Defense Technology International - October 2007 - (Page 12) SCIENCE WATCH MICHAEL DUMIAK KINDER, GENTLER COMBAT Researchers worldwide are developing an arsenal of non-lethal weapons that will incapacitate but not seriously injure human targets. The goal is to devise weapons that permit control of a situation without the use of deadly force. This is important as conflicts shift from warfare between clearly defined forces to asymmetric battles where the distinction between combatants and civilians blurs. Some non-lethal concepts are widely known, such as the Active Denial System (ADS), a directedenergy weapon that uses millimeter waves to inflict an intolerable but harmless burning sensation on mobs (DTI June, p. 26). Most, however, are less futuristic and, like the ADS, still in testing or prototypes. “Things really haven’t changed a whole lot since the Wild West,” says Mark Grubelich, a rocket scientist at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, N.M. “If you want to persuade someone to do what you want, you can talk to him, beat him or shoot him.” Grubelich attended the fourth European Symposium on Non-Lethal Weapons in Ettlingen, Germany, earlier this year. Organized by the Fraunhofer Institute for Chemical Technology, the event drew scientists who presented devices that represent the latest in non-lethal weapons design. Notable examples included pocket-sized fuel-air stun grenades (i.e., flash-bangs), cannons that shoot bursts of chemically saturated air and radio-controlled gliders that drop knockout aerosols on snipers. Sandia’s entry in this field is an updated flash-bang. Conventional flashbangs depend on an explosion within a closed canister that generates a shock wave of around 30,000 psi. and noise that can cause serious hearing damage. Grubelich says he’s seen pictures of users with hands mutilated or blown away after premature detonation. “It’s a major explosive,” he says. “It may be a low-power grenade, but it’s still a grenade.” Grubelich got the idea for a safer but no less effective flash-bang from his work in propellant research. He produced a prototype loaded with 12 chemical spray, absorbing a chemical—such as particles of Obron 5413H tear gas or knockout flaked aluminum powgases the Russians are der that sprays a cloud known to experiment from tiny holes in the with—and carrying it a few hundred feet. canister upon activation. There are problems, The 5-ft.-dia. particle though. The mist could cloud goes off in a flash of light and noise when This flash-bang expose friendly forces it comes in contact with grenade designed to the same gases as the air. Because the cloud by Sandia has no the target. Scale is also is distributed instead of internal explosive. a problem. For the vorpropelled from a central It sprays a cloud tex ring to travel far, source, shock-wave pres- of flaked alumithe air cannon would sure is about 10 psi. probably need to be num powder that The explosion gener- achieves a lowhuge. The technology ates 170 dB., more than pressure yet effec- has roots in World War enough to stun, but tive detonation on II Nazi research into because it’s not part of contact with air. a “Wirbelwind Kaa huge pressure wave, none”—whirlwind canit’s much less likely to cause perma- non—that was designed to knock nent hearing damage. And with no the wings off B-17 bombers with pressure wave, there are no blast concentrated bursts of air generatinjuries. The flash, however, leaves ed by the detonation of hydrogen a scotoma, or temporary blind spot, and oxygen. Documentation of this which lasts about 20 min. research is thin, and there’s no reGrubelich says the device is less like- cord of the weapon shooting down ly to go off accidentally because there a bomber, but a photo of the Wirbelwind Kanone shows it to be the size is no internal explosive mechanism. of a railway car. A more practical way of incapacitating an enemy with chemicals comes from the Fraunhofer Institute. Researchers Sebastian Zettl, Wolfgang Liehmann and Klaus-Dieter Thiel developed a two-stage unmanned aerial vehicle that drops gas on small targets like rooftop snipers silently and accurately. Zettl and colleagues put a gliding dispenser atop a UAV, which can travThis stun grenade generates el 3,000 ft. Both the dispenser and UAV are remotely controlled. Tests a 170-dB. blast and tempoindicate that a 1-kg. (2.2-lb.) payload rarily blinds enemies but can be carried on a 5-kg. UAV powdoesn’t cause serious injury ered by a 31.5 watt-hr. battery, resultor death. ing in four minutes of flight—plenty Sandia licensed the technology of time to take out a sniper. Putting a sniper to sleep and capto a producer that drew up plans for production but never manufac- turing him is more humane than tured any grenades. A new licensing killing him. But a humane act in agreement is being finalized with a war may ultimately be determined different manufacturer. by legal criteria rather than the nonDenis Levin and Victor Selivanov lethality of a weapon. A Red Cross of Moscow State Technical Univer- lawyer at the conference said that sity attracted interest for their work the use of a chemical payload, no on the vortex ring, a dynamic ring of matter how harmless, could make air pushed through the atmosphere the UAV a chemical weapon in viothat can carry a chemical payload. lation of international law. The line When the vortex ring is fired from between control and lethal force an air cannon it passes through a could prove to be fine indeed. I www.aviationweek.com/dti SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORY PHOTOS DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL OCTOBER 2007 http://www.aviationweek.com/dti
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.