. Now we're just working on the engineering," the general told me. "I think we're going to solve that problem -- and this is just a guess -- in 12 months, maybe 18."

It turns out the general wasn't the only one who was impressed. Last year, "then-deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz recommended investing $30 million in research and sending prototypes to Iraq for testing," the L.A. Times reports. Ionatron CEO Tom Dearmin told eDefense that the first of 12 units would be in Iraq by the end of July.

"But 10 months later — and after a prototype destroyed about 90% of the IEDs laid in its path during a battery of tests — not a single JIN has been shipped to Iraq," the Times notes. "To many in the military, the delay in deploying the vehicles, which resemble souped-up, armor-plated golf carts, is a case study in the Pentagon's inability to bypass cumbersome peacetime procedures to meet the urgent demands of troops in the field."

"The decision has been made that it's not yet mature enough," said Army Brig. Gen. Dan Allyn, deputy director of... the Joint IED Defeat Organization. Iraq is "not the place to be testing unproven technology."

But the Marine Corps believes otherwise and recently decided to circumvent the testing schedule and send JIN units to Al Anbar province in western Iraq... Based on their performance, Marine commanders said, they hope the device can eventually be used throughout Iraq.

Just about every arm of the Defense Department that deals with R&D has been struggling to figure out when to send new technologies to the field. Wait too long, and you're robbing troops of a valuable tool. Field a gadget too quickly, the un-worked-out kinks can ruin its reputation in the military for a while. Troops can even get hurt, relying on an unstable machine.

Usually, the Pentagon errs on the side of caution. Some of the most valuable tools in Afghanistan and Iraq -- the Predator drone, the Stryker armored vehicle -- were deemed not ready for prime time by Defense Department testers.

But despite "thousands of little items found wrong with the Stryker," it was fielded anyway, Army Test and Evaluation Command chief Major General James Myles told me recently. The problems were small and fixable enough that the Stryker was sent out "four or five years" earlier than what the old regulations would've required. So what if the brakes don't work in the extreme cold? "We can't wait for a perfect solution to get a weapon to the field."

The Times pairs the JIN hold-up with the "military's failure to provide sufficient body armor and adequate armor for transport vehicles." But that's not quite right. There's a big difference between getting proven life-savers to a combat zone, and figuring out when something brand new is good enough to be deployed. That goes double for ray guns.

Now if I can just get one a little smaller...:D
 
I believe the same company developed similar technology for the Marines in crowd control. Just instead of sending a lightning bolt through the ionized channel, they send a taser like shock.
 
Hmm... if they do make them smaller, would they ever let us have them?

The 2nd amendment has held against the idiots so far simply because we still use firearms. I wonder if it will transpher to lightning-arms.
 
I'll tell you what, it sure hasn't applied to hand grenades thus far.

That would be sort of a grey area. There are already restrictions on lasers. Not as weapons, just as generally dangerous things non-scientist types shouldn't be monkeying with if they are of too high an output.
 
Seems to be about ten pounds of BS. Neutralizing the bombs does not appear to be the problem, but knowing where they are. Another case of spending millions upon millions for nothing. But got to keep the ex-Defense Secretary's bro's fully employed!
 
That, and give the rubes something to go "ooh" and "aah" over that displays how Windswept and Mighty the government/military industrial complex is while distracting them from the quagmire in the middle east.

But I'm only a little cynical.
 
HerrWolfe said:
Seems to be about ten pounds of BS. Neutralizing the bombs does not appear to be the problem, but knowing where they are. Another case of spending millions upon millions for nothing. But got to keep the ex-Defense Secretary's bro's fully employed!

Speaking of wasting money, I once heard that in order to write notes, sketches etc. in space, where the lack of strong gravity eliminates the use of conventional pens, that NASA was given and spent close to one million dollars to develop a pen that would write upside down and in space were there is no sufficient gravity. The Russians our cheif rivals at the time achieved the goal of writing in space by using pencils at a cost of no more than one or two cents each. Moral of the story: we Americans have enough money to waste on trivial things like an astronaut pen, which O suppopse is a good thing.
 
[tinFoilHat]

The truck and the lightning rod are actually cover for what's inside the truck:

liftingark.jpg


Which explains why no one has ever seen more than one of them at the same time....

[/tinFoilHat]
 
M.E.Eldridge said:
Speaking of wasting money, I once heard that in order to write notes, sketches etc. in space, where the lack of strong gravity eliminates the use of conventional pens, that NASA was given and spent close to one million dollars to develop a pen that would write upside down and in space were there is no sufficient gravity. The Russians our cheif rivals at the time achieved the goal of writing in space by using pencils at a cost of no more than one or two cents each. Moral of the story: we Americans have enough money to waste on trivial things like an astronaut pen, which O suppopse is a good thing.
That's an urban legend.
 
I'm waiting for the handheld ray gun!!!

Tech, the urban legend part is the fact that NASA spent the millions of $$$. Actually, it was Fisher that spent around a million $$ for the pen's development. His first order was to NASA for 400 pens at a price tag of $2.99. snopes.com has the answers.
 
Pencil graphite does bad things to electronics, and sharpening a pencil will release small particles of graphite+wood into the air, clogging air filters and getting into EVERYTHING.
You really don't want pencil shavings in your eyes in zero-g, just think about that for a minute or two.
Many of the little advances made for the space program were not really 100% necessary to the success of the program, but we didn't have a fraction of the true casualty rate that the Russian space program did in the same time period.
M.E.Eldridge said:
Speaking of wasting money, I once heard that in order to write notes, sketches etc. in space, where the lack of strong gravity eliminates the use of conventional pens, that NASA was given and spent close to one million dollars to develop a pen that would write upside down and in space were there is no sufficient gravity. The Russians our cheif rivals at the time achieved the goal of writing in space by using pencils at a cost of no more than one or two cents each. Moral of the story: we Americans have enough money to waste on trivial things like an astronaut pen, which O suppopse is a good thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top