akuma_river (akuma_river) wrote in ontd_political,
akuma_river
akuma_river
ontd_political

Whaling Wars may change the way protests/wars are conducted

Whaling Protesters Pioneer Non-lethal Warfare
•By David Hambling
•January 15, 2010 |
•4:18 pm |
•Categories: Less-lethal

Photobucket

An altruistic millionaire spends a fortune on high-tech vehicles and an arsenal of non-lethal weaponry — including sonic blasters and photonic disruptors — for a vigilante battle against similarly-armed villains. Nope, it’s not a comic book plot. This is real life, according to a story in the New Yorker about the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society’s recent tussle with some Japanese whalers. And it raises interesting questions about the future of non-lethal devices as tools of protest.

In an article called “Streetfight on the High Seas,” the magazine interviews Sea Shepherd founder Paul Watson. He describes how the group went into action in a converted whaling ship and a 78-foot wave-piercing trimaran, capable of 45 knots. This boat is often described as looking like something out of a Batman movie; a million dollars of the purchase price was supplied by Hollywood lighting magnate Ady Gil, and the boat was named after him.

The fight started when a Japanese ship, the Shonan Maru 2, attacked the Shepherd vessel MV Steve Irwin with a water cannon and a Long Range Acoustic Device ’sonic blaster.’ The Sea Shepherd folks have their own LRAD; they haven’t used yet. (This leads to the question of what happens when two LRAD-armed opponents get into a standoff – a battle of wills, determined by who has the best hearing protection.)

The fight ended when the Shonan Maru 2 apparently rammed the Ady Gil, shearing off ten feet so the boat had to be abandoned. Animal Planet cameraman Simeon Houtmanm who was embedded with Sea Shepherd, suffered three broken ribs in the incident.

This is not the end of it. Watson revealed that the group are also equipped with “photonic disrupters” which are actually laser dazzlers. These have also been used by the U.S. military, and are an effective way of temporarily blinding the target (so long as they are not misused). These are in addition to the “non-toxic, biodegradable, organic stink bombs” they have used previously.

Stink bombs – or malordorants, as the military prefer to call them - might be a handy weapon against the whalers. The Israeli Navy have used a “skunk spray” against Palestinian fishing boats. Contamination with the bad smell caused some fishermen to abandon their catch; applying a similar smell to whales might have the same effect.

Previous reports say the group has also used line-carrying rockets against whaling ships. Presumably these are intended to foul the propellers, in much the same way as a number of recent anti-pirate gadgets like the Running Gear Entanglement System — also known as the “James Bond Harpoon.”

Watson also promises “a few other tricks we have not used yet.”

The Institute of Cetacean Research — the innocuous official name of the Japanese whaling organization — claim that they found a number of arrows floating by the wreck of the Ady Gil; there’s a picture in the Underwater Times here. The Japanese say that these are a “lethal force weapon”. However, given the group’s fondness for nonlethals it seems unlikely that they were intended for shooting people (any suggestions?).

The Sea Shepherd arsenal of acoustic, laser, malodorant and line-carrying devices is an impressive one. They seem to be in the process of developing new tactics and techniques for stopping whalers without shooting anyone or threatening lethal force. This is an unexpected new angle on non-lethals; historically they have been used against protesters, but now it seems the protesters are finding their own uses for them.

Photo: Sea Shepherd Conservation Society




In conjuction with that article is this one:


A Sonic Blaster So Loud, It Could Be Deadly

•By David Hambling
•January 18, 2010 |
•9:32 am |
•Categories: Less-lethal

Photobucket

All kinds of of devices have been dubbed “sonic blasters” — from the Long Range Acoustic Device super loudhailer to the piercing Banshee to the Inferno (”most unbearable, gut-wrenching noise I’ve ever heard in my life” according to Danger Room’s own Sharon Weinberger). But a new device, developed in Israel, merits the “sonic blaster” label more than most: the Thunder Generator really is a blaster, producing a series of ear-splitting explosions. Some are so loud, they could be deadly.

Israeli firm PDT Agro developed the Thunder Generator, based on a gadget to scare away birds. The design is very simple: gas from a cylinder of domestic liquid petroleum (LPG) is mixed with air and then detonated, producing a series of high-intensity blasts. Patented “pulse detonation” technology ensures high-decibel blasts. According to Defense News, the Israeli Ministry of Defense has now licensed a firm called ArmyTec to market the Thunder Generator for military and security applications.

The generator can produce up to a hundred blasts a minute, with a 12-kilogram cylinder of gas running to around five thousand blasts. ArmyTec say it can continue for “hours of continous operation,” and suggest that a number of generators could be networked together to cover a wide area. Various configurations are possible, including a curved barrel for firing around corners.

Understandably, the device is designed to be used remotely. It has an effective range of up to fifty meters, and the makers say that it is extremely loud but will not do any lasting damage at this range. However, they warn that within ten meters the Thunder Generator could cause permanent damage or even death (!).

Explosive acoustic weapons are not in themselves a new concept. Explosives are one of the few ways of producing a sound loud enough to have a real effect. The Germans experimented with this in World War II without much success. Back in the 1990’s Primex Physics International carried out development work on a crowd-control ”acoustic blaster” which combined the output for four separate explosive-driven sources. The device was so large it had to be mounted on a truck, and while the company thought it might one day work out to a hundred meters this was not proven.

The tough part has always been getting the noise to blare in one direction. It is difficult to have an arrangement that can impact the target without deafening the operator. Prolonged exposure is even worse than sort blasts. Electronic devices like LRAD are fairly directional, but are by no means quiet for the user. The Thunder Generator gets around this by allowing the operator be be at a safe distance.

Perhaps it might be more accurate to see the Thunder Generator as a sort of repeating stun grenade; the fuel-air blast it produces is not dissimilar to the fuel-air explosion produced by the new Improved Flash Bang Grenade developed at Sandia National Laboratory. And in at least one case a large number of blast grenades were used for their sonic deterrent effect.

During the Vietnam War, the U.S. operated a number of floating river bases. There was a constant danger of attack from Vietcong swimmers, so they were kept at bay by explosive means, as this memorial site recalls:

“Seafloat was protected from swimmer zapper attacks by throwing concussion grenades into the water from 4 watch stations so that one grenade exploded underneath the ammo pontoons as often as every 30 seconds 24 hours a day. “

This approach seems to have been effective against swimmers, but it also resulted in cracks in the pontoons, which had to be pumped out daily.

The agricultural predecessor of the Thunder Generator has been used in Israel for nearly two years without accident. But there is clearly a risk of leaving an unattended system driven by a gas cannister. And of course there are countermeasures: as a British science program showed last year, with sufficient sound insulation even the LRAD can be damped to a tolderable level.

As with all non-lethals, what happens in practice is likely to be less important than the way it is used. The Thunder Generator could be a good way of keeping stone-throwing youths out of a sensitive area without using excessive force. Or it might be condemned as sonic harassment which exposes whole neighborhoods to incessant noise.

Photo: ArmyTec
Tags: military, science
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Comments allowed for members only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 7 comments