Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: Raytheon 'heat beam' weapon ready for Iraq
Boston Business Journal ^ | 12/01/04

Posted on 12/05/2004 1:23:24 PM PST by blink182prj

Government defense giant Raytheon Co. has developed the first nonlethal weapon that fires a heat beam to repel enemies and reduces the chance of innocent civilians being shot, a Pentagon official said.

Raytheon, the world's largest missile maker, delivered a prototype to the U.S. military last month. The product is expected to be evaluated from February through June to determine whether to equip U.S. forces with it, Colonel David Karcher, director of the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate, told Bloomberg Business News.

With U.S. casualties in Iraq rising, expectations are growing that Raytheon's weapon, called the Active Denial System, could be sent to Iraq in the next year, according to Charles "Sid'' Heal, commander of the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department. A former Marine, Heal headed nonlethal-weapons training for the U.S. military in Somalia in 1995 and advised Raytheon on the beam's development.

"It's there, it's ready,'' said Heal, who has felt the weapon's beam and compares it to having a hot iron placed on the skin. "It will likely be in Iraq in the next 12 months. They are very, very close.''

The weapon, mounted on a Humvee vehicle, projects a "focused, speed-of-light millimeter wave energy beam to induce an intolerable heating sensation,'' according to a U.S. Air Force fact sheet. The energy penetrates less than 1/64 of an inch into the skin and the sensation ceases when the target moves out of the beam.

The weapon could be used for crowd control and is effective beyond the range of bullets fired by small arms, Karcher said. The effective range of an AK-47 assault rifle is as far as 273 yards, while an M16A2 rifle has a range of 400 meters.

The primary benefit would be protecting U.S. troops, Heal said. The weapon would also limit deaths of noncombatants, he said.

"This forces your adversary to declare intentions,'' Heal said. "U.S. forces get killed because they are reluctant to shoot. It happens in Iraq every day."

"This is where the future is going,'' Raytheon Chief Executive William Swanson, 55, said at a conference in Tucson, Ariz., where he introduced the weapon to investors Wednesday. "This is the ability to protect our troops, and we're talking about the speed of light.''

Raytheon is two years into a four-year, $40 million development contract, Karcher said. How soon the weapon is deployed will depend on the military's interest, and while the technology may be ready, troops must also be trained on it and engagement rules must be decided by a four-star general, he said.

Heal said the military version would cost about $1 million, and the U.S. military could require many.

Karcher said the first prototype cost about $10 million.

Heal told Bloomberg Business News that Raytheon could expand the market by selling a smaller version to law-enforcement agencies. The company is working on a smaller, tripod-mounted version for police forces, and the price would have to come down to a few hundred thousand dollars each to be affordable, he said.

TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: miltech; nonlethal; raytheon
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last
To: blink182prj

Will this melt the gold off the dome of a mosque?
Will it melt minerets like a candle?
Will it make the inside of a house like a convection oven?

41 posted on 12/05/2004 3:26:29 PM PST by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sender
Maybe if you tape bags of popcorn on your chest, it'll be like reactive armor.

"...Habib, What's that 'Popping Sound' and why, do you smell like butter...and not goat/sheep dung?"

42 posted on 12/05/2004 3:29:10 PM PST by skinkinthegrass (Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dcuddeback
If it was me, I'd prefer to clear the crowd with anti-personnel munitions. This is a war, anyway, not a college footbal game.

Ah, a MOAB proponent! : )

43 posted on 12/05/2004 3:31:13 PM PST by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ashtanga
I think this device would be very useful in separating the "faking dead" form the "really dead".
44 posted on 12/05/2004 3:37:48 PM PST by SC Swamp Fox (Aim small, miss small.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: blink182prj
Heal said the military version would cost about $1 million, and the U.S. military could require many

Ah, how many M16s can you get for $1 million?

45 posted on 12/05/2004 3:39:53 PM PST by det dweller too
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dcuddeback
Depends on how complex the IED is. If it is using a cellular telephone or a portion of a garage door opener, you probably could burn them out using some sort of focused high energy RF signal IF the electrical components were exposed enough to be attacked. I understand some units are presently using frequency jammers set on cell phone and garage door opener frequencies as a countermeasure.

However, if the IED is command detonated using an electric blasting cap, field wire and a battery, that's a pretty simple circuit. It has no ICs or other complex components to fry (or jam). Hitting it with the theoretical focused beam may or may not affect it, since the blasting cap will be inside the explosive device (assuming an artillery shell here) and surrounded by metal that will absorb and shunt the projected energy away from the blasting cap. What criteria would you use to decide how long to keep the beam focused on a suspected item to see if it would go off? Going to fry a lot of garbage along the way.

From what I have read, the problem with IEDs is that Iraqi roads are pretty trashy. The task is to figure out what is just routine trash and what is a camouflaged IED waiting to be set off when the MNF comes by. Since there are always people around (mostly innocent, some not), you can't just indiscriminently fire up everything that looks suspicious as a policy (although I suspect more than a few soldiers and Marines would like to do just that). Instead, they either drive fast, jam the frequencies and pray they are lucky or they deliberately search for the devices using combined forces foot patrols. Dangerous business either way.
46 posted on 12/05/2004 3:50:35 PM PST by Captain Rhino ("If you will just abandon logic, these things will make a lot more sense to you!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RandallFlagg

No, these are beebers and they are set on stune

47 posted on 12/05/2004 3:51:27 PM PST by eclectic (Liberalism is a mental disorder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dead Corpse
The flip side of your issue is, "How well does it penetrate mud bricks?" If the signal is not appreciably absorbed/scattered/attenuated by building materials used in Iraq, it could be used to force terrorists out into the open where they could then be shot.

"Come out. Come out, wherever you are..." ZZZzzzaaaaaaaap!

48 posted on 12/05/2004 4:03:19 PM PST by TXnMA (Back home in God's Country -- and that's where I plan to stay until they "plant" my carcass here!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: det dweller too
Ah, how many M16s can you get for $1 million?

My guess would be between 1,000 and 3,000 M16s. The low number assumes M16 goes for 1K a pop; the high number assumes $333 a weapon. The latter number is probably what the civilian market would bear; the former assumes the usual price gouging for Govt contracts.

49 posted on 12/05/2004 4:27:02 PM PST by IonImplantGuru (PhD, School of Hard Knocks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: vger


50 posted on 12/05/2004 4:27:10 PM PST by mad_as_he$$ ("Sure is a nice day for making things right." Boss Spearman. NSDQ, De Opresso Libre)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: dcuddeback

A microwave oven can do that.

51 posted on 12/05/2004 4:29:10 PM PST by RightWhale (Destroy the dark; restore the light)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic

"The basic rules of engagement are always engage lethal force with lethal force of a greater degree. I don't see anything in this argument to counter that principal. What I see is a better way to control a non lethal force encounter."

Understand what your reply means. Perhaps I jumped the gun a bit on this one. But in my mind I don't equate crowd control in the states the same way I do in the Sunni Triagle where anyone male or female can be carrying a conceled weapon. That is the point I guess I should have stressed.
In Sadr city sector of Baghdad for instance, you have perhaps a 100,000 youth carrying guns etc..
I have no problem with the gun being used in non lethal crowd control. I have a problem on it being used on crowds that are dangerous. And in my mind I immediately think, OK,
once it is an established practice by the coalition forces to primarily use the "heat gun", as a primariy tool to disperse crowds, I immediately think, OK, American, aim the gun in the crowd, make us jump as we open up on you with small arms fire, knowing you cannot shoot back with anything lethal, we will take out a few dozen of you real quick, and since your other personel that acccompany you cannot fire into crowds with real bullets, we will win this little battle against you. We win, because we had the sense to carry loaded firearms and use them against you when you cannot fire back. That is my fear for our guys.

52 posted on 12/05/2004 4:34:43 PM PST by Marine_Uncle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: dcuddeback

"hope the Brass isn't foolish enough to rely on this thing to the detriment of our troops. It should complement current procedures, not replace them.
How about having a "volume" knob...turn it up, and up, and up...Then, open fire. It should be mounted on a fighting vehicle, so bumping up the deterrent to .50 cal should be easy....."

My sentiments. I just don't think this "heat gun" is going to protect our troops. Ok, perhaps if you have a few dispersed in a infantry platoon. But who is going to want to carry the damn thing instead of their M4?
Guess we shall see how this splendid new crowd control gun will work in the future. I know I wouldn't want to be the one carrying the heat gun in an angry crowed of potential killers, all armed with guns.

53 posted on 12/05/2004 4:45:39 PM PST by Marine_Uncle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: dcuddeback
Yes I know this one was designed to penetrate skin and produce a sensation of heat

That's the beauty of it, although not for use in Iraq. It doesn't penetrate deeply enough to actually cause burns, but does heat up the nerve endings, which then tell the brain that you are frying. I guess such a thing might be useful in the Shia regions, but in the Sunni Triangle, it's still bullet and bomb time.

54 posted on 12/05/2004 4:48:51 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: blink182prj

Wonder what a leather jacket would do for the enemy?

55 posted on 12/05/2004 4:49:41 PM PST by deaconjim (Freep the world!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kizzdogg
Sure this is non-lethal, but what are you going to do with this kind of heat on you?

Run. You sure aren't going to be capable of aiming a weapon. You probably could still set off your Islamakazi belt or car bomb though.

56 posted on 12/05/2004 4:51:08 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: blink182prj; First_Salute

The speed of heat.

57 posted on 12/05/2004 4:51:51 PM PST by snopercod (Bigger government means clinton won. Less freedom means Osama won. Get it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blink182prj

" . . . with laser beams?"
58 posted on 12/05/2004 4:54:12 PM PST by ChadGore (VISUALIZ 61,683,787 Bush fans.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marine_Uncle
Where does one aim the weapon at? An exposed hand, face, head, perhaps a foot that is in an open sandal. How does one focus on an exposed part within a crowd of "hopped up wildmen". Are they going to stand still, so that you can warm their big toe? If so, what do you do when they quickly step aside from the beams mommentary heating action, pull an AK47 from their overdress and nail you?

The beam is much broader than your musings imply. They can't just step out of the beam. They have get far away from the source. Still they could probalby manage to run towards you and set off their bomb belt. Although the closer they got, the hotter they would feel. They could not even manage spray and pray with an AK.

59 posted on 12/05/2004 4:54:15 PM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ThirstyMan
They should develop something like this to aim at the ground in front of their Humvee to detonate these damned roadside bombs before they get there.

They already have something similar - there was a thread on it a couple days ago. It is basically a "jammer" that blocks the detonation signal (from a cell-phone, I think).

60 posted on 12/05/2004 4:54:42 PM PST by snopercod (Bigger government means clinton won. Less freedom means Osama won. Get it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson