This is all fine and great until someone sits at the end of an Airport runway and hits a passenger jet taking off with one of these things. The range is 600 feet. (200 meters)
Not too good of an idea to have one in the hands of every police officer in the nation now, is it?
@GeoGuy True, worse case scenario: 1. Terrorist steals police car equipped with this thing. 2. Takes it to airport in a populated area and shoots it at plane.
Even more realistic. Some 16 year old kid buys one on Ebay or a Chinese website (where they will be made no doubt) and rides his bike past the airport, thinks its cool to see what would happen if..... Not thinking at all.
Kids do this stuff all the time. Shoot guns into the air to see if they can hear them land or throw bottles into a crowd just not thinking.
@Wwhat Oh you're right, because nothing is ever reduced in size. Like the computer, cell phones, width of LCD screens, shall I go on or is that enough sarcasm for you?
@flanders Why would they bother when they can get a few AKs and do a Mumbai on the airport? And why a harder target like that when they can go to a shopping mall? A bodycount is a bodycount. I think alot of people are overthinking and overcomplicating terrorism.
@formetopoopon A lot of people have a fear of a fear of flying. What will strike more fear into people while flying? Being blown up is what will do that. The near tragic Christmas bombing attempt clearly showed the type of fear that such attempts strike. A plane blowing up(or being zapped, disabled) out of the sky, killing everyone on board, then the flaming wreckage slamming into a populated are killing hundreds more certainly strikes more fear than someone with an AK running into a mall and gunning down 20-30 people.
@GeoGuy Thats more like 800' and even so, things are a bit more complicated than you think.
@flanders There'll no doubt be some sort of security/ authentication means for usage of this thing. Any designer, researcher, manufacturer or gov't that implements use of these w/o certain checks or safety measures should be 'dealt with' for gross incompetence.
"...then the flaming wreckage slamming into a populated are killing hundreds more..."
When has that ever happened? Not even in the movies! Dont you mean like 5 or 10 more?
@F C No this has not happened only in the movies. Although 9/11 was terrorists taking over a plane and guiding them into a building, it clearly showed what would happen if a plane(s) slammed into a building. That was more than 5 or 10 more tragic losses. Then we have the "Miracle in the Hudson" incident. Yes that was a bird strike. Thanks to the Heroic acts of Sully he was able to keep a fueled up jet from slamming into a highly populated area in the Bronx. Imagine if one of these devices disabled a jet taking off from the same airport(Laguardia), the plane could possibly crash into a highly populated area of Queens or the Bronx. And unlike Sully's plane which had backup power for instrumentation and controls, an EMP would take those essentials away from the pilot leaving him with no control to guide it into a waterway or other safe corridor. And as far as security measures and gross incompetence, Christmas day bombing attempt, White House party crashers, and the Ft. Hood shooting. And if you want to say none of those events involved stealing a large weapon, well then google Shawn Timothy Nelson. He stole an M60 Patton Tank and rampaged through the the city of San Diego. All I'm saying is I see more cons than pros with inventions such as these.
@flanders Yeah and the pocket powerplants that powers our cities. The reason I think it won't be miniaturized is because the laws of physics, to have a powerful pulse you need to insert the power in the first place, and to go over distance and reach into the car you are also faced with the laws of physics. Not that it won't be smaller than now maybe, but there is a limit.
@Wwhat I respect that, and I never said it would be pocket sized. In fact if you carefully read my last comment I did compare it to a large tank that was stolen.
The new FiOS HD DVR, arguably the biggest update since Verizon released a DVR, thanks to its external storage support, enhanced multi-room functionality and slick new 16x9 HD user interface.
The most commented posts on Engadget over the past 24 hours.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
This is all fine and great until someone sits at the end of an Airport runway and hits a passenger jet taking off with one of these things. The range is 600 feet. (200 meters)
Not too good of an idea to have one in the hands of every police officer in the nation now, is it?
@GeoGuy
True, worse case scenario:
1. Terrorist steals police car equipped with this thing.
2. Takes it to airport in a populated area and shoots it at plane.
@flanders
Even more realistic. Some 16 year old kid buys one on Ebay or a Chinese website (where they will be made no doubt) and rides his bike past the airport, thinks its cool to see what would happen if..... Not thinking at all.
Kids do this stuff all the time. Shoot guns into the air to see if they can hear them land or throw bottles into a crowd just not thinking.
This thing will always need a huge powerbuffering setup and powering device, and will cost a ton, it won't be in standard police cars ever.
@Wwhat
Oh you're right, because nothing is ever reduced in size. Like the computer, cell phones, width of LCD screens, shall I go on or is that enough sarcasm for you?
@flanders Or surface-to-air missiles...
@flanders Why would they bother when they can get a few AKs and do a Mumbai on the airport? And why a harder target like that when they can go to a shopping mall? A bodycount is a bodycount. I think alot of people are overthinking and overcomplicating terrorism.
@formetopoopon
A lot of people have a fear of a fear of flying. What will strike more fear into people while flying? Being blown up is what will do that. The near tragic Christmas bombing attempt clearly showed the type of fear that such attempts strike. A plane blowing up(or being zapped, disabled) out of the sky, killing everyone on board, then the flaming wreckage slamming into a populated are killing hundreds more certainly strikes more fear than someone with an AK running into a mall and gunning down 20-30 people.
@GeoGuy
Thats more like 800' and even so, things are a bit more complicated than you think.
@flanders
There'll no doubt be some sort of security/ authentication means for usage of this thing. Any designer, researcher, manufacturer or gov't that implements use of these w/o certain checks or safety measures should be 'dealt with' for gross incompetence.
"...then the flaming wreckage slamming into a populated are killing hundreds more..."
When has that ever happened? Not even in the movies! Dont you mean like 5 or 10 more?
@F C
No this has not happened only in the movies. Although 9/11 was terrorists taking over a plane and guiding them into a building, it clearly showed what would happen if a plane(s) slammed into a building. That was more than 5 or 10 more tragic losses.
Then we have the "Miracle in the Hudson" incident. Yes that was a bird strike. Thanks to the Heroic acts of Sully he was able to keep a fueled up jet from slamming into a highly populated area in the Bronx. Imagine if one of these devices disabled a jet taking off from the same airport(Laguardia), the plane could possibly crash into a highly populated area of Queens or the Bronx. And unlike Sully's plane which had backup power for instrumentation and controls, an EMP would take those essentials away from the pilot leaving him with no control to guide it into a waterway or other safe corridor.
And as far as security measures and gross incompetence, Christmas day bombing attempt, White House party crashers, and the Ft. Hood shooting.
And if you want to say none of those events involved stealing a large weapon, well then google Shawn Timothy Nelson. He stole an M60 Patton Tank and rampaged through the the city of San Diego.
All I'm saying is I see more cons than pros with inventions such as these.
@flanders
Yeah and the pocket powerplants that powers our cities.
The reason I think it won't be miniaturized is because the laws of physics, to have a powerful pulse you need to insert the power in the first place, and to go over distance and reach into the car you are also faced with the laws of physics.
Not that it won't be smaller than now maybe, but there is a limit.
@Wwhat
I respect that, and I never said it would be pocket sized. In fact if you carefully read my last comment I did compare it to a large tank that was stolen.