Slashdot Mirror


Contractor Proposes Laser Rifles for US Military

The Fryar writes "Well, folks, it looks like the future really is now! It seems the Defense Review has uncovered a submission by Stavatti, a sort of "free market" defense contractor, to the military for a laser rifle. The submission comes in response to the Army's LFLAN requirement - the quest to provide "Light Fighter Lethality After Next" technology, or lasers/phasers/sabers/advanced weapons for use some 20 years down the road. Needless to say, I also considered the category "Star Wars Prequels" for this article."

34 of 724 comments (clear)

  1. You mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now attach them to shark's heads.

    1. Re:You mean... by swordboy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or you could use them to play a prank on a corrupt college professor - use the laser to fill his house with popcorn!

      Oh.. wait...

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  2. WOW by WestieDog · · Score: 5, Funny

    I also here that the BFG isn't far behind...

    1. Re:WOW by robbo · · Score: 4, Funny

      I was thinking more along the lines of a Doomsday Device, or perhaps a method for clearing planets to make way for an interstallar bypass. :-)

      --
      So long, and thanks for all the Phish
  3. Woohoo! by Saint+Mitchell · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'm with it as long as the use Red for one side and Blue for the other just like they did in the GI Joe cartoons. After all, you have to be able to tell who is shooting at you.

    1. Re:Woohoo! by aghman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Then nobody would die, and only vehicles would explode! And whenever something bad was going to happen to you, one of the Joe's would come around and teach you how to stay safe! Oh what a wonderful world.
      "And now I know...and knowing is half the battle!"

    2. Re:Woohoo! by gmuslera · · Score: 5, Funny
      Those lasers will follow the RFC 3514 convention, so evil people will turn on the evil bit to have a laser in red color, and good ones will have it turned off.

      That will be used unless the evil ones are really evils, and turn off the bit disregarding RFC and Geneva conventions, in that case the good ones will change the bit to look different.

      Fortunatelly they will not be used in the Iraq war, because invaders (the ones that you traditionally call evils) and iraqis (the evil ones according to US) will use the same color.

    3. Re:Woohoo! by jareth780 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Before a weapon like the TIS-1 could be adopted, a number of technichal hurdles would have to be successfully negotiated, such as..."

      1. Getting the guns to make that "Peww!" sound whenever they shoot.

      2. Making the lasers shoot at a slow enough velocity so that you can actually watch it travel from the end of the barrel to the target in no less than 0.4 seconds. This way massive hallway gun-fights involving garbage-shoot-getaways look that much cooler.

      Personally, I'm with it just as long as they make one that looks like a broomhandle mauser.

    4. Re:Woohoo! by EatHam · · Score: 5, Funny

      No kaboom? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering kaboom! I vote to name this the Illudium Pu-36 Explosive Space Modulator.

  4. Weapons != toys by CptSkydrop · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Call me a peace loving hippy but I don't think the prospeect of a weapon thats designed to kill and injure should be put under a category that is about fun and enterntainment (toys).

  5. Cure disease? Explore space? Feed the hungry? by defile · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Nah! That shit's boring! Lets focus our resources on developing more efficient ways of killing people!

    Someone really needs to start an extra-American hyper technology-driven society with some priorities besides war-war-war. Brotherhood. Unity. Peace. Peace through power! One vision one purpose!

    1. Re:Cure disease? Explore space? Feed the hungry? by cyberlync · · Score: 4, Insightful


      Someone really needs to start an extra-American hyper technology-driven society with some priorities besides war-war-war. Brotherhood. Unity. Peace. Peace through power! One vision one purpose!


      You will never find it. America's priority is not killing people, you can do that with very simple technologies (gas chamber, etc). The priority here is defense (or perhaps offense according to your persuasion). These means that we look 20 and 30 years into the future so that we can guarantee that we have the capability to defend ourselves and carry out our national policies.

      Every nation on earth is doing this, with the constrictions of thier resources. Do you think France and Germany are sitting on thier butts and not worring about developing new military technology? No way, if they weren't they wouldn't be around in the next few decades and they know it.

      Like it or not we are Human and that means that as a species we like to kill each other and take each others resources by force, etc, etc. If you have a problem with that talk to the evolution gods. Untill you do though, we will continue spending money to make sure we are not the next Carthage, Phonecia, Ottoman Empire, etc.

      --
      I'm a programmer, I don't have to spell correctly; I just have to spell consistently
  6. Re:Lethal? by ip_vjl · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't you watch the Simpsons?

    If you shine a laser dot onto someones pants, you trick them into thinking they have a spot on their pants and they drop them. Then when the spot is on their underwear, they think THAT is where the stain is and drop those.

    ...

    I'm guessing at that point you just go in with conventional weapons since the enemy will be standing there with no pants.

  7. Fast forward to the future... by wazzzup · · Score: 5, Funny

    I see my grandson reading Slashdot and he clicks on a post titled "Contractor Proposes Death Star for US Military" from the that's-no-moon dept.

    He's reading it....he clicks to enter a post...he posts a link to goatse. Damn. My grandson is a troll.

  8. TOTALLY ILLEGIAL by cheshiremackat · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The only problems with Laser weapons are that they are illegial under the Geneva conventions, as are any weapons that are designed to permanently blind a person. While it may be possible to skirt the issue by using a non-visable wavelength, targeting becomes an issue... even low power lasers for targeting would be potentially illegial as they could/would be intense enough to harm the vision, OR if they are sufficiently low power, they probably disperse so greatly as to give away the position of the 'shooter'.

    Now this is not free bait for trolling, so please do not reply with stupid comments about the U.S. not following the convention as is... this is not about Iraq or GitMo.

    _CMK

    --
    Bad spellers of the world untie!
    1. Re:TOTALLY ILLEGIAL by MrMickS · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Hmmm.... they've been using laser rangefinders for years and laser guidance systems for munitions.

      Also isn't it strange that the Geneva convention would band weapons that cause permanent blindness yet allow ones that kill people?

      "He's dead Jim, but look on the bright side he didn't lose his sight"

      --
      You may think me a tired, old, cynic. I'd have to disagree about the tired bit.
    2. Re:TOTALLY ILLEGIAL by Jason+Earl · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not really. Wounding a soldier is generally even better than killing him, because not only is he taken out of the action, but he now ties up any other soldiers that might try and help him. Wounded soldiers have to be evacuated, they require medics, etc. etc. You would be surprised how many weapons are designed more towards wounding the maximum amount of people instead of killing them outright.

  9. Re:yeah, right by zeus_tfc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Recoil mitigation? On a Laser weapon? I don't get it, where does the recoil come from.

    Really, I don't see a need for this kind of weapon. I don't see it being as effective as our current rifles, unless this is intended as an anti-vehicular weapon as opposed to an anti-personel weapon.

    Admittedly, I don't really know anything about what the weapon will do, or what kind of testing they have done that they think this will be a viable weapon, but how much call will there be for a weapon that causes small, cauterized holes in people? Isn't that what Lasers would do, or am I mistaken?

    The only use for this I see, would be a no-recoil sniper weapon, using precise shots to the head or heart. But then there's that odd "recoil mitigation" hurdle that I still don't understand the cause of.

    I guess it comes down to the fact that there is too much we don't know about what the weapon will do.

    --
    "...At the end of the day"..."when everyone goes home, you're stuck with yourself." RIP Layne Staley
  10. Power Source.. by dracken · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Of the laser gun is Po-210. A milligram of Polonium 210 emits as much alpha radiation as 5g of radium.

    To quote LANL Polonium-210 is very dangerous to handle in even milligram or microgram amounts, and special equipment and strict control is necessary. Damage arises from the complete absorption of the energy of the alpha particle into tissue.

    The maximum permissible body burden for ingested polonium is only 0.03 microcuries, which represents a particle weighing only 6.8 x 10-12 g. Weight for weight it is about 2.5 x 1011 times as toxic as hydrocyanic acid. The maximum allowable concentration for soluble polonium compounds in air is about 2 x 10-11 microcuries/cm3.


    Also polonium 210 is very rare in nature. It is usually produced by bombarding Bismuth 209 with neutrons (typically in a nuclear reactor). In the current form, this weapon is an invitation for radioactive contamination disaster.

  11. Apparently you're not a redneck. by BoomerSooner · · Score: 4, Funny

    However, here in Oklahoma Guns and Toys are synonymous. In fact why else would you need shooting ranges, hunting licenses, ... Hunting is a sport, sports are games, guns are used in hunting, therefore guns are toys (albeit dangerous ones).

  12. Re:Advantages? by BWJones · · Score: 4, Informative

    * silent

    Perhaps. However, the gas generated lasers I have seen tend to be quite noisy due to pumps and compressors and injectors.

    * no recoil

    True, but someone with good marksmanship training can easily and quickly reacquire a target with even heavier caliber (7.62mm) light platforms. However, having a rifle with no recoil would be an advantage.

    * less resupply problems (lay a power cable to the forward camp instead of moving trucks full of ammo)

    Geez, can you imagine the logistics of this? This may work for defined areas of control, but this proposal is for light infantry. If that were the case light infantry would have to protect their power cable in addition to performing their mission. Given the current tactics of light infantry (in the USMC at least), there is no way this approach will work.

    * if constructed right, can be enclosed completely = less susceptable to dirt, dust and water

    Absolutely true, however optics would have to be protected and ruggedized, and any dirt on the optics would degrade performance significantly, possibly creating dangerous situations for those around the weapon.

    * if using invisible light (IR/UV) doesn't give away your position through muzzle flashes

    True enough for unsophisticated enemy forces. However, night vision optics are becoming more available and tuning them to "see" IR/UV is fairly trivial. Indeed there is evidence that Iraqi forces are using significant numbers of night vision devices.

    * more accuracy due to a reduce "time to impact"

    Indeed. Agree completely.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
  13. Re:What I have always been wondering.. by watchful.babbler · · Score: 4, Informative
    They propose using polonium-210, which is a strong alpha emitter that can be used as a strong heat source (.5 grams of po-210 can reach 500 degrees Celsius -- nearly a thousand degrees Farenheit!). Frank Spedding proposed using po-210 to power aircraft back in the 1940s and '50s.

    Four problems: First, po-210 is rare; in the early days, tons of pitchblende had to be refined to get microgram amounts. Today, we let bismuth-210 beta-decay, which lets us get milligram amounts reasonably cost-effectively, but we're a long way from getting the thousands of kilos that would be needed to power these rifles. It might be cheaper just to build that army of giant robot samurai Bechtel's got on the drawing board.

    Second, polonium is toxic, really toxic. Imagine ensuring safety at every point in a battlefield logistics chain, no mean feat -- and now consider what you'd do with all this toxic, radioactive waste after the 60-day powerspan cited in the article.

    Third, of course, is the heat issue: how do you effectively shield the troops from the massive heat source sitting literally in their hands? One of the things that scotched the radioisotope-powered plane was the necessity of constantly ducting away waste energy.

    Fourth is the terrific intensity of the alpha emissions of po-210. Alpha radiation is, of course, low-hazard, but po-210 is powerful enough to degrade virtually all materials it comes into proximity to -- you can work around that when designing a power system for a satellite, but I'm not sure what the ramifications would be for a handheld weapon.

    In short, the contractor basically has proposed a weapons system that works great, except for all these massive technical hurdles that have to be dealt with first. I think we're a long way from Star Wars here.

    --
    "Freedom is kind of a hobby with me, and I have disposable income that I'll spend to find out how to get people more."
  14. This is vaporware (pardon the pun) by Goldenhawk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A few salient details should convince you this is as close to an April Fools joke as it's possible to get on April 2. If it hadn't been posted on DefenseReview I'd have completely ignored this.

    The polonium source is always hot, whether or not it is being used. The article states that "while the weapon is in a storage mode, in essence the system produces 104KW of heat energy." Imagine a bin of these replacement cartridges - it could run a small town. And when in use, each burst (of which you can fire 170 per minute) has an internal energy dissipation of 16.4KW. No kidding. You'd need several inches of shuttle thermal tile just to hold this thing.

    The article states "Currently Polonium-210 is only produced in microgram quantities for research purposes at facilities such as Oak Ridge National Laboratory." Yep, THAT'S likely to change soon.

    It specs a recoil force of 90 (yep, NINETY) pounds in the forward direction - enough to rip it out of the hands of a soldier. And it claims to be able to sustain 170 bursts per minute, at 0.35s per burst. That's about 59.5 seconds per minute, yanking at 90 lb on a soldier. No human could handle this thing for long.

    The article states "Stavatti has not previously, nor is currently involved in an effort to develop a qualified small arm weapon system ..." like this one. Yep, that makes it likely this could ever work.

    Finally, the article is full of spelling and grammar errors.

    Just in case you missed the pun, it's a carbon dioxide / nitrogen gas laser - hence the term "vaporware"...

    BTW, their web page about this thing is here:
    http://www.stavatti.com/armament_systems.ht ml

    I think Defense Review got hoaxed.

    --
    --Brandon / Split Infinity Music

  15. Re:Say what? by ratamacue · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The term "free market" here is misleading. Free market economics (i.e. capitalism) is the philosophy of voluntary association: Nobody forces anyone to sell anything (or not sell anything), and nobody forces anyone to buy anything (or not buy anything) -- it is the complete absence of force in the market. Under a free market system, every transaction is done on a voluntary basis. Government contracts, on the other hand, represent the exact opposite of free market economics. Government contracting does not represent voluntary association but coercion: The consumer (you and I) do not choose for ourselves whether or not to patronize these businesses. We choose between paying our taxes, leaving the country, or going to jail. This is not market decision but a threat, and hence, the defense contractor does is not a true competitor in the free market. Their market share is not acquired through persuasion, voluntary association, and fair competition. Their market share is aquired through force. Therefore, to label a government contractor "free market" is completely wrong and backwards, and serves only to blur the distinction between free market economics and socialism.

  16. One advantage by Sergeant+Beavis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ....that I see with this weapon is better shooting. With a ballistic rifle (aka: the M-16) you have to account for the arch of the round you are firing. The soldier firing would still have to rely on firing basics, breathing and trigger squeeze for instance, but not having to account for a bullets arch would be helpful.

    One disadvantage to a system like this would be laying down cover fire. The adoption of the M-16, by the Army, made it easier for a soldier to lay down cover fire so that fellow troops could move into a better position to engage the target. This weapon system, IMO, wouldn't make a visible or audible cover fire that would force enemy troops to seek cover. That can be a good or a bad thing depending on the tactical situation.

    --
    There is nothing inherently safe about liberty. That's why so many people died protecting it.
  17. Kill, kill, kill by hey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The more the U.S. kills people around the world the more enemies it makes. It needs to kill those new enemies. Better make better guns so you can kill more of those enemies...creating more enemies.

  18. Re:Another half-baked Army project by The+Evil+Couch · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ok, speaking as an actual active duty infantry soldier and not some armchair general, the molle's actually pretty good. it's just not that much better than the gear we've got now to make changing over worth it.

    the molle has a book and a video to put it together and wear it, but you're an idiot if you can't figure it out by yourself. it's really pretty easy to put together and configure.

    as far as new weapons, I'm all for having a weapon that I don't have to carry a shitload of ammunition for. if all it needs is a radioactive power cell and it's good to go for longer than I'll be in contact with the enemy, fucking awesome.

    the first gripe of any soldier about new equipment is weight. no ammo means less weight. a lot of soldiers will be happy with that shit. the M-16 has its weaknesses and I wasn't sorry to say goodbye to it and get my hands on my first M4.

    the reason the military has a large budget is so we can continue to improve things by testing new ideas. we've made big jumps with gear. if this laser rifle isn't a good idea, we'll figure it out. we don't need someone that hasn't crawled in the mud and put bullets downrange second guessing new technology or telling us that the M-16 is fine as it is.

  19. Re:Actually... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 4, Insightful
    For every advance in weapon technology, there should follow the concern of it falling into the wrong hands.

    So what do you suggest? Uninventing it? Destroying anything that could lead to its re-discovery? Kill anyone smart enough to think of something similar? Your working the wrong angle. Weapons aren't the problem. People wanting to kill people is.

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  20. Totally off topic... John Cleese by TheLastUser · · Score: 4, Funny

    Axis of Evil Wannabees
    by John Cleese

    Bitter after being snubbed for membership in the "Axis of Evil", Libya,
    China and Syria today announced that they had formed the "Axis of Just as
    Evil", which they said would be more evil than that stupid Iran-Iraq-North
    Korea axis President Bush warned of in his State of the Union address.

    Axis of Evil members, however, immediately dismissed the new Axis as
    having, for starters, a really dumb name. Right. They are just as
    evil...in their dreams!" declared North Korean leader Kim Jong-il.
    "Everybody knows we're the best evils . . best at being evil . .we're the
    best."

    Diplomats from Syria denied they were jealous over being excluded,
    although they conceded they did ask if they could join the Axis of Evil.
    "They told us it was full," said Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. "An
    axis can't have more than three countries", explained Iraqi President
    Saddam Hussien.

    "This is not my rule, it's tradition. In World War II you had
    Germany,Italy and Japan in the evil Axis. So, you can only have three, and
    a secret hand shake. Ours is wickedly cool."

    International reaction to Bush's Axis of Evil declaration was swift, as
    within minutes, France surrendered. Elsewhere, peer-conscious nations
    rushed to gain triumvirate status in what has become a game of
    geopolitical chairs.

    Cuba, Sudan and Serbia announced that they had formed the "Axis of
    Somewhat Evil", forcing Somalia to join with Uganda and Myanmar in the
    "Axis of Occasionally Evil", while Bulgaria, Indonesia and Russia
    established the "Axis of Not So Much Evil Really as Just Generally
    Disagreeable".

    With the criteria suddenly expanded and all the desirable clubs filling
    up, Sierra Leone, El Salvador, and Rwanda applied to be called the Axis of
    Countries That Aren't the Worst But Certainly Won't Be Asked to Host the
    Olympics".

    Canada, Mexico and Australia formed the "Axis of Nations That Are Actually
    Quite Nice But Secretly Have Some Nasty Thoughts About America", while
    Scotland, New Zealand and Spain established the "Axis of Countries That
    Want Sheep to Wear Lipstick". "That's not a threat, really, just something
    we like to do", said Scottish Executive First Minister Jack McConnell.

    While wondering if the other nations of the world weren't perhaps making
    fun of him, a cautious Bush granted approval for most axes, although he
    rejected the establishment of the "Axis of Countries Whose Names End in
    'Guay", accusing one of its members of filing a false application.
    Officials from Paraguay, Uruguay, and Chadguay denied the charges.

    Israel, meanwhile, insisted it didn't want to join any Axis, but privately
    world leaders said that's only because no one asked them.

    1. Re:Totally off topic... John Cleese by maquina · · Score: 5, Informative
      Get your sources straight, from SatireWire the original writer:

      "Strangely enow, this SatireWire story lately has been zipping around the 'Net attributed to John Cleese. That's flattering and funny and all, but now I'm getting so many emails asking who "really" wrote it that it will make my life easier to nip it here. I apologize for any disappoinment, but the story was written by Andrew Marlatt. It first appeared on SatireWire on Feb. 1, 2002, and was subsequently published in several major newspapers, including this version still available at The Washington Post. So that's the deal. All the best -- Andrew"

  21. Considerations... by dark-br · · Score: 4, Informative
    While the physics is generally sane there are a number of practical problems heer that are not sufficiently covered in the article:

    boron nitride is still regarded as slightly exotic, using this in harsh environment might be OK but mass production of large scale items are not

    storage problems are glossed over, for instance bringing a large number of radioactive items close together requires strict handling rules

    environmental damage when a laser rifle breaks is not even mentioned, also militaries are strict about such things. For instance the US navy has stricter environmental rules than the British merchant navy...

    reloading the powercell must be reasonably easy when you only have a half life of 138 days.

    pressure is immense and boron nitride is not just hard, it is brittle. Protecting against shattering requires a bit more than a little injection moulded plastic. When this high pressure hot gas breaks free it is a good idea to stay away.

    wavelangth is 10.6um which means it will be eaten up by the CO2 in the air so useful range becomes limited. This is not described properly.

    the large wavelength makes for more diffraction but the opening aperture is not stated.

    this wavelength chouce makes locating a shooter relativgely simple, just look for massive re-radiation in the CO2 band.

    of course the massive constant power flux from the Po source makes for nice thermal targets too.

    this wavelength is not eye safe. No, this is not a joke. The snag is that it can then be construed to be a violation of various convensions of war.

    thrust is said to be big, yet recompression is said to be part of the plan in which case most of the recoil should be possible to compensated for. Why is this not mentioned?

    and compression takes a lot of power, where does this come from?

    the gas expansion is likely to cause a hideous noise and makes for even more simple location.

    And so on. I could go on at lengths.

  22. Not Cleese by phriedom · · Score: 5, Informative

    I does sound like something Cleese would write, but it was written by Andrew Marlatt.

    --
    Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
  23. Re:Actually... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Funny
    So what do you suggest? Uninventing it? Destroying anything that could lead to its re-discovery? Kill anyone smart enough to think of something similar?

    Sure, why not? We're talking 15-25 years away, right? It worked for John Connor... and they'll have discovered lasers that fire slowly enough to look good in a movie by then, too.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  24. It's a chemical laser, not electric by morcheeba · · Score: 4, Funny

    Seriously, what part of gasdynamic LWS providing LFLAN capability with a Polonium-210 thermal source pumping an STC-catalitic-converter-stabalized CONHe lasing cavity through a supersonic aerospike expansion region following a constricting annulus do you not understand? ;)