PhaSR – the first man-portable, non-lethal deterrent weapon

[msbae]

Yet another Star Trek technology getting a real-life equivalent...

http://www.gizmag.com/go/4815/

November 5, 2005 No this is not a movie prop nor will it be marketed by Mattel for the bigger boys this Christmas– it is one of two working prototypes of a non-lethal laser gun built by the Air Force Research Laboratory's Directed Energy Directorate. The non-lethal illumination technology weapon was developed by the laboratory's ScorpWorks team. Dubbed the PhaSR (who needs a Madison Avenue creative team when you can come up with names like this – an acronym for Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response), it is the first man-portable, non-lethal deterrent weapon and is intended for protecting troops and controlling hostile crowds. The weapon employs a two-wavelength laser system and is a hand-held, single-operator system for troop and perimeter defense. The weapon’s laser light temporarily blinds its targets.

When are they going to develop one that's smaller and can be set to Kill? Lugging this around in combat is likely to be much lighter (and cost less to transport) than an M-4 Carbine and it's 5.56mm and/or 7.62mm NATO rounds.

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Re: PhaSR – the first man-portable, non-lethal deterrent weapon

Blinding a hostile crowd, eh? Nothing bad could happen from that.

I'm of a mixed mind on non-lethal weapons. As an alternative to lethal force it is a nice tool. But I see the taser as being a go-to shortcut to working with people, it seems to be used as a cattle prod as much as it does an alternative to a bullet.

 

[msbae]

Blinding a hostile crowd, eh? Nothing bad could happen from that.

I'm of a mixed mind on non-lethal weapons. As an alternative to lethal force it is a nice tool. But I see the taser as being a go-to shortcut to working with people, it seems to be used as a cattle prod as much as it does an alternative to a bullet.

Tasers wouldn't be the most effective weapon against an entire unruly crowd, especially in Palestine. I can see the Jews wanting a weapon like this PHaSR for that purpose.

 

[Marc]

Yet another Star Trek technology getting a real-life equivalent...

http://www.gizmag.com/go/4815/

November 5, 2005 No this is not a movie prop nor will it be marketed by Mattel for the bigger boys this Christmas– it is one of two working prototypes of a non-lethal laser gun built by the Air Force Research Laboratory's Directed Energy Directorate. The non-lethal illumination technology weapon was developed by the laboratory's ScorpWorks team. Dubbed the PhaSR (who needs a Madison Avenue creative team when you can come up with names like this – an acronym for Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response), it is the first man-portable, non-lethal deterrent weapon and is intended for protecting troops and controlling hostile crowds. The weapon employs a two-wavelength laser system and is a hand-held, single-operator system for troop and perimeter defense. The weapon’s laser light temporarily blinds its targets.

When are they going to develop one that's smaller and can be set to Kill? Lugging this around in combat is likely to be much lighter (and cost less to transport) than an M-4 Carbine and it's 5.56mm and/or 7.62mm NATO rounds.

Why is it necessary to have a weapon that kill in a riot/crowd control situation?

 

[The Badger]

The US Military is developing something called the PEP, or Pulsed Energy Projectile, for riot control.
A pulse laser is fired at a target, vaporizing a tiny amount of matter at the impact site (ablation). This is energised, becoming rapidly expanding plasma.

The intent was to have been an impact like a rubber bullet, coupled with with an effect like a 'flash-bang' stun grenade. During animal testing, however, it was discovered that the electromagnetic properties of the plasma could cause direct stimulation of the pain receptors in the skin, coupled with a temporary paralysis.
Not quite 'phasers on stun', but close.

The weapon can also be reset to have lethal effects, and was originally known as the 'Project Improved Kill Laser'.

At present it is far too bulky and heavy to be man portable, but could be carried on vehicles. Maximum range is about two kilometres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_Energy_Projectile

 

[Mr. Adventure]

Re: PhaSR – the first man-portable, non-lethal deterrent weapon

Blinding a hostile crowd, eh? Nothing bad could happen from that.

I'm of a mixed mind on non-lethal weapons. As an alternative to lethal force it is a nice tool. But I see the taser as being a go-to shortcut to working with people, it seems to be used as a cattle prod as much as it does an alternative to a bullet.

Tasers wouldn't be the most effective weapon against an entire unruly crowd, especially in Palestine. I can see the Jews wanting a weapon like this PHaSR for that purpose.

I know, I kind of mixed two thoughts there. Just saying I don't like how non-lethal weapons are becoming the de facto way to handle situations rather than a last resort alternative to lethal force.

 

[The Badger]

Why is it necessary to have a weapon that kill in a riot/crowd control situation?

Hopefully, there will never be a need.
But if one of the rioters is armed, he's a threat to all around him. Unless you have a fool proof, guaranteed effective way to incapacitate him, lethal force may be necessary.

I'm not saying I approve. But I can understand the utility of lethal weapons.

 

[msbae]

Yet another Star Trek technology getting a real-life equivalent...

http://www.gizmag.com/go/4815/

November 5, 2005 No this is not a movie prop nor will it be marketed by Mattel for the bigger boys this Christmas– it is one of two working prototypes of a non-lethal laser gun built by the Air Force Research Laboratory's Directed Energy Directorate. The non-lethal illumination technology weapon was developed by the laboratory's ScorpWorks team. Dubbed the PhaSR (who needs a Madison Avenue creative team when you can come up with names like this – an acronym for Personnel Halting and Stimulation Response), it is the first man-portable, non-lethal deterrent weapon and is intended for protecting troops and controlling hostile crowds. The weapon employs a two-wavelength laser system and is a hand-held, single-operator system for troop and perimeter defense. The weapon’s laser light temporarily blinds its targets.

When are they going to develop one that's smaller and can be set to Kill? Lugging this around in combat is likely to be much lighter (and cost less to transport) than an M-4 Carbine and it's 5.56mm and/or 7.62mm NATO rounds.

Why is it necessary to have a weapon that kill in a riot/crowd control situation?

It wouldn't. I want that for front-line operations. I would think the terrorists, Chi-coms and other enemies of the Free World would shit their pants if their best friend was just vaporized right in front of them. The psychological factor is undeniable here.

The US Military is developing something called the PEP, or Pulsed Energy Projectile, for riot control.
A pulse laser is fired at a target, vaporizing a tiny amount of matter at the impact site (ablation). This is energised, becoming rapidly expanding plasma.

The intent was to have been an impact like a rubber bullet, coupled with with an effect like a 'flash-bang' stun grenade. During animal testing, however, it was discovered that the electromagnetic properties of the plasma could cause direct stimulation of the pain receptors in the skin, coupled with a temporary paralysis.
Not quite 'phasers on stun', but close.

The weapon can also be reset to have lethal effects, and was originally known as the 'Project Improved Kill Laser'.

At present it is far too bulky and heavy to be man portable, but could be carried on vehicles. Maximum range is about two kilometres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_Energy_Projectile

That is awesomeness right there. I'd love to see tanks rolling around with Phaser guns on them. If that doesn't scare the crap out of the enemy, (probably) nothing will.

 

[noknowes]

Yet another Star Trek technology getting a real-life equivalent...

http://www.gizmag.com/go/4815/

When are they going to develop one that's smaller and can be set to Kill? Lugging this around in combat is likely to be much lighter (and cost less to transport) than an M-4 Carbine and it's 5.56mm and/or 7.62mm NATO rounds.

Why is it necessary to have a weapon that kill in a riot/crowd control situation?

It wouldn't. I want that for front-line operations. I would think the terrorists, Chi-coms and other enemies of the Free World would shit their pants if their best friend was just vaporized right in front of them. The psychological factor is undeniable here.

The US Military is developing something called the PEP, or Pulsed Energy Projectile, for riot control.
A pulse laser is fired at a target, vaporizing a tiny amount of matter at the impact site (ablation). This is energised, becoming rapidly expanding plasma.

The intent was to have been an impact like a rubber bullet, coupled with with an effect like a 'flash-bang' stun grenade. During animal testing, however, it was discovered that the electromagnetic properties of the plasma could cause direct stimulation of the pain receptors in the skin, coupled with a temporary paralysis.
Not quite 'phasers on stun', but close.

The weapon can also be reset to have lethal effects, and was originally known as the 'Project Improved Kill Laser'.

At present it is far too bulky and heavy to be man portable, but could be carried on vehicles. Maximum range is about two kilometres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_Energy_Projectile

That is awesomeness right there. I'd love to see tanks rolling around with Phaser guns on them. If that doesn't scare the crap out of the enemy, (probably) nothing will.

your reasoning is illogical.

guns kills/wound... these fancy lasers kill/wound

why would the enemy be terrified of these lasers more then the bullet guns?

how long would they be terrified for?

familiarity breeds contempt.

as spock said "military secrets are the most fleeting of all"

what is to stop arms manufacturers selling to the enemy?

it is a double edged sword.

who is going to pay/ look after tens of thousands of blind people for an average of 40 years?

would you like to be blinded?

 

[msbae]

your reasoning is illogical.

guns kills/wound... these fancy lasers kill/wound

why would the enemy be terrified of these lasers more then the bullet guns?

how long would they be terrified for?

familiarity breeds contempt.

as spock said "military secrets are the most fleeting of all"

what is to stop arms manufacturers selling to the enemy?

it is a double edged sword.

who is going to pay/ look after tens of thousands of blind people for an average of 40 years?

would you like to be blinded?

Lasers are more scary than bullets because they aren't common. So, until they do become common, Directed Energy weapons should still be rather unsettling to those on the receiving end. What's with this blindness crap?

 

[plague]

I think the design is good evidence of why one shouldn't let the sci-fi geek on your team near the 3d printer.

 

[msbae]

I think the design is good evidence of why one shouldn't let the sci-fi geek on your team near the 3d printer.

What?

 

[noknowes]

your reasoning is illogical.

guns kills/wound... these fancy lasers kill/wound

why would the enemy be terrified of these lasers more then the bullet guns?

how long would they be terrified for?

familiarity breeds contempt.

as spock said "military secrets are the most fleeting of all"

what is to stop arms manufacturers selling to the enemy?

it is a double edged sword.

who is going to pay/ look after tens of thousands of blind people for an average of 40 years?

would you like to be blinded?

Lasers are more scary than bullets because they aren't common. So, until they do become common, Directed Energy weapons should still be rather unsettling to those on the receiving end. What's with this blindness crap?[/Q]

What's with this blindness crap?

dogs are more scary then lasers and they are common.

What's with this blindness crap?

dogs are more scary then lasers and they are unsettling.

What's with this blindness crap?

dogs are more scary then lasers and they are common and unsettling.

What's with this blindness crap?

My Aunts are more scary then lasers and are unsettling and are uncommon.

What's with this blindness crap?

What's with this blindness crap?

What's with this blindness crap?

 

[plague]

I think the design is good evidence of why one shouldn't let the sci-fi geek on your team near the 3d printer.

What?

Sorry. I'm confused on what you're asking. If you can clarify what you're looking for, I'd be happy to clarify my response.

 

[Meredith]

Kirk to Spock, set Phasers to Blind!

 

[msbae]

your reasoning is illogical.

guns kills/wound... these fancy lasers kill/wound

why would the enemy be terrified of these lasers more then the bullet guns?

how long would they be terrified for?

familiarity breeds contempt.

as spock said "military secrets are the most fleeting of all"

what is to stop arms manufacturers selling to the enemy?

it is a double edged sword.

who is going to pay/ look after tens of thousands of blind people for an average of 40 years?

would you like to be blinded?

Lasers are more scary than bullets because they aren't common. So, until they do become common, Directed Energy weapons should still be rather unsettling to those on the receiving end. What's with this blindness crap?[/Q]

What's with this blindness crap?

dogs are more scary then lasers and they are common.

What's with this blindness crap?

dogs are more scary then lasers and they are unsettling.

What's with this blindness crap?

dogs are more scary then lasers and they are common and unsettling.

What's with this blindness crap?

My Aunts are more scary then lasers and are unsettling and are uncommon.

What's with this blindness crap?

What's with this blindness crap?

What's with this blindness crap?

Dogs are only scary to people who don't have one. Go troll somewhere else.

I think the design is good evidence of why one shouldn't let the sci-fi geek on your team near the 3d printer.

What?

Sorry. I'm confused on what you're asking. If you can clarify what you're looking for, I'd be happy to clarify my response.

I'm wondering what a 3D printer has to do with the article.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Mr Adventure,

I'm of a mixed mind on non-lethal weapons. As an alternative to lethal force it is a nice tool. But I see the taser as being a go-to shortcut to working with people, it seems to be used as a cattle prod as much as it does an alternative to a bullet.

Yeah, I kind of have a similar opinion. They are used way too frequently, probably because there is no worry of causing death (actually they can cause heart-attacks in unhealthy people)

 

[hyzmarca]

When are they going to develop one that's smaller and can be set to Kill? Lugging this around in combat is likely to be much lighter (and cost less to transport) than an M-4 Carbine and it's 5.56mm and/or 7.62mm NATO rounds.

Likely never. The problem with laser weapons is power. Chemical lasers require large tanks of chemicals, while electrical lasers require a a rather powerful source of electricity. Both of these can work in a tank, though a chemical laser would only be good for a few shots. Electrical lasers are potentially better due to the fact that the tank's engine can provide electrical power, and they don't use potentially dangerous chemicals.
On foot, however, a chemical laser would require carrying around tanks of dangerous chemicals that are only good for a couple of shots. An electrical laser would require lugging around large heavy batteries with discharge rates far in excess of what is currently possible and would also only be good for a couple of shots.

Gunpowder propelled projectiles are going to be the most efficient means for footsoldiers to to kill distant targets for some time to come.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

hyzmarca,

They've already been testing THEL's that can destroy rockets, missiles, and RPG's in flight...

 

[hyzmarca]

Yes, but they aren't exactly man-portable. The Mobile THEL is currently the size of three semi-trailers, and they hope to get it down to the size of one. It isn't something that a human being can lift, much less carry around and fire from the shoulder.