This is kind of creepy.....

I don't know if this has been posted here before, but I doubt it, as my "Google Alert" brought it to my attention a few days ago. ]

(since I am new here, I've been following and researching this sort of directed energy weaponry for several months now - originally for a science fiction novel I'm currently writing)

Anyway - this looks like "Active Denial - the commercial production version" to me:

www.raytheon.com...

Apparently from what I've been able to mine from the 'net the original version of ADS still has yet to be deployed in Iraq or anywhere else (so they say!), yet here is the manufacturer with an *apparently* turn key unit ready to sell!

Now what I wonder is this: Do you think this will ever see the light of day? It seems to me that these things are "always on the edge of being deployed" but it never happens. However, this one looks frighteningly close to it.

Also......if you notice in the video they've got that thing pointed right at someone's face! (I know it's just a demo but still....)

Oh s*@! that cool but I don't if this is a good thing.

Prison planet has pictures of one like that in use in New York city during a demonstration about Bush.

All painted up in NYPD colours and manned bya cop and a goon in civvies.

Scary stuff, as soon it will be Policed by pain and not consent. Violent times ahead i see - OH and a time in the near future when cops will not be living amongst us, but in defendable housing zones.

Oh man I love it. You can't win for losing. Police use rubber bullets, and they're evil for it. So they use this, which won't cause nearly as much harm as a rubber bullet or other "non-lethal" devices, and this is the begining of the police state.

You can't turn the heat under the pot too quickly or the frog (the people) will realize what is happening and jump out. You have to do it slowly so by the time they realize they are cooking it will be too late.

sidenote: I had to add the extra line so Dbates (the mod) would not dock me 20 points again for a one liner, regardless if the response merited one. Gotta love a little bit a power. Now I can see what really happened to Rumsfield and Cheney.

[edit on 29-8-2006 by kleverone]

. . . less-than-lethal . . .

Now what's that supposed to mean? Personally, I think I'd like to be hit by something 'non-lethal' rather than something 'less-than-lethal.' Just how much less than lethal is it

I heard about this a while ago, maybe even on ATS. Here's the NewScientist.com link

Seems pretty scary, I wouldn't like to get caught up somewhere where one of those is going off.

Pointing any high energy micro waves at any one is VERY bad. First, all thier cell phones and stuff like that will burn out, video cameras will not be able to capture the denial of our rights to protest peacefully. It can also blind you if you don't shut your eyes, it damages the lens.

It causes rapid heating of the skin and also acts like a taser because it induces a voltage in the water in your skin.

And then it will be the "wonder" riot weapon and be used for a few years before they suddenly realise that "HEY, wait, this thing causes brain cancer and tumours and speeds up the aging process and then it will be banned and or shipped to Iraq to sort out them "Bin" type persons because it is fine then. Then Airhostesses will be issues them to warm our meals if, for some reason, it gets cold too quickly and you want it warmed up for you and then she slips and gives the woman next to you a, shave, a hysterectomy and a tonsillectomy and then cuts open the side of the airplane and trims a passing albatross and he drops like a stone knocking the captain of a nuclear war ship on the head and he falls forward knocking a red lever and then a barrage of nuclear weapons, aimed for the moon, get set off and the aliens see this sh1t and make a run for it leaving the moon in a trailing cloud of dust…. Etc etc etc etc etc

[edit on 29/8/2006 by shearder]

Originally posted by shearder
And then it will be the "wonder" riot weapon .... leaving the moon in a trailing cloud of dust…. Etc etc etc etc etc

[edit on 29/8/2006 by shearder]

Haha you never know! The world could be a crazy place in a few years time!

But really, do you think that this weapon will last for very long? Surely it's pushing on human rights a bit, and I can't see the UN (or whoever) being very happy if it's used in the middle east.

We're always hearing about police abusing their weapons like tazers and rubber guns, I'd hate to get on the wrong side of police branding these things...

did anyone else notice that this thing couldnt even stay on a man walking, it was always slightly behind. imagine what happns when someone runs or wehn multiple people move towards it. so not only is it extremely dangerous and liable to cause cancer rates to soar as has already been pointed out, its not even capable.

justin

I don't really think you can judge this weapons effectiveness just going by a 1 second segment. Most likely, the human controller wasn't paying attention, what with a camera looking into his primary display.

And I don't even reckon this thing would just be pointed at someone and left on. It would probably be used more like a water cannon. Perhaps focused every now and then to push certain people back, but generally swept over the crowd's front. If you pointed one of those things at me even for the briefest amount of time you could be guaranteed I'd be outta there.

Originally posted by watch_the_rocks
Now what's that supposed to mean? Personally, I think I'd like to be hit by something 'non-lethal' rather than something 'less-than-lethal.' Just how much less than lethal is it.

No such thing, most direct "non-lethal" weapons are a misnomer; they can be lethal if not used properly which is why they can't really be called non-lethal, that would imply that they can't kill you. Less then lethal is the proper term, they are not as dangerous as getting shot at but also not totally safe either. Personally I don't see what the problem is, would you rather get shot at by real bullets, rubber bullets, a bean bag or this? Take your choice.

How does it work? I watched the clip, and it really didn't show me much; except that it has survelliance capabilities. How does it disburse crowds? Does it use a low-frequency resonator?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

microwave weapons don't just have thermal effects, they damage living systems, which may lead to many diseases from glaucoma to cancer. these non-thermal effects of non-ionising radiation are clandestinely known by gov't and industry but they keep the lid on it because they'd have to shell out trillions if they were sued and predictably convicted.

a glaring example:

..
The operation was a success, but the patient died. Norma died after being given a blood transfusion where the blood had been warmed in a microwave oven. This was our first big clue to the fact that heating things in a microwave does

..

if these weapons are widely used i predict eye damage at an enormous scale, along with infertility, constant fatigue and many more. this stuff is utterly dangerous and, unlike rubber bullets, will not run out of energy after a few hundred yards while dispersing and unpredictably bounce off obstacles, randomly irradiating pretty much everyone over a large area.

a catastrophy, this is a weapon of terror it should be banned like nerve gas.

[edit on 29-8-2006 by Long Lance]

Umm, I'll admit I don't have much knowledge in this area but it is my understanding these weapons do not penetrate more then something like 1/64 or so of an inch. It just reacts with the outermost parts of skin nerves causing in some case extreme sensation which will make you stop doing, whatever it is that you're doing. But it wont harm you permanently unless in cases of prolonged exposure and or unsafe levels of power. In other words it won't microwave your organs thereby cooking you.

Perhaps someone with more knowledge can shed some more light on this.

My first thought was how it could be used in military applications. Clearly one of the main problems in Irag and Afghanistan is dealing with terrorists hiding in buildings with innocent civilians. This would give them a means to force them out of hiding without harming innocent people. This could save a lot of lives.

The only people who would need to be afraid of this would be criminals or people planning on engaging in criminal activities. Who cares about them other than other criminals. When we see people getting shot with rubber bullets it's not because their rights are being violated. It's because they are breaking the law and endangering other people with their violent behavior. It's easy to get a permit to hold a peaceful demonstration and practice your right to free speech. Any child could set one up but it seems a lot of adults are incapable of filling out a simple form. The problem is the phonies who are to dumb to get a permit or that want to incite violence and cause trouble and they deserve whatever happens to them. Criminals have no rights. Most of these people could care less about the causes they claim to represent. They are anarchists who get their rocks off causing trouble and getting their faces on the TV news which is their only real goal. If they cared they would take the legal route and maybe do some good instead of harming their own cause by showing their true colors. You cant cause change to happen by force.

I don't see why the worry about long term effects like cancer unless you are planning on engaging in a lot of criminal activity. If that's the case who cares if you get cancer. Only those that deserve this would ever be exposed to it in the first place. If its just paranoia of anything new that is best addressed by a professional in the field of psychiatry. The only exception would be if it were used by a criminal and in that case how is it any worse than a gun or a bomb?

Here's an official document that gives more info on how the thing works:

www.dmc.utcdayton.com...

Here's another that describes the differences between ADS and a microwave oven, among other things:
www.jnlwp.com...

It also has a video of some poor dude in his underwear getting blasted!

Actually 95 ghz is borderline between microwaves and far infrared light, so I can see where there would be a difference in effect.

Now while I can see the advantages of this over tear gas and the like (and from what I've read the link between radio waves, microwaves and cancer is pretty weak if not non-existant, in other words that's not what bothers me - hey, after all, there are plenty of people who pay to have themselves exposed to man-made ionizing radiation that has been proven to cause skin cancer - it's called a tanning bed), what creeps me out is
the insidiousness of it - you could get blasted and not even know what hit you!

At least with ordinary projectiles you would kind of have an idea that someone fired something at you, and probably from which direction it came - but this thing? Then one thing I read mentioned "dwelling" the beam on a target - suppose someone was running and they kept them in the beam - yikes!? But then again, conventional weapons can certainly be abused as well. The taser is one example, and they are still in use in many places.

On the other hand, some part of me finds this to be very, very cooland fascinating- like something out of a sci-fi movie come to life (not that I would want to find myself on the business end of the thing - I don't plan on attending any riots or demonstrations anytime soon! But if I did I suppose I could make a suit out of mylar or cobble together a faraday cage out of fine-mesh steel window screen..... :roll.

But seriously, it makes you wonder how long it will be before other directed energy weapons come on the scene.....

wrt penetration depth: quick attenuation is better than nothing, it does not alleviate the issue of eye damage, though.


about microwaves in general: if their effects were purely thermal, please explain how that patient died from an exposed blood transfusion? warming to 100F conventionally does nothing and microwaves make it poisonous? of course, there's little reason to believe that blood inside the body will react differently, is there? certain wavelengths may be less dangerous,but considering the utter silence wrt microwave effects, one can only expect the worst.

PS: Russian regulations are much more stringent. why is that? did they just dream them up or are economic interests overriding research?

more examples:

www.hairfacts.com...
Microwave hair removal is not cleared by FDA for use on the head or near the eyes. Medical literature has shown that microwave radiation taken in concentrated doses to the eyes can cause cataracts and other damage.

www.physorg.com...

The ADS has been very thoroughly tested, with a load of in vitro, animal and human tests, and they have a very accurate idea of what it does. After thousands of tests, we know it is not carcinogenic - the effects it produces are purely thermal.

You get a pain reaction after about 2 seconds, which becomes intolerable within 5 seconds. There are a lot of issues over potential abuse and the human-rights aspect of something that works by causing pain.

btw The Russian concern of microwaves (which are now legal there) had a lot to do with the quality of Russian microwave ovens and leakage from them. They used to get a lot of fires from exploding TVs too for similar reasons.
Note that MMW and microwave are very different however, in terms of penetration.