News Blog

(Credit: Metal Storm)

After years of development, a new class of weapon that uses computer-controlled electronic ignition instead of primers to fire projectiles may be finally taking its much coveted place in the U.S. military inventory.

Brisbane, Australia-based Metal Storm has delivered a four-barrel weapon to the Naval Surface Warfare Center for testing that uses a small electrical current instead a conventional firing pin to deliver stacked rounds at an astounding rate.

How astounding? Try 1 million rounds per minute. That's the rate, by the way, not the volume; still, there's no way you want to be anywhere near the wrong end of one of these puppies.

One version, the Redback, features a remotely operated 40mm that can automatically track targets by slewing around at almost 2 complete revolutions per second, according to the company. "The employment of Metal Storm's stacked round technology for a U.S. military weapon system is a huge step for us," Metal Storm CEO Lee Finniear said in the company's press release.

Electronically fired weapons and the general concept have been around for awhile--Austrian company Voere offers an electric, bolt-action hunting rifle--but nothing has approached Metal Storm (PDF). Metal Storm weapons use multiple, "lightweight, economical barrels" mounted in pods on a variety of platforms that can fire a wide selection of munitions.

The projectiles are stacked in-line in the barrel--nose to tail--so there are no magazines, no shell casings, and no mechanical components. This makes them ideal for unattended area denial or picket duty. They are also easily adapted to light vehicles and robot platforms. In fact, the company just signed an MOU with iRobot Government & Industrial Robots to combine its robot platforms with Metal Storm's scalable systems.

"Together with Metal Storm, we aim to develop a superior next-generation weapons platform that ensures absolute safety and always places a human in the decision loop," iRobot's Joe Dyer promised in announcing the agreement. "When you are talking about weaponizing robots, there is no margin for error."

Especially at a million rounds per minute.

The Talon, locked and loaded.

(Credit: Qinetiq)

Does the right to bear arms also apply to robots?

That's no longer a question for idle speculation. And the answer appears to be a quiet but distinct yes.

These aren't autonomous robots, of course (so begone, you Terminator nightmares, at least for now). They're standard-issue remote-controlled machines like Foster-Miller's low-to-the-ground Talon, which has been put to good use in dangerous places for less-aggressive duties such as finding and neutralizing roadside bombs. That means a human operator well versed in the rules of engagement would make the actual decision on whether to shoot.

But their use as a weapons platform is only just beginning, so we've yet to see how well they perform and under what circumstances, and it could soon enough become more widespread. For instance, Foster-Miller parent Qinetiq this week is showing off a weaponized Talon at the DSEi (Defence Systems and Equipment International Exhibition) event in London. Military units can equip the so-called SWORDS (Special Weapons Observation Reconnaissance Direct-action System) variant with an M240 or M249 machine gun, a Barrett .50-caliber rifle, a 40mm grenade launcher or an M202 antitank rocket system, Qinetiq says.

A trio of M249-equipped Talons is already on deployment with the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry Division in Iraq. (That compares with hundreds of bomb-disposal Talons.) In-country since April, they were formally approved for combat use in June, according to National Defense, which first reported on the use last month. Some 80 more could eventually be on the way, if funding comes through, the magazine reported.

The Talon is driven by joystick from a briefcase-size control unit.

(Credit: Sgt. Lorie Jewell/U.S. Army)

Qinetiq says the weaponized systems are being evaluated by "other nations" as well.

The Defense Department had hoped to have the gun-toting Talons in Iraq a couple years ago, according to an Army News Service story from December 2004. That account also said that in testing, the system could hit a bull's-eye from 2,000 meters, though it was understandably less accurate when on the move. At that time, each unit had cost about $230,000 to produce, and estimates were that the figure would drop 20 percent to 30 percent when the robots went into production.

Not long before that article appeared, Time magazine had designated the weaponized device as one of the "coolest inventions" of 2004.

The 200-pound robot can move at up to 5.5 miles per hour, and its battery has a 4-hour run time.

In its quest to develop laser weapons, the Pentagon is aiming both high and low.

The sky-high plans for the Airborne Laser call for a squadron of 747s that would train chemically generated laser beams on ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) to knock out those missiles long before they become a threat to targets in the United States. A "lethality" test of that system is scheduled for 2009, though if past delays are any indication of future performance...

A solid-state laser does its thing under the watchful eye of a Northrop Grumman engineer. At its new Directed Energy Production Facility in Redondo Beach, Calif., the defense contractor aims to build a 100-kW device that can be used on the battlefield.

(Credit: Northrop Grumman)

For a more down-to-earth system, look no further than a truck-mounted solid-state laser now in the early stages of development. Rather than intercontinental missiles, this system would protect ground troops from smaller projectiles including rockets, artillery rounds and mortar shells. Advantages that solid-state lasers have over their COIL (chemical oxygen iodine laser) counterparts include smaller size and lighter weight--there's a reason that the Airborne Laser requires a 747--and the avoidance of big doses of toxic materials. COIL systems pack a bigger punch, however.

The U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command has enlisted two defense sector heavyweights to vie with each other to produce the ruggedized beam control system, a key component of what will become the High Energy Laser Technology Demonstrator (HEL TD). Northrop Grumman this week said it received an $8 million, one-year contract to do that work, followed in about a month by Boeing's receipt of a $7 million deal to do the same. For both contractors, options could extend the programs to about $50 million.

The Space and Missile Defense Command is the lead agency for the Army's high-energy solid-state laser program, the next phase of which is to boost the power capability from 25 kW to 100 kW. (According to a report from the BBC earlier this year, a solid-state laser in a lab set a record by reaching 67 kW.)

But the laser engine itself is just one factor in a very challenging equation; what Boeing and Northrop Grumman will have to wrestle with is getting it to work when mounted on one of the Army's Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Trucks, or HEMTTs.

Meanwhile, elsewhere on the truck-mounted directed-energy beat, the Associated Press on Wednesday ran an in-depth story on the Active Denial System, which uses millimeter waves to blast human targets with a scorching--but nonlethal--sensation of heat. For months, the AP reports, military leaders have asked for the ADS, which is still in the prototype stage, to be deployed to Iraq to help quell civil disturbances, but the Pentagon, worried that the system could be seen as inhumane, has repeatedly said no.

If the Defense Department continues to stall for a more favorable moment, that may give Raytheon the opportunity to pitch its similar "Silent Guardian" system (it has one ready to go), the AP says.

Politics aside, directed-energy weapons still are in their infancy. As Thomas Killion, chief scientist of the Army, told News.com last month, "It's still a very hard technical problem. We are working hard to make this a reality--it's going to take some time."

(Credit: Taser International)

This could be almost as much fun as a blowgun and curare-laden darts. Except, of course, that the kinder, gentler weaponry from Taser International is intended to have nonlethal results.

Up to now, Taser stun guns have been short-range gadgets that deliver their jolt of electricity through wires linking the gun and the projectile. (Think Ben Stiller and Dustin Hoffman getting zapped in Meet the Fockers.) On Monday, the company plans to introduce its first-ever wireless device in Chicago at the Taser Tactical Conference for members of law enforcement and military organizations,

Taser's new XREP packs its neuromuscular punch in a self-contained half-ounce projectile, the company says. Another convenient feature is that the XREP can be fired from a standard 12-gauge shotgun.

Taser plans to start a field test of the XREP in the fall. After six to 12 months of testing, it's expected to get a full production release sometime in 2008. The company is being stingy about sharing details of the wireless zapper in the days before Monday's unveiling, but more than a year ago, the word was that a forthcoming Taser shotgun projectile might work at ranges approaching 100 feet.

By comparison, the consumer-oriented Taser C2 has a range of just 15 feet. Plus, those annoying wires.

While you're waiting for more information, you might pass the time by keeping track of how nonlethal Tasers weapons are. The company makes it easy, with conveniently labeled and enumerated press releases like this one from June 22: "51st Product Liability Lawsuit Dismissed Against TASER."

Remember the scene in Independence Day where the alien invaders blow up the White House with some sort of interstellar death ray? We Earthlings are still a long, long way from that sort of weaponry--just how far will depend, as so many things do, on budget battles in Washington.

The Airborne Laser aircraft at Andrews Air Force base on June 20, 2007.

(Credit: Air Force photo by Bobby Jones)

The Pentagon's premier "directed energy" weapons system is a missile-zapping laser that could someday soon be tooling around in a modified 747, if all goes right for a program valued at $3.8 billion. This week, the Airborne Laser aircraft paid a visit to Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland--well known, of course, as a commuter airport of sorts for the president--as the destination of what the Pentagon says was the plane's first-ever cross-country flight.

Washington area residents need not worry about a misfire. The plane isn't yet equipped with the "megawatt-class chemical oxygen iodine laser beam" weapons system; that work is slated for sometime later this year. The Pentagon says the chemical laser has had 70 successful firings (on the ground, that is) over the past three years, and it is preparing for what it hopes will be the first takedown of a ballistic missile target in mid-2009. Eventually, the battle-ready chemical load would be sufficient to destroy an unspecified "many" missiles.

"We are going to put that big laser in the back...and then we're ready to shoot a missile down," Air Force Col. John Daniels, program director, said in a statement. "The biggest challenge we have right now is integration. The optics system is working. The battle management system works well. We even tracked an (intercontinental ballistic missile) with the sensors on the airplane."

Daniels continued: "When you put those big pieces together, and you get the software talking to each other and the systems, that's not trivial. It's really an integration challenge."

The political challenge, meanwhile, is to keep the funding alive. Reuters reported Thursday that preliminary votes in Congress have slashed between $200 million and $250 million from the program's $549 million portion of the proposed defense budget for fiscal 2008. Cuts on that level, Reuters said, would set the program back three years.

Daniels told reporters that the current level of budget cuts would delay the shootdown attempt by at least two years, according to Reuters.

Whatever happens in Congress, it's a long road ahead for the Airborne Laser as a truly battle-ready system. From this one plane so far, the Air Force aims to build a "production representative" model. The eventual goal is for the Air Force to have seven laser-equipped aircraft, all based in the U.S., that would cost about $1.5 billion apiece.

From Andrews Air Force Base, the Airborne Laser prototype plane was set to fly back to Edwards Air Force Base, Calif., where flight tests are set to wrap up this summer. The program is based at Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico and is managed by the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.

There's no easy way to clear a path through a minefield. Options range from tracked vehicles pummeling the ground with whirling flails to individual soldiers gingerly poking the ground and then defusing mines one by one. The Defense Department, cognizant of the need for both speed and safety in beach landings and other operations, is looking at another alternative--masses of small darts raining down on suspect terrain.

The April edition of Popular Science offers a quick look at that laboratory project, which falls under the auspices of the Office of Naval Research. (The ONR isn't just about ships and submarines--its projects range from Humvee replacements to the biomimetic robolobster.) In this scheme, a precision-guided bomb would release 6,500 darts that would cover a 60-foot circle and penetrate two feet of sand or seven feet of water, the magazine reports. The seven-inch Venom darts would either detonate the land mines through impact or, with their coating of a compound called DETA, cause mines to essentially overheat and self-destruct.

(An undated document from the ONR project leader, Brian Almquist, offers more insights on the effort.)

The system won't be ready anytime soon, however. Backers say the military probably wouldn't deploy the system until 2015, pending further R&D and the inevitable bureaucratic back and forth.

And even then, don't count on the dart system helping out with humanitarian, postconflict demining efforts, where low-tech approaches are still the order of the day. It's bound to be far too expensive.