50 Years of Research and Still No Microwave Weapons

DevotedSkeptic writes in with a story about the lack of usable microwave technology to come from 50 years of military research. "For some Pentagon officials, the demonstration in October 2007 must have seemed like a dream come true — an opportunity to blast reporters with a beam of energy that causes searing pain. The event in Quantico, Virginia, was to be a rare public showing for the US Air Force's Active Denial System: a prototype non-lethal crowd-control weapon that emits a beam of microwaves at 95 gigahertz. Radiation at that frequency penetrates less than half a millimetre into the skin, so the beam was supposed to deliver an intense burning sensation to anyone in its path, forcing them to move away, but without, in theory, causing permanent damage. However, the day of the test was cold and rainy. The water droplets in the air did what moisture always does: they absorbed the microwaves. And when some of the reporters volunteered to expose themselves to the attenuated beam, they found that on such a raw day, the warmth was very pleasant. The story is much the same in other areas of HPM weapons development, which began as an East–West technology race nearly 50 years ago. In the United States, where spending on electromagnetic weapons is down from cold-war levels, but remains at some US$47 million per year, progress is elusive. 'There's lots of smoke and mirrors,' says Peter Zimmerman, an emeritus nuclear physicist at King's College London and former chief scientist of the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency in Washington DC. Although future research may yield scientific progress, he adds, 'I cannot see they will build a useful, deployable weapon.'"

Comments

You say it like it is a bad thing.

[Anonymous Coward]

I say we have enough weapons already, how about drooling over something that doesn't kill or maim for a change?

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[tomhath]

RTFA. This is a tool to stop an assailant without doing permanent damage.

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[sjames]

More likely it is a tool to disperse protesters without those incriminating head cracking videos.

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[sjames]

It makes it way too easy to disperse peaceful protestors when their message is politically inconvenient. The people you linked to were not protesters, they were rioters and anything but peaceful. A water cannon would have done a better job than the microwave weapon anyway.

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[cold fjord]

A water cannon would have done a better job than the microwave weapon anyway.

Especially in desert countries with primitive plumbing and sewer systems.

The people you linked to were not protesters, they were rioters and anything but peaceful.

So you wouldn't object to using it on them then?

It makes it way too easy to disperse peaceful protestors when their message is politically inconvenient.

They can already be dispersed with ultrasonics or chemicals which would leave no photos and limited trace. If the government is going to cross the line to coercion it is going to cross the line. The problem isn't the nature of the weapon so much as the nature of the government. Totalitarian countries are totalitarian due to the behavior of the government, not because of the weapons they have.

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[sjames]

When you design a weapon that is inferior in every way except that it's use leaves no obvious traces, it has only bad uses.

That applies to ultrasonics as well.

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[sjames]

It happens to be less effective than those other options by far and more expensive. The only 'advantage' (other than lining defense contractor pockets) is that it doesn't create photos of obvious government oppression.

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[cold fjord]

When you design a weapon that is inferior in every way except that it's use leaves no obvious traces, it has only bad uses.

So, having an effect while being less likely to kill, maim, or injure, than rubber bullets, baton rounds, riot batons, etc., is essentially a design flaw then. Don't you think that democratic governments have a responsibility to minimize the harm to its citizens, if possible, even when coercion is necessary?

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[Joce640k]

I can easily see this going badly wrong.

eg. In a big crowd the people at the back won't feel anything but they can be blocking the escape of the people at the front. The people at the front will have nowhere to go and could be exposed to this for a very long time. That's torture by any definition.

Re:You say it like it is a bad thing.

[rullywowr]

When you design a weapon that is inferior in every way except that it's use leaves no obvious traces, it has only bad uses.

That applies to ultrasonics as well.

You mean like a Taser? No cops EVER misuse those...

No new weapons?

[Anonymous Coward]

What a tragedy.

Re:No new weapons?

[schnell]

No new weapons? What a tragedy.

I prefer living in a country that wastes money trying to find non-lethal weapons that don't work out vs. countries that take the cost-effective, pragmatic approach of "f**k em, bullets are nice and cheap."

There are plenty of reasons to criticize the US Department of Defense, no question. But the fact that they are spending money on non-lethal weapons means they at least care about a future war where not everyone has to get killed. Or even if you want to indulge your most Reynolds-wrapped tinfoil-clad conspiracy theories, a future where US domestic political protestors don't meet the same fate as those in the Prague Spring, Tienanmen Square or Syria.

Re:No new weapons?

[zarlino]

they at least care about a future war where not everyone has to get killed.

And what about working towards not having a future war at all?

Re:No new weapons?

[Phrogman]

The problem is that a government facing protesters and equipped with a non-lethal weapon that leaves no visible marks faces less of a barrier towards using it than one where the media can get juicy pictures of the government abusing its citizens. This thing going would be worse for free speech in the long run, and let's face it free speech is already under attack as it is.

Are There Any Alternatives

[rueger]

Sigh, if only there were other ways to control peaceful pro... ah mobs of anarchists.

Like pepper spray, water cannons, clubs, horses, dogs, sonic weapons, machine guns, truncheons, whips, tear gas.....

$47 million. You could make a good start at buying an election with that kind of money.

Re:Are There Any Alternatives

[godel_56]

Sigh, if only there were other ways to control peaceful pro... ah mobs of anarchists. Like pepper spray, water cannons, clubs, horses, dogs, sonic weapons, machine guns, truncheons, whips, tear gas.....

There are some excellent non-lethal possibilities that the authorities are not using, such as laser dazzlers. My favorite unused method is the foam generator. You cover the entire ravening mob in a layer of soapy foam about 3 meters thick, so they stumble around saying "where'd every body go?", and the cops pluck them out from the front end of the mob at their leisure. You can also include orange or green skin dyes or capsaicin in the foam if you're feeling nasty.

Re:Are There Any Alternatives

[MimeticLie]

Not all elections are presidential.

Re:Are There Any Alternatives

[strength_of_10_men]

But then they'll all be clean and we can't call them dirty hippies anymore. :)

Why are we fronting the cash?

[C0R1D4N]

If a company has an idea for a weapon they think will be super-awesomes why don't they spend the cash to R&D it and when/if it is successful they can start offering it out. Can we stop blowing cash on stupid crap that won't work like jet packs and laser rifles?

Re:Why are we fronting the cash?

[Animats]

If a company has an idea for a weapon they think will be super-awesomes why don't they spend the cash to R&D it and when/if it is successful they can start offering it out.

It's been tried. See the F-20.

So let's see

[93 Escort Wagon]

We have a very expensive crowd control weapon that likely could be rendered ineffective as long as enough of the protesters brought 99-cent spray bottles full of water along with them.

Got it.

Re:So let's see

[sjames]

With the right rectifier you might even be able to recharge your cellphone.

Re:So let's see

[number11]

We have a very expensive crowd control weapon that likely could be rendered ineffective as long as enough of the protesters brought 99-cent spray bottles full of water along with them.

But it's the very first weapon that a tinfoil hat is actually documented to protect against.

The spray bottles are good. But arty foil-backed protest signs that just happen to be shaped like corner reflectors would be fun for the people in the front.

Re:So let's see

[AJWM]

To defeat the squirrels, just reinforce the layer of bug screen (whether fiber or metal) with a layer of chicken wire. Then reinforce that with a layer of chain-link fencing if you're worried about the zombie apocalypse.

Really?

[nospam007]

The anti-terror guys have warned us for years that a microwave cannon could be built with parts ordered from the web, capable of frying a plane's electronics when it tries to land.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-196971883.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1166499/Terrorists-bring-jumbo-jet-using-microwave-cannon-built-internet.html

So I guess Mythbusters didn't get an authorization to test that either.

It's not really a weapon,

[RivenAleem]

You can't way they have no microwave weapons. They have an inefficient crowd control device. We don't know what they have in the lethal range. Probably because they chose not to show it. What's to stop them 'taking the safety' off and cranking out a much higher power version?

Until recently

[Dyinobal]

Until very recently no one could get microwave lasers at room temperature. How ever that is no longer the case, I don't remember the specific article but it was posted either here on Slashdot or Reddit.

Some lab had been working on it, with some old papers from the Japanese. Basically it was done with specially doped ruby emitters if I remember correct.

Now that we have at least the general knowledge of one method to create microwave laser emitters at room temperate I expect to see progress on this in the next five to ten years. Though I myself much prefer the nonmilitary uses of microwave lasers, such as communication and wireless power emission.

Re:Until recently

[Guppy]

Basically it was done with specially doped ruby emitters if I remember correct.

It was a pentacene-based organic material: http://phys.org/news/2012-08-maser-power-cold-demo-solid-state.html

They found the warmth pleasant.

[Anarchduke]

Put him in The Comfy Chair!!!!

Microwave weapons have been in use for 30 years.

[dicobalt]

They're called HotPockets.

Government regulation of weapons

[tepples]

If a company has an idea for a weapon they think will be super-awesomes why don't they spend the cash to R&D it

Government regulation of weapons, for one.

Radiation at that frequency penetrates less than..

[taxman_10m]

So what happens if you get it in the eye?

Re:Frisbies: no weapon potential

[AK Marc]

Also, any weaponry aimed at the masses has to contend with the issue:
being effective against a 20 year old male excellent physical condition marine, who the device is tested on, and on the other hand, not killing grandma. Or someone with asthma, or Lupus, or a heart condition. That may be something in favor of traditional guns and clubs. When used they are used with the intent to stop quickly the target, and everyone knows there is a high risk or death or injury. This tends to limit their use. Just not enough.

They could do what they do with tasers. Lie. Tasers kill. Yet, in the US, they are still non-lethal. Tasing someone is on the same violence level as grabbing them by the wrist. And it kills, regularly. Other countries treat them as lethal. The police have to go through the steps with them as if they fired their firearm. In fact, I was talking with an NZ cop who talked about not being allowed to carry a taser, as they are a firearm replacement, and he chooses to be firearm-less, so, even if he were to qualify with the gun and the taser, he couldn't carry the taser unless he also carried the gun. So he carries neither. In the US, they pepper spray seated people, and tase non-violent pricks shouting "don't tase me, bro."

Re:One use for microwaves

[vlm]

At 1,500W a 2.4GHz microwave driven by a high capacitance array, steered into place with say a dish antenna will fry electronics. I mean fry! It's just about the right wavelength to do so. Of course anyone standing in the way will get that section within the beam cooked almost immediately but that's just a collateral problem.

Talk to a EE first. I think you want high directionality, high gain. Capacitance isn't going to help you. Also, although this is /., on a regular basis I submit myself to a radiation flux right around 1.5 kilowatts per sq meter and barely sweat (well, as long as its below 80 degrees or so). Its called "sunlight". Not a military codeword, but genuine plain ole fashioned "sunlight". So if you want to "cook immediately" you need to focus to far, far smaller than 3 feet on a side. When you calculate the size of antenna required at 2 GHz to focus to a square inch or whatever, you'll be surprised. Its not going to be mobile.

Another way to put it, is you want to "cook immediately" but it takes a good fraction of a minute for a 1500 watt hotplate to get hot enough to burn my skin, and thats just the surface. Cooking a steak or hamburger all the way thru takes a lot longer.

Another way to put it is blasting unfocused 1.5 kilowatts is about like standing in front of a 1.5 kilowatt infra red space heater. Maybe in a draft-free garage or basement that'll help, but outdoors its just wasting electricity or providing purely psychological comfort.