Til Eulenspiegel wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> > Anders Sandberg wrote:
> > >
> > > "Michael S. Lorrey" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > >
> > > > Ha no. Just a miniaturized EMP/ECM device.
> > >
> > > Which will of course zap nice electronics too. Why not instead
> > > use a laser to blind the sensors? Maybe connected to a steering
> > > system scanning for lens antireflex and pumping up the amplitude
> > > when pointing in the right direction. A kind of privacy version
> > > of the eye-popper laser discussed earlier as a non-lethal weapon
> > > (!).
> > Heh... close to twenty years ago, when I worked at Otrona (a
> > portable microcomputer manufacturer) our production building was
> > plagued with flies from a nearby agricultural area. A bunch of us
> > brainstormed a flyzapper that would use microphones to triangulate
> > on a target, with an elliptic dish and a spark gap at the near
> > focus. Track the target until it crosses the range gate, then blow
> > its wings off with the focused SNAP of the spark gap...
> I don't quite understand. If the spark gap lies at the near
> focus, what good is an elliptical dish? The fly must reach the near
> focus for a kill, but then why have microphones? Please explain this
> differently. Off-list is fine.
The sound from the spark is focussed by the elliptical dish. Its
actually a pretty powerful shock wave being focused. You can easily put
out a candle with the sound of your voice from 20 feet away if you focus
it properly (with no electronic amplification).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:44 MDT