Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do we finally have an energy weapon

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Do we finally have an energy weapon

    Found this on a site and i thought it might be worth posting here and to see your views on it
    Originally posted by US aims Star Trek ray guns at nuclear sites
    US scientists have unveiled details of a project that aims to develop Star Trek-style ray guns that could keep "security adversaries" out of Department of Energy (DoE) nuclear sites.

    The DoE Office of Security and Safety Performance Assurance, together with the Department of Defense, is "exploring the potential" of directed energy weapons based on millimetre-wave rays.

    Dubbed Active Denial Technology (ADT), the systems are an emerging class of non-lethal weaponry using 95GHz millimetre-wave directed energy.

    According to the DoE the technology is capable of rapidly heating human skin to a pain level that has been demonstrated as "very effective at repelling people" without apparently burning the skin or causing other secondary effects.

    ADT emits a 95GHz non-ionizing electromagnetic beam of energy that penetrates approximately 1/64 of an inch into human skin tissue, where nerve receptors are concentrated.

    Within seconds, the beam will heat the exposed skin tissue to a level where intolerable pain is experienced and natural defence mechanisms take over.

    This intense heating sensation stops only if the individual moves out of the beam's path or the beam is turned off.

    The sensation caused by the system has been described by test subjects as feeling like touching a hot frying pan or the intense radiant heat from a fire. Burn injury is prevented by limiting the beam's intensity and duration.

    Sandia National Laboratories, a National Nuclear Security Administration lab, will investigate how the technology can be used on "adversaries" by developing a small ADT system to protect US nuclear sites.

    To help solve the many technical issues associated with the project, Sandia has partnered with Raytheon and the Air Force Research Laboratory as both organisations have significant experience with earlier ADT developments.

    In the mid 1990s the US Air Force funded development of an ADT prototype which resulted in several ongoing projects, such as the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate's Vehicle Mounted Active Denial System and the Office of Force Transformation's project Sheriff.

    In 2004, Sandia conducted simulations of how the smaller ADT system might be used and how it would perform against "adversary attack scenarios" within a nuclear facility using the Joint Conflict and Tactical Simulation software modelling tool.

    "Recently there has been significant progress with this project," said Willy Morse, Sandia's principal investigator.

    "On 5 May we took acceptance of a prototype system built by Raytheon's Advanced Electromagnetic Technologies centre in partnership with CPI and Malibu Research. Initial characterisation and performance tests were completed at the end of May."

    A second-generation small-size ADT system is expected to be fielded at several DoE nuclear facilities as early as 2008.

    Millimetre-wave "human effectiveness testing", initiated in 2001, has demonstrated ADT as effective and safe without any long-term effects, according to the Department of Defense.
    The doctor told me Im insane, thank God! its so much better then being outsane!



    #2
    Sweet. Set phasers on stun!

    Now with added lesbians.

    Comment


      #3
      I wonder if the Pentagon is going to field test this in Iraq.

      Comment


        #4
        ^^^^^^there is a good chance..

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by SP90
          I wonder if the Pentagon is going to field test this in Iraq.
          Maybe they already have
          The doctor told me Im insane, thank God! its so much better then being outsane!


          Comment


            #6
            Of course they did.

            Anyway there is an error in that statement, the weapon doesn't heat the skin it heats the nerves under it.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Dutch_Razor
              Of course they did.

              Anyway there is an error in that statement, the weapon doesn't heat the skin it heats the nerves under it.
              No error, it heats the skin 1/64 of an inch into the skin where the nerve endings are to make the pain more unbearable
              ADT emits a 95GHz non-ionizing electromagnetic beam of energy that penetrates approximately 1/64 of an inch into human skin tissue, where nerve receptors are concentrated.
              Within seconds, the beam will heat the exposed skin tissue to a level where intolerable pain is experienced and natural defence mechanisms take over.
              The doctor told me Im insane, thank God! its so much better then being outsane!


              Comment


                #8
                I've heard of that before. Are you familiiar with the HELLADS program? This one's a real offensive energy weapon.

                PLAYING WITH LIQUID FIRE: High Energy Lasers Cool Down


                a time to mourn

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Hatcheter
                  I've heard of that before. Are you familiiar with the HELLADS program? This one's a real offensive energy weapon.

                  PLAYING WITH LIQUID FIRE: High Energy Lasers Cool Down
                  Yeah i heard of that weapon ages ago, i like the power of it but i dont like the time in between shots, and the lenght of time it can shoot for
                  I like the ADT tech much better

                  The doctor told me Im insane, thank God! its so much better then being outsane!


                  Comment


                    #10
                    Sorry to be negative, but the ADT tech sounds really, really crap. 'Burn your enemies into submission!!!'

                    It doesn't really work. You really need to be able to fire of a shot that will deal with an enemy, not keep your weapon pointed at him while the hoardes start running at you.

                    My main problem with the weapon is its lasting effects - or lack of. a burn hurts, but if its not even permenant, then once nice man stops shining it at you, you're going to be aiming at him again.

                    For non-leathal weaponry, we really need to be able to take the person out without having to worry that they'll get back up again in the next few seconds... like a zat gun...

                    May be useful for speciallised teams to take one person down, but really no use one-to-one, or at a numerical disadvantage. Not a tech i'd be investing in...
                    "I have a B.A., M.D., Ph.D and B.Sc. Maybe one day I'll get a J.O.B."

                    "A word to the wise ain't necessary -- it's the stupid ones that need the advice."

                    "He who laughs last didn't get it."

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by cozzerob
                      Sorry to be negative, but the ADT tech sounds really, really crap. 'Burn your enemies into submission!!!'

                      It doesn't really work. You really need to be able to fire of a shot that will deal with an enemy, not keep your weapon pointed at him while the hoardes start running at you.
                      Yeah, but it's a defence system, not a personal weapon.

                      My main problem with the weapon is its lasting effects - or lack of. a burn hurts, but if its not even permenant, then once nice man stops shining it at you, you're going to be aiming at him again.
                      Yeah, but it's a defence system, not a personal weapon.

                      Now with added lesbians.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by cozzerob
                        Sorry to be negative, but the ADT tech sounds really, really crap. 'Burn your enemies into submission!!!'

                        It doesn't really work. You really need to be able to fire of a shot that will deal with an enemy, not keep your weapon pointed at him while the hoardes start running at you.

                        My main problem with the weapon is its lasting effects - or lack of. a burn hurts, but if its not even permenant, then once nice man stops shining it at you, you're going to be aiming at him again.

                        For non-leathal weaponry, we really need to be able to take the person out without having to worry that they'll get back up again in the next few seconds... like a zat gun...

                        May be useful for speciallised teams to take one person down, but really no use one-to-one, or at a numerical disadvantage. Not a tech i'd be investing in...
                        I think this is more intended as mob/crowd control, akin to tear gas.


                        a time to mourn

                        Comment


                          #13
                          It would be most useful in area denial, assuming one could keep a steady power source.

                          The currently most effective area denial weapons, land mines, have fallen out of favor due to humanitarian concerns and the potential to accidently deny the area from yourself, although remote detonation technology is helping wit that.

                          Poision gas, potenially while useful in temperory area denial dissipates too quickly to use as a long term solution but is too indiscriminant in the short term, not the mention that it is prohibited by one of the Hague Conventions

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Yeah, it not going to stop somebody who's really dedicated, for instance being inside a vehicle is probably would prevent it from working. The scenarios I've seen presented for it have all been crowd control type situations, like when you've got a mob and such, so that rather than having to use tear gas (which can cause respiratory problems) and send in the riot police to beat the crap out of people with batons, you can more effectively persuade the crowd that they REALLY don't want to go there. From what I've read on it, nobody, no matter how tough, has been able to withstand this for more than a few seconds.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Three PhDs
                              Yeah, but it's a defence system, not a personal weapon.
                              And yet... somehow... I still find my self... dissatisfied... with this technology.

                              Even as a defence system, it still falls down on the same aspects as an offensive system:

                              >Effects are not long lasting enough! You cannot aim the weapon continuously and escape at the same time. For the love of God, most peple have trouble even aiming in the first place, let alone with your back turned and while running...

                              >Doesn't work on more than 1 person. Angry drunk guy doesn't jump you on his own, he gets angry drunk mate 1 & 2 to help him out. Fat lot of good this weapon will be in that situation. You might be able to subdue him while the others massecre you - maybe...

                              It also fails as a crowd control device, because you can only aim at one person. The only viable solution is to increace the beam size, to fit in a whole crowd/mob. this fails as the power requirements jump when you try to do this, and you get the same problem as with poison gas - some people get to much, some to little. It was said that the weapon is only not dangerous when the exposure period was not prolonged. To fix a mob, you need long exposure - and that is simple not acceptable with this weapon.

                              On the battle field, as an alternative to land mines - it uses too much energy to keep it on (or you need a sensor, which, again, uses energy). And that's assuming that the enemy doesn't use cars or other transport vessels to get past the trap.

                              all in all, I stand with my original comments, not a very useful technology, but nice try.
                              "I have a B.A., M.D., Ph.D and B.Sc. Maybe one day I'll get a J.O.B."

                              "A word to the wise ain't necessary -- it's the stupid ones that need the advice."

                              "He who laughs last didn't get it."

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X