Journalist Gets Blasted By the Pentagon's Pain Ray — Twice 357
dsinc writes "Wired's Spencer Ackerman voluntarily subjected himself to what the U.S. military calls the Active Denial System, an energy weapon commonly known as the 'Pain Ray' that turns electricity into millimeter wave radio frequency and blasts targets with heat. He describes it thus: 'When the signal goes out over radio to shoot me, there’s no warning — no flash, no smell, no sound, no round. Suddenly my chest and neck feel like they’ve been exposed to a blast furnace, with a sting thrown in for good measure. I’m getting blasted with 12 joules of energy per square centimeter, in a fairly concentrated blast diameter. I last maybe two seconds of curiosity before my body takes the controls and yanks me out of the way of the beam.'"
The device has been tested now on over 11,000 people, with only two serious injuries to show for it. However, the device has limitations: rainy weather decreases its effectiveness, and its "boot-up" time is 16 hours, making it useless for breaking up unexpected, impromptu mobs.
Faster than windows (Score:3, Funny)
Boots faster than windows...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It's a joke. Laugh.
Re: (Score:2)
It's in Microsoft minutes.
*hoop shoot* *score*
16 hours? (Score:5, Interesting)
What electrical components take 16 hours to boot up?
What mechanical operation requires 16 hours of prep?
Any insight? I read the article, and it had very little in the way of information.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know for sure, but I assumed capacitors (special capacitors, obviously). Maybe an EE can comment.
Re: (Score:2)
(special capacitors, obviously)
Like, a flux capacitor?
Re: (Score:2)
(special capacitors, obviously)
Like, a flux capacitor?
Only if you reverse the polarity and pump it through the deflector dish.
Re: (Score:3)
Batteries. A capacitor bank would be used for a pulsed device, but this device seems to be continuous wave. So we are probably talking batteries + inverter + high voltage transformer. Ultimately what you want for a device like this is a high voltage DC current. So after the transformer the AC is probably converted back to DC again before powering the CW gyrotron. Actually the device could use short duty cycle pulses, but in that case the capacitor charge time would probably be measured in milliseconds or na
Re:16 hours? (Score:4, Informative)
Getting that much energy stored up and ready for use at 12 joules per square centimeter might be the reason, especially when you take efficiency losses into account.
Re: (Score:2)
That does not bode well for its endurance over the next 16 hours.
Re: (Score:2)
that would then be reload time, not boot up time.
but you're missing the point. of course the first model is slow to setup. that's how you _really_ gouge the money out of gov...
Re:16 hours? (Score:4, Interesting)
I could be completely wrong here but I think it is because you need to create a superconductive state and it takes 16 hours to get cold enough. That's the only thing I can think of.
Tube filaments. (Score:5, Funny)
Everybody knows that you can't get that perfect warmth without tubes.
Re:16 hours? (Score:5, Informative)
Why something that just pumps out such large amounts of juice needs that long a startup cycle though, I have no idea. My best guess is limitations on the components themselves. Maybe the energy storage elements suffer from charging too quickly, or maybe it has to store plenty of energy in advance to maintain a full-power beam over extended periods of time.
Re:16 hours? (Score:4, Funny)
Even with all that time spent reloading the game when you die?
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I read the article...
You must be new here.
Re:16 hours? (Score:5, Funny)
Not really integral to the function, the design team was just really goth.
Re: (Score:3)
Supracooled components. I've used a gamma-ray spectrometer that took about a day to get running for this reason.
Not sure why this one would have any of those. Maybe it uses a superconductor?
Re:16 hours? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:16 hours? (Score:5, Informative)
This is CW Microwave at 95ghz so I'd imagine it takes that long for everything to charge and come into spec frequency-wise, since all of the waveguides and antenna would be very sensitive to SWR if the frequency drifts too badly .. probably to the point of destruction at 100kw PEP.
Close not exactly. The highest freq amps I've worked on are just above Ku band and the highest power is a KW or so, so I'm about a factor of 4 low in freq (which in microwave work is practically in their backyard) and low by a factor of 100 in power (which is a big difference).
Waveguide and antenna for microwave work are pretty much inherently broadband. Unless you're doing it wrong or weird darn near 2:1 is normal. Its not the antenna and waveguide. Combining networks are pretty precise ... wavelength at 100 ghz is what 3 mm or so, so you'd like to build them to a hundredth or better of that, or about 0.03 mm accuracy which isn't all that taxing for a machinist. The point being that its probably not realistic to build something that requires 12 sig figs of freq accuracy if you can't build anything to more than maybe 5 or 6 sig figs of wavelength accuracy even in theory.
I can purchase off the shelf GPSDO with frequency accuracy better than 10e-11, even better than 10e-12 on a good day, also rubidium oscillators are not that bad. You can build one that takes "16 hours" or whatever to stabilize. Like I figured out above, you can't build an antenna that depends on 11 sig figs of freq stability (this is required for comm purposes, not required to just blast watts downrange to torture people).
A normal person would engineer in a really good quartz crystal oscillator probably a TXCO which unlike the non-temperature stabilized dip oscilator in you PC that wanders 50 ppm or so, the txco is probably pretty stable to 0.1 or so ppm, or 10e-7, which is better than you can build your wavelength dependent components, so.. also it "boots up" in less than a second.
The puzzler for me is at 100 GHZ you're gonna use WR8 or WR10 and those do not tolerate more than 10 KW or so before arcing over. High freq = small wavelength = small waveguide = short distance for arc to zap across. My guess is they're using an array of like 10x10 or 100 little 1 KW blasters. Some brave OWS protestor or Ron Paul supporter should walk in front of the beam and see if its got the beamwidth characteristics of an antenna a tenth the size.
From having been in the Army reserves two decades ago I can guarantee that the army tech manual for my unisys strange btos minicomputer thingy for ammo accounting probably said it can be unpacked, hooked up, restored from backup, tested, blah blah in 16 hours, but in practice, in sane and normal weather and sane and normal conditions we could set up in like one hour or less including running comm cabling for the remote terminals and test suites and everything. But, yes, airdropped into Antarctica with new/untested/not-pre-setup gear and all noob staff doing it the first time "for real" outside of AIT I could see Fing around for 16 hours. I remember at AIT having to do this one inventory operation that was pretty tricky and they gave us 4 hours and I did it in about 45 minutes because I knew what I was doing, but some hopeless cases took darn near the whole 4 hours.
Re:16 hours? (Score:4, Interesting)
The puzzler for me is at 100 GHZ you're gonna use WR8 or WR10 and those do not tolerate more than 10 KW or so before arcing over.
You seem to be thinking solid state. Think tubes. I would imagine such a high power device would almost certainly use a gyrotron [wikipedia.org]. With a gyrotron they could output megawatts of power, even in long pulse or CW. I bet L3 Communications (their California Tube Laboratory) made them the gyrotron and maybe designed the whole system as well.
Re:16 hours? (Score:5, Interesting)
ADS is a Raytheon product [raytheon.com]. They're already pretty good at high-energy microwave systems [raytheon.com]. And the know a little about tubes, since that was their original product line [wikipedia.org].
Re:16 hours? (Score:4, Informative)
WR8 and WR10 are standard waveguide sizes not transistors. I guess you'd say its sort of the microwave RF equivalent of singlemode optical fiber.
Like down around 10 GHz you use standard size WR90, etc.
The waveguide wouldn't arc over if you increase the dimensions... however that increases the wavelength the waveguide operates at such that it would no longer be 100 GHz waveguide it would be 50 GHz waveguide or whatever.
Waveguide is singlemode, obviously (?) over a bit less than a 2:1 wavelength range.
You can theoretically run multimode, after all waveguide is high pass (hold a piece up in the air and look thru it...), but thats... considered kinda crazy. Crazy enough to work, maybe, if you spent enough money modeling it. Have to think about that. I bet someone is making a fat stack of cash off this crazy thing.
Re: (Score:3)
So for high frequencies in the millimeter wave range you are stuck using small waveguides?
Yeah small wavelength means small waveguides, unless you do something weird like multimode, or don't use waveguide, or do strange things.
I would guess that 140 PSI air would not detune a waveguide frequency "too much" although it would have some effect, but the main result is it would take about 10 times the voltage to arc over.
I wonder how they deal with that limitation when megawatt class gyrotrons at say 170 Ghz are used in particle accelerator applications.
I am unable to get a straight answer on this. Pulsed operation means you're all done before the arc fully ionizes? They seem to be vaporware since there's nothing online.
No microwa
Re: (Score:3)
I can't believe any capacitor takes that amount of time to charge. This isn't like a flash camera that is "pumping" a high voltage capacitor up to a few hundred volts from a pair of AA (1.5volt) batteries that have a slow discharge current. Setups like this have a big gas powered generator in the back of the truck, cranking out thousands of watts of power.
Capacitors themselves are certainly not the limit, they're specifically known and used for their ability to charge and specifically to discharge extreme
Re: (Score:3)
1 horsepower = 746W.
100kW = 134hp
Watts = J/s ; generic unit of power, nothing to do specifically with electricity.
Re: (Score:2)
You never started windows on a babagge machine? that take pretty much as much time :-)
Wear Foil! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wear Foil! (Score:5, Funny)
I wear a foil hat all the time. It seems to disable the mind reading abilities of the satellites that the United States government uses.
That's really the only thing you need to worry about. I'm thinking of having foil implanted on the inside of my skull for a more permanent solution. I just hope the person performing the surgery isn't a reptile. He or she or it might kill me on the operating table. You know how They are. They are always plotting against us, and they have been slithering around in the highest offices for so long...
Tinfoil burka... (Score:2)
You've got to protect all your exposed skin. Conductive fabric or foil should do quite nicely. (Has to be reflective, though; if it's just resistive/dissipative, then you're wrapped in flaming fabric.
Resistance... (Score:5, Funny)
Has to be reflective, though; if it's just resistive/dissipative, then you're wrapped in flaming fabric.
So with these things resistance really is futile.
Re: (Score:2)
If the cops are bringing-out the stun guns and pain givers, I'd rather just re-locate myself (and the protest) to a different location. Like maybe along an interstate highway and hold-up big signs. - "End the TSA"
Re: (Score:2)
The standoff distance of this toy is still less than your average deer rifle
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Zero to scream in six seconds"
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2012/03/japanese-speech-jamming-gun/ [wired.com]
Taking the "scream" out of pain.
Uh, what (Score:4, Interesting)
Ok, I get that this baby is running on beta hardware. But 16 hours? Can anyone here venture a guess as to why? No matter how sllloooowww the CPUs, or how inefficient the code, 16 hours isn't plausible.
So, it must refer to something the hardware is doing. Still, 16 hours? Thermodynamics is normally quicker than that for a machine that can fit on a truck. That's an awfully long time for it to be heating up or cooling down.
Any RF engineers here know a reason for this? My best guess is that components of this device rely on superconductivity, and require very slow peltier coolers to bring the operating temperature down to the range of operation. I've seen radios sold on ebay that use superconductors for parts of the RF elements.
Re: (Score:2)
Or as stated elsewhere its just charging a big damn capacitor bank off a humvee alternator.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it's quite simple: they're focusing large amounts of energy at a person. Since the actual power source cannot dispense this much energy at once, it must be used to charge a capacitor bank - much like a camera flash.
That said, they could probably optimize it to shoot a narrower beam, but hey: this is the military. They can't do anything right, that would be unpatriotic.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not THAT much power being radiated. A few thousand watts at most. 1 Joule = 1 Watt*second. 1 Joule per square centimeter. Any decent military generator can produce that. If they have to charge up capacitors, what concerns me there is how rapidly they will be drained out. They need the green model that will be endorsed by hippies everywhere.
Re:Uh, what (Score:4, Informative)
That is a pretty common time for cooling down to liquid nitrogen or superconducting temperatures.
Re: (Score:3)
Those vacuum tubes were instant on in comparison to the way integrated circuits need to "warm" up now.
My LCD tv starts up about 50% slower than the CRT it replaced.
My DVD player takes at least 5 minutes longer to start than the VCR it replaced (or so it seems due to prohibited user ops, strange boot time (why if the power is applied does it take 10 seconds to respond to the door open button, that is just bizarre slow)
TRS-80 color computer boot up time in 1981, about 1 second. Windows XP in 2012, about 1 minute.
Ma Bell 2600 model/series analog telephone boot up time in 1992, zero (boot up time, whats that?)
Corner reflector (Score:5, Informative)
If you ever go to a protest where you expect the government to use one of these on you, bring a buch of corner reflectors. [wikipedia.org]. They can be bought in boat stores, or made cheaply out of paper lined with aluminum foil, and they will send the "pain ray" right back at the operator.
Re:Corner reflector (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
This needs to be wide spread so the cops can enjoy what they dish out. Dont send it back, target the scumbags in riot gear on the ground around the truck.
Re: (Score:2)
Considering that he's going to be in a Bradley that's RF shielded... It's not going to matter much unless they're making man-portable versions- and I suspect they'll have "armor" for the person wielding it, regardless of how bulky the stuff is.
Re: (Score:2)
be in a Bradley
Now I have to go home and re-watch "The Pentagon Wars" :D
Re: (Score:2)
Disco outfits [shutterstock.com] and tinfoil hats back in style.
Right answer, wrong question (Score:5, Funny)
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear... I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
Re:Right answer, wrong question (Score:4, Funny)
No, the proper resistance mantra is R=V/I.
Re: (Score:2)
I believe reflectivity is frequency-dependent. A material that highly reflects light might barely reflect milimeter waves, and vice-versa. So you'd need to asses whether or not the boat-store versions would do the trick.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh my god, why do you think that you can use comic books as a guide to life? Second, you would need to know who is shooting the pain ray at you (i.e. which policeman) and bring your device up in time and aim it correctly. Remember, there is no warning before shot, you have to see and prepare in advance.
Actually, a properly deployed corner reflector will shoot it back in the general direction of the shooter. That's the whole point of the device. They are used to create strong radar returns. They're used on boats and such things to make it easier to see other vessels.
Hmm... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
For psy-ops you'd probably want to add this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5imaJwfJMZ8#t=0m55s [youtube.com]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_from_ultrasound [wikipedia.org]
That way you can "Voice of God" someone with the sound beam without anyone hearing, and punish them with the pain beam as "proof".
Less Effective (Score:5, Interesting)
Sounds less effective, most costly, and more dangerous then tear gas.
Re:Less Effective (Score:5, Funny)
It is the American way (tm).
Re: (Score:2)
This is much, much more effective than tear gas: the pain ray has a several thousand-foot range and nearly instantaneous effects, plus you can't negate the effects with a (fairly) simple gas mask. Also, tear gas is pretty dangerous stuff which can cause lasting damage, and anyone who uses it risks getting caught by it themselves (a fundamental problem with all chemical weapons).
Re: (Score:2)
Just be glad they don't use .22 rounds.
Re: (Score:2)
And considering the first thing that probably pops into the public's mind when they see anything involving "rays" is "cancer" .. it's not even more politically safe.
I can see the headlines... "police irradiating protestors!!!".
Someone put it best.. the most effective (both in cost and effectiveness) tool they ever had was the shock baton... but the PR was so bad there's no way they could use it. The stuff with the high PR is ineffective. This thing seems to be the worst of both worlds!
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds less effective, most costly, and more dangerous then tear gas.
Tear gas is generally the wrong instrument anyway, because you not only tear gas the mob, but also the entire neighborhood. WTO riots in Seattle for example. They used tear gas on 20-40 people (if you took out the photographers and journalists, another 20-40 people) in the street on Capitol Hill. An hour later they had hundreds screaming angry people in the street and outside the Police Station who were upset about getting tear gassed while sitting in their own homes. Then there were the businesses that we
And is easily defeated... (Score:2)
Wrap yourself in tinfoil and it's completely neutered. Make clothing out of cloth that is conductive and you can make long underwear that will protect 90% of your body, slap on a baklava of the same with gloves and flip them the bird while they get out the mace cannon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No you cant. The microwave is at 1000watts, or 1000 joules of energy per second.
This device outputs 12 joules of energy per second. This is two orders of magnitude less.
Re:And is easily defeated... (Score:4, Funny)
Last time I slapped on a baklava, it took me an hour to get the honey and nuts out of my beard.
Re: (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baklava [wikipedia.org]
Yeah, that is what I meant!
The same old problem with non-lethal weapons (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But in the long long run, crippled people destroy your opponent's economy. That's why the chinese poison our children's toys with lead.
Re: (Score:2)
It's against the Hague convention to intentionally cripple/blind people.
Re:The same old problem with non-lethal weapons (Score:5, Interesting)
There was an instance of non-lethal weapon abuse by a Boston policeman who shot a Red Sox reveler [boston.com] with a projectile that's supposed to only cause the sensation of burning, like pouring hot sauce on the skin. It's like a targeted remote pepper spray. Problem is, the policeman hit this poor woman in the eye. She died as a result of the injury.
The words "non-lethal weapon" should more accurately be written as "not-usually-lethal weapon". A weapon designed to hurt enough to seriously distract everyone it is used against cannot be non-lethal in all cases, given the wide range of physiologies found in humans, and the wide ranges of unanticipated potential uses. While one might argue whether the officer in question above should have aimed at this student's head (if the weapons are so inaccurate that they cannot be controlled well enough to avoid hitting someone in the head, or if the officer was inadequately trained or prepared to do so, then that is another matter entirely), because he did hit her in the head that must therefore be an anticipated use. Thus this particular paintball-like weapon, and by extension, all non-lethal weapons, must be considered less lethal, but certainly not non-lethal.
Torture (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I believe the argument is that rioters have the option of just walking away and those being arrested have the option of just complying. (Ignoring, of course, when cops taser people unnecessarily.)
Re:Torture (Score:5, Interesting)
Which, really, highlights how inappropriately all these non-lethal weapons and anti-riot instruments are used nowadays. They've gone from 'preventing imminent violence and harm' to 'making someone unstable easier to deal with' to 'a way to subdue someone, no different from handcuffing them really'. It's positively criminal and evil how thoughtlessly devices like tasers, rubber bullets, and mace are used nowadays by law enforcement. These things were designed as last resorts and are now being used routinely. If a person is being disruptive but there is no imminent threat of harm, then these tools should not be used. Even if the person has clearly broken a law and needs to be arrested, these tools should be avoided: the person should be subdued peacefully somehow (sometimes this means just waiting, letting them yell and whatnot, until they tire themselves out and can be safely arrested).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Good point.
If I got to be pragmatic about it, it's because torture generally doesn't produce good results. Torture someone for long enough and they'll admit to anything.
Re: (Score:3)
My guess is most people probably simply haven't though about it.
http://www.ted.com/talks/stephen_coleman_the_moral_dangers_of_non_lethal_weapons.html [ted.com]
A highlight of this video is a datapoint from Australia, when pepper (OC spray) was introduced. Officers were specifically instructed that it was to be used only when the officer would have otherwise been required to use lethal force. The years before the OC spray was introduced, there were about 6 people shot to death by the police year. The two years after th
Other unfortunate uses (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Moral dangers (Score:2)
http://www.ted.com/talks/stephen_coleman_the_moral_dangers_of_non_lethal_weapons.html
So? (Score:2)
making it useless for breaking up unexpected, impromptu mobs
So? Plan on having mobs. ;)
1 out of 5500 people is severely injured? (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
At the 2008 GOP presidential convention (St Paul), the police were insured against civil rights liabilities by a "host committee" funded by private interests. Think that one through.
So, yes, police will "risk that" because they are insured against that risk, with someone else paying the premiums.
Citation: http://www.globalintegrity.org/node/488 [globalintegrity.org]
"16 hours" start-up time probably bogus (Score:2)
That "16 hour" start-up time is probably bogus. It's not in the article. If it's real at all, it probably refers to how long it takes to drive the thing from some base to the target area. The military often figures response times like that - from when it's called for until it gets there and starts shooting.
There's a smaller version, the Silent Guardian [slashgear.com], with only about 250m of range. This is about the size of a WWI tripod-mounted heavy machine gun.
If this technology had been available in the 1960s,
I hear that in the US... (Score:2)
... you have to pay cash for uninsured medical bills.
You might want to start saving up for that cataract operation. You've got about five years.
I saw this on TV the other day (Score:5, Insightful)
The reporter said that the injuries that were sustained were 2nd degree burns because the people didn't get out the way quick enough.
But what if you can't get out of the way? If you are trapped you could easily sustain 2nd or 3rd degree burns over quite a bit of your body - and that sort of thing is potentially lethal.
This device is non-lethal in the sense that a bullet is non-lethal. I shoot someone in the hand they probably don't die. I shoot someone in the head and they will probably die.
Re:future weapons ? (Score:5, Funny)
The device has been tested now on over 11,000 people, with only two serious injuries to show for it.
Doesn't sound like an effective weapon to me.
Injury depends on length of exposure. (Score:4, Insightful)
I last maybe two seconds of curiosity before my body takes the controls and yanks me out of the way of the beam
The person who was injured in the testing was overexposed. So if used outside the lab your going to have injured people. People will fall down and if the machine is ran to long they will be burned. This is similer to the LRAD system that uses sounds instead of microwaves. It has already been used by law enformcement and has caused hearing loss on someone who fell down.
Re:future weapons ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, you started it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Umm, no it's still in the past; we just have to wait until we get to see it.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Please, do explain to us what simultaneity means in galaxies separated by 5.1 million light years.
Re:future weapons ? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
You fail at relativity. Just because we haven't observed it yet, doesn't mean it hasn't happened.
ex: a pulse of light is shot from the Earth to the moon. The pulse takes ~12 seconds to arrive.
Two seconds before the pulse arrives, does someone on the moon say that the pulse hasn't been fired yet?
If so, then consider a ship that travels at 0.9c (we'll say that it takes less than 0.01 second to accelerate 0.9c relative to an observer, from stationary to that observer)
If this ship leaves at the same time as the
Re: (Score:3)
Closer to 1.3 seconds...
Re: (Score:2)
If it happened 5m years ago (their time) in a galaxy 5.1m lightyears away then it's still 100,000 years in our future.
If I leave now, I can get "future weapons" before everyone else!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)