Military Shows off new Ray Gun

[whited]

.

what makes anyone think that that same orginization wouldn't use a potentially deadly weapon against us in protection of itself and its interests.

Nothing. I am completely positive that they would. They reinforce this
view with each passing day our criminal congress is in session, and with
each innocent foreign life sacrificed on the altar of our "interests."

Let's be honest about this weapon, too. Its the soft-core version that's
been trotted out in the only way deemed acceptable to most of us. Imagine
the real headline:: "Military Shows off New Beam that Could incinerate an
Entire Regiment from 10 Miles Away."

Wouldn't go over too well, methinks.

 

[mdao]

Just make sure you don't have any coins in your pocket, wearing a watch or jewellery, have any fillings in your teeth, a metal rod holding a bone together, a metal zip in your trousers or so on or else you are screwed from it. After all every test required that no metal whatsoever was present to avoid massive heat burns.

Metal implants are unaffected as are implanted much deeper than the microwave beam can penetrate. Other metal object will heat up faster and can cause burns, but not "massive heat burns".

The reason why the test subjects weren't wearing metal is because they already know what the effects will be. (Second degree burns, etc)

Two, they're not taking into account crowd panics and trampling deaths as people suddenly feel like they're on fire and the crowd surges to get away.

Certainly beats high speed ventilation by Bradley.

Three, yes, it WILL be used to quell protests in the United States. In fact, an Air Force general even proposed TESTING it on people here first, by using it here, to prove it was safe to our enemies. (?!)

Yeah, the guy ain't very tactful. The reason he proposed testing it here was to prove to the world that the system is so safe that we're willing to use it on Americans. This was to keep the "Arab street" from saying that we're using dangerous/untested technology in Iraq. Misguided, yeah. But I can see where he's coming from.

Thankfully, the effects of it can completely be negated by a beekeeper-suit-like Coverall, Microwave Radiation Protective made for the Navy in the 1970's or so. You can find them on eBay, yet. It's a mesh suit that covers everything, footcovers, gloves, and hood, and was meant for radar technicians who might need to work on live radar equipment, to prevent them from being burned if it was emitting. The mesh works exactly like the grid inside your microwave door.

It's a purchase I highly recommend, as something to have around. The light mesh can be worn under loose outer clothing, the hood under a hooded sweatshirt to be pulled up if need be. It'd ensure you'd not be "herded" with the rest of a crowd, and wouldn't suffer injury.

(as another note, it can also be negated by being under a mylar blanket or other metal or metallized surface...a radar flag from a boating store would be highly effective, thus making the whole damned thing into yet another billion dollar boondoggle that won't work.)

You do realize that the whole point of the beam is to get civvies to clear the area ASAP. Anyone still operating in the beam's path is most likely to get mowed down by small arms fire...

Let's be honest about this weapon, too. Its the soft-core version that's
been trotted out in the only way deemed acceptable to most of us. Imagine
the real headline:: "Military Shows off New Beam that Could incinerate an
Entire Regiment from 10 Miles Away."

Nah, more like early prototype. Energy requirements for microwaving an entire infantry regiment are a bit high for current technology.

 

[Manedwolf]

Actually, I think the challenge with this was getting it to a level that it would NOT cause internal burns in targets. Doing that isn't so hard...in fact, that's how microwave ovens came about, the discovery that radar could cause deep tissue heating at close range due to exciting of water molecules.

If you were in front of a regular high-powered military radar dish when it emitted at full power, you'd suffer severe internal burns rather quickly, literally being microwaved to death.

 

[Manedwolf]

You do realize that the whole point of the beam is to get civvies to clear the area ASAP. Anyone still operating in the beam's path is most likely to get mowed down by small arms fire...

Clearing the area would still be advisable. It'd just be that you'd be able to do so with a clear head, without damage to your retinas or burns from metal fillings or coins in your pockets, (or from the metal parts of a gun you might be carrying), and without being in abject pain. You'd be far more able to focus and avoid being trampled by the panicking crowd.

Would you rather depart an area with pepper spray in your eyes, or without? Same idea.

Also, since the suit was made to protect technicians from being burned by the energy of a full-powered military radar emitter, it should be able to protect you from one that, if it ever happens, were turned up beyond just "it burns" to "poach".

 

[ZeSpectre]

Worked (briefly) on the mounting system for a prototype of this thing. I don't know much in the way of details for the actual system but I do know that it can do a lot more than make someone feel hot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_high_frequency
(it's a weapon and it can be used to phone home )

Also
http://www.mapcruzin.com/news/war080801a.htm
with this marvelous quote...

"active-denial technology will not cause rapid burning, because of the shallow penetration of the beam and the low levels of energy used."

And who thinks that the power level can't be turned up ...considerably... if the decision were made that it was necessary?

Also another "denial" concept to mull over. Metal can/will heat up fast, gun or other metal weapons suddenly too hot to hold/use.

 

[mdao]

Clearing the area would still be advisable. It'd just be that you'd be able to do so with a clear head, without damage to your retinas or burns from metal fillings or coins in your pockets, (or from the metal parts of a gun you might be carrying), and without being in abject pain. You'd be far more able to focus and avoid being trampled by the panicking crowd.

Would you rather depart an area with pepper spray in your eyes, or without? Same idea.

If even prepped enemies wrapped in RF reflecting gear are forced to flee, then it's no longer "yet another billion dollar boondoggle that won't work." ADS has successfully performed it's role by denying use of the area to enemies.

It also handily solves the "10,000 loonies are marching on your embassy, what do you do now?" question.

 

[whited]

.

You do realize that the whole point of the beam is to get civvies to clear the area ASAP.

I guess I missed the point in time that clearing "civvies" from an
area was the job of our military.

 

[Zoogster]

If used properly, ADS will produce no lasting adverse affects, the military argues.

I imagine that means a couple seconds in the perfect setting. Still just like xrays and microwaves(the waves not the appliance), and the dangers posed by getting near high power radar dishes your likely to experience a serious increase in cancer in the parts of the body that the wavelength does penetrate to. If you are to believe they are designed to only penetrate a few inches, there is vulnerable parts of the body at about that depth in certain areas. Men likely would be sterile, or with increased birth defects in the short term after extensive exposure(possibly permanent if the dividing cells are altered), and women with permanent increase of birth defects. This is because men's testes will remake the damaged sperm if capable, but women have all the eggs they will ever have already in thier body being exposed.
So skin cancers, birth defects, seen as ok for non lethal acceptable use against people not posing a lethal threat, great. I guess that is one good way of insuring the offspring of those that defy the government often won't be capable of doing the same.
Metal reflects these rays, so places where you have metal can reflect them onto parts of your body already being hit with the effects, in essence doubling or tripling the effect depending on how much is being reflected. This means areas near where you are carrying metal will quickly burn you, possibly severely.
I imagine a parabolic dish and turning it up to high would easily and quickly create a beam of thousands of degrees without much increase in power consumption. Simply using different waves that penetrate much deeper would allow much deeper burns. This technology can be easily modified, even in the field to be as effective or permanent and deadly as is required.

 

[mdao]

I imagine that means a couple seconds in the perfect setting. Still just like xrays and microwaves(the waves not the appliance), and the dangers posed by getting near high power radar dishes your likely to experience a serious increase in cancer in the parts of the body that the wavelength does penetrate to. If you are to believe they are designed to only penetrate a few inches, there is vulnerable parts of the body at about that depth in certain areas. Men likely would be sterile, or with increased birth defects in the short term after extensive exposure(possibly permanent if the dividing cells are altered), and women with permanent increase of birth defects. This is because men's testes will remake the damaged sperm if capable, but women have all the eggs they will ever have already in thier body being exposed.

The dangers posed by this device are completely different than the dangers posed by standing in front of a random high powered radar dish. (Or even low powered radars at certain wavelengths.)

The ADS is set to a wavelength that penetrates only a few fractions of an inch. Just enough to get to the sensory nerves under your skin. It's set to a wavelength that excites water, and not one that is highly adsorbed by DNA or other material. Could it have mutagenic effects? Sure. Is it likely? No. Sterility is not an issue as the radiation does not penetrate deep enough to affect gametes. It's also the wrong wavelength to produce skin cancer.

The greater danger is if the weapon is used for extended periods of time. Then it can produce injuries similar to very nasty sun burns.

I imagine a parabolic dish and turning it up to high would easily and quickly create a beam of thousands of degrees without much increase in power consumption. Simply using different waves that penetrate much deeper would allow much deeper burns. This technology can be easily modified, even in the field to be as effective or permanent and deadly as is required.

Aside from the point. I imagine CS grenades can be easily modified to deliver VX too. Doesn't make CS grenades any more dangerous or less moral to use.

I guess I missed the point in time that clearing "civvies" from an
area was the job of our military.

It's a task that's incidental to the military's job. Tools like the ADS make it much safer for the civvies involved.

 

[goColt]

I guess I missed the point in time that clearing "civvies" from an
area was the job of our military.

Ever see a Marine hanging around a US Embassy?

Also, recent history (IE: Somalia, Iraq and to a lesser extent Afghanistan) proves that our military will be operating in urban areas more and more. And what do we find in urban-combat areas: Civilians mixed in with BG's.

Think of how many of our soldiers that might have been saved in Somalia if one of these was deployed to defend a downed Blackhawk or on one of the Hummers coming to the rescue or possibly from a high altitude Blackhawk.

One potential problem I see is: Could one shot from a marksman/sniper that is out of range (distance or angle) to this delicate electronic device put it out of commission?

 

[Kaylee]

Out of curiosity on the "metal weapons will be too hot to use" - a few questions --

1. Hot enough for cook offs?
2. Will weapons with polymer frames/receivers still be usable? For a few rounds anyway? Are we talking the metal getting hot enough to cause melting damage to the polymer parts?

 

[Zoogster]

Out of curiosity on the "metal weapons will be too hot to use" - a few questions --

1. Hot enough for cook offs?
2. Will weapons with polymer frames/receivers still be usable? For a few rounds anyway? Are we talking the metal getting hot enough to cause melting damage to the polymer parts?

I would venture that it is not the metal that gets hot, but rather the inability of the metal to absorb any of the rays and reflecting additional rays on the body near the weapon. So imagine your skin is being instanty heated to 130 with a ray adjusted to heat it that over your skin. Well the metal item's surface area is reflecting additional rays to the skin already getting it's own share of direct rays. So now that skin is getting 2-3X that 130 degree heat. Kinda like a magnifying glass, where the same amount of the sun, equal to the size of the glass is being applied to the area equal to the size of the circle of light you make with it, even starting fire with the 75 degree sunlight, even though your only using a few inches of glass to condense it to much less surface area. So a few inches of sunlight are burning something.
So the skin around the metal gets baked at 300+ as quickly as the rest is brought to 130f(which is probably the low setting, and they will use a higher one to be more effective after passing it's initial public scrutiny.) So I would venture that no no cookoffs because the metal item itself wont be getting hot, just your flesh near the metal item being instantly scalded at a far more rapid rate than the rest of you..Kinda like metal in a microwave does not get cooked, it causes the microwave to cook itself because it reflects the waves back. Or have you seen the lil boxes that have a slightly metalic inside for some microwavable items and the metal browns it? That is because near the metal a lot more waves are being reflected down at the item. The same concept would happen to the skin around a firearm on your body.

It's also the wrong wavelength to produce skin cancer.

This is incorrect as that while it is usualy ultraviolet rays causing skin cancer, that is because that is the most energetic rays people are commonly exposed to frequently at low doses because that is the ones put out by the sun. However the skin cancer is caused because the repeated exposure at some point isolates some cells from the natural feedback that tells them to stop dividing and 'reproducing' for an easier term. The radiation is only a minor contributor with the sun as the levels are quite low. That is why just about anything that continously irritates a part of the body over time can cause cancer. Whether it is like chewing tobaco continuously irritating the throat/mouth, or the sun continously irritating the skin, or smoke continuously irritating the lining of the lungs (and depositing things that continues to irritate) or powerful transmitters continuously irritating the inner ear like on sat phones and older cell phones. Radiation rapidly contributes, and radiation combined with burning would be a excellent cancer increasing combo. So ultraviolet or not it will still rapidly increase cancer, just like catscans. Here is an article on catscans which use no ultraviolet rays significantly increasing cancer risks http://japan.medscape.com/viewarticle/488260
I have even seen stats showing like a 16x fold increase per so many years per each scan.

"The typical radiation dose from a single full-body CT examination, as a weighted average of doses to all organs, is about 12 mSv. Ten such examinations in a lifetime would yield an effective dose of about 120 mSv. Survivors of the atomic bomb in the dose category from 5 to 100 mSv (mean, 29 mSv) have a statistically significant increase in solid cancer risk."

 

[mdao]

Zoogster
Re: Cancer causes

Incorrect. The reason that UV radiation from the sun causes skin cancer is that UVB wavelength energy is adsorbed by adjacent thymine bases in DNA and form thymidine dimers. This distorts the structure of the DNA affected and can causes DNA replication errors. Cancer is the result when the mutations causes the cell to uncontrollably replicate.

Same for cigarettes and chewing tobacco. The cause of cancer in those cases is not the irritation caused by the smoke and chew. It's the adsorption through the lungs and mouth of the various carcinogenic agents in tobacco (mainly TSNAs).

As for radiation dosing, low level chronic radiation dosing has much different effects than a single acute dose, even if the total dose is the same. In the low level chronic dosing situation, cellular repair systems have time to repair the damage done by the radiation dose before the next dose comes. In an acute dose, the cell's repair system may be overcome leaving permanent damage. Because of this, the situations of an atomic explosion survivor is different than the situation of someone who has a few CT Scans in their lives, even if the total dosing is the same.

Out of curiosity on the "metal weapons will be too hot to use" - a few questions --

1. Hot enough for cook offs?
2. Will weapons with polymer frames/receivers still be usable? For a few rounds anyway? Are we talking the metal getting hot enough to cause melting damage to the polymer parts?

Too hot to use just means too hot for normal people to hold onto. Metal in the beam's path can get hot enough to cause second degree burns with extended contact. Nomex gloves would be a decent countermeasure.

The heating of the metal parts is caused by ohmic heating due to excitation of the electrons in the metal by the RF beam. It won't actually have any effect on weapons function.

 

[Zoogster]

It's the adsorption through the lungs and mouth of the various carcinogenic agents in tobacco

Then why is high proof alcohol in the mouth frequently over time capable of causing cancer? Even some alcohol based mouthwashes acknowledge this and mention that proper use occasionaly won't contribute significantly? Irritation plays a role. Cells constantly being damaged sometimes mutate into something not properly inhibited by signals from cells surrounding them causing cancer.

Too hot to use just means too hot for normal people to hold onto. Metal in the beam's path can get hot enough to cause second degree burns with extended contact. Nomex gloves would be a decent countermeasure

.
I have not studied that particular ray and it's effects on metal, but assuming what they say is correct and that it burns by exciting water molecules, similar to exactly how microwave ovens cook your food, I would be inclined to think what is next to metal would heat up faster than the metal which reflects most of the energy to what is near it the same way microwaves do. That is why the shielding is metalic mesh, it reflects the waves, a metalic object should do the same.

As for radiation dosing, low level chronic radiation dosing has much different effects than a single acute dose, even if the total dose is the same. In the low level chronic dosing situation, cellular repair systems have time to repair the damage done by the radiation dose before the next dose comes. In an acute dose, the cell's repair system may be overcome leaving permanent damage. Because of this, the situations of an atomic explosion survivor is different than the situation of someone who has a few CT Scans in their lives, even if the total dosing is the same.

Yeah I found the comparison a little exaggerated, but it is what was written in the medical article as comparison. Yet a person can recieve lethal radiation levels in one acute setting and be fine for a few days before they show serious symptoms and die. Enough radiation to kill instantly is far above what is a lethal dosage. There is also lifetime levels of acceptable radiation exposure, for people that must face exposure in thier line of work, that does not mean even those levels are desirable.

The reason that UV radiation from the sun causes skin cancer is that UVB wavelength energy is adsorbed by adjacent thymine bases in DNA and form thymidine dimers. This distorts the structure of the DNA affected and can causes DNA replication errors. Cancer is the result when the mutations causes the cell to uncontrollably replicate.

Yes, however they also acknowledge that the amount of sunburns someone experiences in life can play a role as well. There is acute causes, and prolonged causes. You explained the acute cause well. Both encourage and contribute to causing cancer.

 

[LaEscopeta]

Also, recent history (IE: Somalia, Iraq and to a lesser extent Afghanistan) proves that our military will be operating in urban areas more and more. And what do we find in urban-combat areas: Civilians mixed in with BG's.

+1. And the BG has figured out our inability to find separate BG from civilians, and they are hiding behind the civilians in Iraq and elsewhere.

Think of how many of our soldiers that might have been saved in Somalia if one of these was deployed to defend a downed Blackhawk or on one of the Hummers coming to the rescue or possibly from a high altitude Blackhawk.

+1. This critical analysis by a US military officer of Task Force Ranger in Somalia:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB63/doc10.pdf

…found using CS gas to push civilians from the battle zone, out of the path of US ground vehicles, and separating them from the BGs would likely have helped (pages 29 & 30.)

(Note I am not agreeing or disagreeing with anything else in the report, nor am I commenting on anything else about Somalia or the Blackhawk Down events. Not trying to get this moved to Legal and Political.)