China reveals heat ray gun, Russia to follow

[XTankSlayerX]

China has developed a long-range pain gun that works by shooting microwaves into people’s bodies and heating up water under their skin, according to reports, and might plan to fit it onto its ships or for crowd control.

The gun, known as a Poly WB-1, works by projecting a man-sized milimetre beam onto the body, which heats water molecules just under the skin and causes intense pain. The gun is non-lethal and doesn’t seem to cause lasting harm — a point the US government tried to make repeatedly amid criticism of a similar weapon it developed, which it demonstrated by shooting a reporter with one.

The gun has a range of 80 metres, but with increased power can work over 1 kilometre.

The gun was shown off at the recent Airshow China 2014, according to IHS Jane’s, and the country is thought to be working to fit it on ships.

Chinese ships have been actively involved in the country’s feuds with Japan, as part of increasing tensions over disputed territory in the South China Sea.

The gun is similar to the US Military’s Active Denial System (ADS), which worked on a very similar principle. The system was rumoured in 2004, and used to control riots in Iraq in 2006.

It was then deployed in Afghanistan in 2010 but then recalled after a series of safety and technical issues, including the fact that it took 16 hours to warm up.

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/china-reveals-longrange-heat-ray-gun-9925713.html

This... I've heard of this, this is probably the cruelest thing that has ever been made. It essential burns you from within your skin... Think about that for a moment. Only countermeasure i see to this would be some sort of metal lined clothing so it would reflect some of the heat.

More news to come, its Monday again. News isn't slow and i can start posting thse for all of you again!

Post all your rants and criticisms below!

[Trik'Stari]

US already had this for a while now. Saw it on "Future Weapons" on the military channel a while back. looking for video now

 

Edit: Just realized they mentioned that. It sounds like a good idea since it's meant only to cause pain and not cause physical damage (except maybe cancer?  )

[Sidiox]

 

doesn't seem to cause long lasting harm

 

Well yeah a small amount of microwave radiation isn't that bad, but boiling the water inside of you that will cause tissue damage.  

 

I'm not sure if I am a fan of this, it might be better for crowd control, but I'd like to see more testing of this kind of stuff first. 

[JoaoPRSousa]

U FOKEN WOT M8

[SkilledRebuilds]

Yay for more weapons...

 

/Obvious sarcasm

[The_Strict_Nein]

If at any point it becomes a big thing, it'll immediately be put into the same category as Hollow-points, Napalm and Nuclear Bombs under the Hague Acts on human rights.

 

This is a weapon of mass terror.

[Sidiox]

US already had this for a while now. Saw it on "Future Weapons" on the military channel a while back. looking for video now

 

Edit: Just realized they mentioned that. It sounds like a good idea since it's meant only to cause pain and not cause physical damage (except maybe cancer?  )

Look at my comment, freaking boiling water isn't good for your skin. Also hamsters die for a reason when you put them in the microwave.

It won't cause cancer most likely, but if it heats the water molecules inside your skin to above 40C then that will cause damage to the cells. I hope they tested it, but I'm still not convinced

[Fate]

Hopefully they'll never have to use it, that shit seems horrifying. 

[The_Strict_Nein]

Look at my comment, freaking boiling water isn't good for your skin. 

It won't cause cancer most likely, but if it heats the water molecules inside your skin to above 40C then that will cause damage to the cells. I hope they tested it, but I'm still not convinced

 

It's not that, it's that fact that you could neutralize an entire army of protesters/soldiers with incredible debilitating pain a kilometre away.

 

It's awful.

[MeltingPoint]

I've seen this on Future Weapons a long time ago.

[Trik'Stari]

Look at my comment, freaking boiling water isn't good for your skin. 

It won't cause cancer most likely, but if it heats the water molecules inside your skin to above 40C then that will cause damage to the cells. I hope they tested it, but I'm still not convinced

They tested it on air on "Future Weapons" with the host, who was ex special forces. All it is meant to do is cause a bit of pain, doesn't actually "boil" the water, just causes a bit of heat. As soon as it hit him he turned around and walked away. Granted over exposure could probably have negative effects. But compared to bean bag rounds from shotguns and tear gas?

 

It's not that, it's that fact that you could neutralize an entire army of protesters/soldiers with incredible debilitating pain a kilometre away.

 

It's awful.

 

It's not debilitating pain, it's simply enough to make you turn around and walk away, they tested it live on air, on "Future Weapons".

 

Granted that could have been bullshit and they might not have even turned it on, since we can't see microwave radiation.

 

 

Still beats rubber bullets, bean bag rounds from shotguns, and tear gas grenades

[Sidiox]

It's not that, it's that fact that you could neutralize an entire army of protesters/soldiers with incredible debilitating pain a kilometre away.

 

It's awful.

 

Whether it is an ethical weapon to use is a bit of a hard question I think; in a time of war then pain is "normal", but what makes it different from say Napalm is that it doesn't cause horrible burns.  It isn't a nice weapon, at all, but a lot nicer then dropping an atomic bomb or napalm. I really wonder how dangerous it really is and what happens to equipment, the whole metal and radiation stuff. 

[Trik'Stari]

Whether it is an ethical weapon to use is a bit of a hard question I think; in a time of war then pain is "normal", but what makes it different from say Napalm is that it doesn't cause horrible burns.  It isn't a nice weapon, at all, but a lot nicer then dropping an atomic bomb or napalm. I really wonder how dangerous it really is and what happens to equipment, the whole metal and radiation stuff. 

From what they said on Future Weapons, (and granted that could be bullshit) it doesn't even have the power to penetrate clothing (when used at it's correct range, point blank who knows). It only effects visible skin, and only causes mildly "intense" heat on skin facing the "Weapon".

 

I believe it also had intensity settings.

[The_Strict_Nein]

Whether it is an ethical weapon to use is a bit of a hard question I think; in a time of war then pain is "normal", but what makes it different from say Napalm is that it doesn't cause horrible burns.  It isn't a nice weapon, at all, but a lot nicer then dropping an atomic bomb or napalm. I really wonder how dangerous it really is and what happens to equipment, the whole metal and radiation stuff. 

 

If it was only used momentarily to stun someone, then yes, it's not too bad.

 

But if jacked up the intensity and you held it for 20 seconds? A minute? An hour? You could kill someone from continuous terrible pain.

 

It's extremely unethecal.

[Sidiox]

They tested it on air on "Future Weapons" with the host, who was ex special forces. All it is meant to do is cause a bit of pain, doesn't actually "boil" the water, just causes a bit of heat. As soon as it hit him he turned around and walked away. Granted over exposure could probably have negative effects. But compared to bean bag rounds from shotguns and tear gas?

 

 

It's not debilitating pain, it's simply enough to make you turn around and walk away, they tested it live on air, on "Future Weapons".

 

Granted that could have been bullshit and they might not have even turned it on, since we can't see microwave radiation.

 

 

Still beats rubber bullets, bean bag rounds from shotguns, and tear gas grenades

 

Yeah I saw that vid, my problem with that testing is that I want to know that what temperature you actually heat the water molecules, what effect does it have on the cells you hit, it is not penetrating radiation, but it sure as hell isn't good. Also what happens to softer tissue, such as your eyes. 

 

And with this kind of weapon, if you want to use it as a crowd control weapon and you spray a large group of people, can you actually make sure that no one gets boiled. It is a very effective weapon, but more against single targets I feel then against groups, just because of the dangers involved

[Trik'Stari]

Yeah I saw that vid, my problem with that testing is that I want to know that what temperature you actually heat the water molecules, what effect does it have on the cells you hit, it is not penetrating radiation, but it sure as hell isn't good. Also what happens to softer tissue, such as your eyes. 

 

And with this kind of weapon, if you want to use it as a crowd control weapon and you spray a large group of people, can you actually make sure that no one gets boiled. It is a very effective weapon, but more against single targets I feel then against groups, just because of the dangers involved

Well, realistically, any slight raise in temperature would be enough to make anyone turn around and walk away. At least anyone not hell bent on killing people by blowing themselves up.

[Sidiox]

From what they said on Future Weapons, (and granted that could be bullshit) it doesn't even have the power to penetrate clothing (when used at it's correct range, point blank who knows). It only effects visible skin, and only causes mildly "intense" heat on skin facing the "Weapon".

 

I believe it also had intensity settings.

 

Well that reporter got hit through a mattress....  So I'm quite sure it has got intensity seconds, but if you aim at someone and don't know the nature of their clothing, then how can you choose the appropriate setting, and what are the effects if you choose the wrong setting.

 

If it was only used momentarily to stun someone, then yes, it's not too bad.

 

But if jacked up the intensity and you held it for 20 seconds? A minute? An hour? You could kill someone from continuous terrible pain.

 

It's extremely unethecal.

 

If it truly is a safe weapon it shouldn't be able to kill anyone at longer intervals. If they wish to use this as crowd control it has to be safe. 

I highly doubt whether it is safe, so yeah it isn't ethical to use an unsafe weapon, although that is a bit of a weird combination of words

[Sidiox]

Well, realistically, any slight raise in temperature would be enough to make anyone turn around and walk away. At least anyone not hell bent on killing people by blowing themselves up.

From wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System:

 

 

The ADSʼs repel effect in humans occurs at slightly higher than 44 °C (111 °F), though first-degree burns occur at about 51 °C (124 °F), and second-degree burns occur at about 58 °C (136 °F).^[16] In testing, pea-sized blisters have been observed in less than 0.1% of ADS exposures, indicating that second degree surface burns have been caused by the device.^[16]

 

And there is more there about the safety and that there have been incidents where it caused second degree burns because it was left on for too long 

 

With that in mind, I do not like this as a crowd control weapon where you can not control for how long people are exposed, groups people can be pushed with out wanting to go a certain way and therefor be over exposed.

As a single target weapon used in single target situations, then I have less objections

[Geekazoid]

This is quite cruel, not sure that I agree with it, however, if it was the difference between killing someone and just using this gun, then I think it'd be the better option.

[Trik'Stari]

From wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System:

 

And there is more there about the safety and that there have been incidents where it caused second degree burns because it was left on for too long 

 

With that in mind, I do not like this as a crowd control weapon where you can not control for how long people are exposed, groups people can be pushed with out wanting to go a certain way and therefor be over exposed.

As a single target weapon used in single target situations, then I have less objections

As with any weapon, it has a potential for misuse and "accidents". As for controlling how long people are exposed, all you do is turn it off.

 

 

No weapon is perfect, but I'd rather have a chance of getting second degree burns than killed by a bean bag round (those can kill you, rather easily if they hit you in the chest) or suffocated by tear gas. This to me seems a lot kinder than the alternatives.

 

Well that reporter got hit through a mattress....  So I'm quite sure it has got intensity seconds, but if you aim at someone and don't know the nature of their clothing, then how can you choose the appropriate setting, and what are the effects if you choose the wrong setting.

 

 

If it truly is a safe weapon it shouldn't be able to kill anyone at longer intervals. If they wish to use this as crowd control it has to be safe. 

I highly doubt whether it is safe, so yeah it isn't ethical to use an unsafe weapon, although that is a bit of a weird combination of words

 

the dude on Future Weapons took it straight up. No mattress, just his leather jacket.

[Mooshi]

That topic, holy shit. We've transitioned from real life to comic book world..this sounds like something Superman should keep close tabs on.

[Mujteba]

In a large crowd it would be really difficult to monitor when the intensity of this device is getting too high for a person to handle and hence the overexposure could cause severe tissue damage. The predominant argument raised above was that pointing it at someone for a few seconds would "make anyone turn around and walk away". Now my question is: how do you simply "walk away" when there is a mass of negatively enthused (and potentially violent) individuals surrounding you? Simple answer is you can't and without proper training law enforcers can potentially abuse this type of control measure either through being overcome by negative emotion due to a stressful situation or simply not understanding the risks involved.

 

Going by the above logic I guess it would be best to only aim for the legs before shooting.

[ComradeHX]

It's not that, it's that fact that you could neutralize an entire army of protesters

 

It's awful.

I'll take a dozen.

Seriously, this(with proper adjustment on power level) could be a lot safer(for both sides) than beanbag rounds, teargas...etc.

[StingBull]

America already has this.

Perfect tool for torture since it doesn't leave any mark behind.

I wouldn't be surprised if US already uses this in Guatemala.

[The_Strict_Nein]

I'll take a dozen.

Seriously, this(with proper adjustment on power level) could be a lot safer(for both sides) than beanbag rounds, teargas...etc.

 

Alright Dictator