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

[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.

 

[msbae]

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.

So much for any ambitions of executing a really clean kill by vaporizing the enemy...

 

[tharpdevenport]

Appearently masturbating isn't he only thing which will blind you... ;-)

 

[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.

Because msbase and mabye others didn't get my response, I'll elaborate.

If you've never worked in product R&D, you may not know, that most prototypes are haphazardly soldered components to a eeprom put in a casing that fits around them. Since your case has to go around a device that is a new shape (in the industry) and requires buttons and other interface openings, the case must be manufactured from scratch. (You usually can't just use something that you find at the store.)

The case is usually fabricated with a 3d printer, and is made as fasionable as the geeks in the lab can make it. The result in this instance is a weapon case that can't be taken seriously.

 

[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.

Because msbase and mabye others didn't get my response, I'll elaborate.

If you've never worked in product R&D, you may not know, that most prototypes are haphazardly soldered components to a eeprom put in a casing that fits around them. Since your case has to go around a device that is a new shape (in the industry) and requires buttons and other interface openings, the case must be manufactured from scratch. (You usually can't just use something that you find at the store.)

The case is usually fabricated with a 3d printer, and is made as fasionable as the geeks in the lab can make it. The result in this instance is a weapon case that can't be taken seriously.

Okay, now I understand. Unless it's a car, prototypes aren't expected to be that pretty anyway.

 

[Surefire]

Blinding the attacker temporarily doesn't inspire my confidence. If they look away from the beam, or protect their eyes the weapon is likely useless.

When a wireless device is invented that can disrupt the nervous system enough to take the fight out of an attacker, at least for 5 minutes, without any permanent damage I will be more impressed.

 

[Meredith]

A weapon that can defeated with sunglasses!

 

[cultcross]

Am I misunderstanding what this thing does, because it seems an awful lot of very expensive hardware to achieve the same thing as a decent torch?

Oh, and "the first man-portable, non-lethal deterrent weapon" is not something the TASER company are going to enjoy as a slogan Or are they making the oft-ignored distinction between 'non-lethal' and 'less-lethal'? Because if so, I would still class any form of incapicitating weapno as 'less', not 'non' lethal.

 

[plague]

Cultcross, good point. I've been carrying pepper spray around for awhile, and I'm a man.

 

[hyzmarca]

Am I misunderstanding what this thing does, because it seems an awful lot of very expensive hardware to achieve the same thing as a decent torch?

A decent torch can't permanently burn out the retinas of a dozen people at once. This weapon can.

Oh, and "the first man-portable, non-lethal deterrent weapon" is not something the TASER company are going to enjoy as a slogan Or are they making the oft-ignored distinction between 'non-lethal' and 'less-lethal'? Because if so, I would still class any form of incapicitating weapno as 'less', not 'non' lethal.

No, this weapon is truly non-lethal. It's capable of blinding, but only capable of blinding. It doesn't have sufficient energy to do anything else. A taser cases several thousand volts of electricity to pass through the body, potentially disrupting the hearts of individuals who are prone to such things (victims of recreational drug overdose, heart patients, the elderly).
The issue is that the blinding effect is supposed to be temporary, that it's duration actually depends on range. At long range, there is no blinding. At close range, there is permanent destruction of important eye structures. But it won't kill you. At worst, you'll have to learn braille.

 

[Overgeeked]

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

I, for one, am quite happy they changed the name to something other than pickle.