Electric Machine Guns, Coilguns and Death Ray Guns of Yesteryear

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,215
Reactions
16,800
Some things the past presents us with are not in the traditional textbooks. One of those things is the 1845 "Siva" Electric Machine gun. The "successful" machine gun history (per the narrative) started in 1862 and goes like this:
  • The first successful machine-gun designs were developed in the mid-19th century. The key characteristic of modern machine guns, their relatively high rate of fire and more importantly mechanical loading, first appeared in the Model 1862 Gatling gun, which was adopted by the United States Navy. These weapons were still powered by hand; however, this changed with Hiram Maxim's idea of harnessing recoil energy to power reloading in his Maxim machine gun. Dr. Gatling also experimented with electric-motor-powered models; this externally powered machine reloading has seen use in modern weapons as well.
  • Machine gun - Wikipedia
  • Check out this list of the machine guns. Sure it is most likely not the most complete one, but... does it matter which list we examine?
This "successful" injection allows for a lot of speculative opinions, but we are not really presented with those, aren't we? Well, let's take a look at some of the "unsuccessful" machine gun designs of the past.

Compare the above description to the one below. Close, but not quite the same, isn't it? Would be nice to know where this difference could be attributed to.

The 19th century is hard to dig though, but there appears to have been at least several machine gun designs using electricity (in some capacity). Here is one of those.

electric_gun_1.jpg

The Electrician, 1883

1854 Electric Rifle
I did not find the actual publication, but a small excerpt from the Family Herald, Volume 12 for 1854 says it all. What did really they fight the Civil War with?
electric_rifle.jpg


Early 20th Century
It would be naive to suggest that there was no additional research and development directed at the use of electricity as it pertains to the 19th century electric machine guns. Meanwhile we move into the 20th century, and what do we see? Yup, more electric machine guns.

And while the principle changes, and these are more commonly known as "coilguns" ... are we aware of their use in WW2, for example? On these ones, wikipedia did a bit better, for we have a few lines. So, if you need some additional info, you will need to look for other sources.

Wikipedia Coilguns:
  • The first operational coilgun was developed and patented by Norwegian scientist Kristian Birkeland in 1904.
  • In 1933, Texan inventor Virgil Rigsby developed a stationary coilgun that was designed to be used like a machine gun. It was powered by a large electrical motor and generator. It appeared in many contemporary science publications, but never piqued the interest of any armed forces.
1904
The scale of Birkeland's research enterprises was such that funding became an overwhelming obstacle. Recognizing that technological invention could bring wealth, he developed an electromagnetic cannon and, with some investors, formed a firearms company. The coil-gun worked, except the high muzzle velocities he predicted (600 m/s) were not produced. The most he could get from his largest machine was 100 m/s, corresponding to a disappointing projectile range of only 1 km. So he renamed the device an aerial torpedo and arranged a demonstration with the express aim of selling the company. At the demonstration, one of the coils shorted and produced a sensational inductive arc complete with noise, flame, and smoke. This was the first failure of any of the launchers that Birkeland had built. It could easily have been repaired and another demonstration organized.

birkeland_gun.jpg

Source
Technically, the above would be a 1901 invention, but the patent US754637A was granted in 1904.

gun_patent_1.jpg
1911
This here is supposed to be a work of fiction. The history of the TASER ECD dates back as far as 1911 during the publication of the 'Tom Swift' adventure stories.

electric_rifle.jpg


1932
rail_gun.jpg


1933
med_electric_machine_gun.jpg


med_electric_machine_gun-1.jpg


Death Ray Guns
As usually, we have this "theoretical" escape route the narrative tries to use. Here is the official position on Death Ray Guns we are presented with:
  • The death ray or death beam was a theoretical particle beam or electromagnetic weapon first theorized around the 1920s and 1930s. Around that time, notable inventors such as Guglielmo Marconi, Nikola Tesla, Harry Grindell Matthews, Edwin R. Scott, Graichen and others claimed to have invented it independently. In 1957, the National Inventors Council was still issuing lists of needed military inventions that included a death ray.
  • While based in fiction, research into energy-based weapons inspired by past speculation has contributed to real-life weapons in use by modern militaries sometimes called a sort of "death ray", such as the United States Navy and its Laser Weapon System (LaWS) deployed in mid-2014. Such armaments are technically known as directed-energy weapons.
In other words, the stuff is desperately needed, but we (or rather them) do not have it. But... is it really so, and how do we verify that those allegedly working examples were false claims? These are primarily 1930s, but where did it they come from?

death_ray_gun.jpg


death_ray 3.jpg



Longoria_death_ray.jpg


death_ray77.jpg


death_ray.jpg


death_ray 2.jpg


slow_death_ray.jpg


nazi_death_ray.jpg


Harry Grindell Matthews. In 1924 his 'Death Ray' was publicly tested in London.
death_ray-11-1.jpg


1925 photo that purports to show a demonstration of the ray on the island of Flat Holm.
1925 death ray.jpg

Source
Ku-Go. Japan’s top-secret weapon inspired by Tesla’s “Death Ray”.

death_ray-22.jpg

Source

Videos
kd_separator.jpg

KD: These are just a few of the examples available on the internet. We are supposed to believe that none of the above stuff was successful, does not exist and is only possible within the limits of some science fiction movies. Meanwhile, California's Paradise was destroyed by a camp fire, right?

Do we really know what weapons TPTB really have in their possession? Do we have the slightest idea?

The part which I'm personally most interested in boils down to the origins of this technology. Where did it come from, and when was it really developed?

Want a Toy?
elecric_toy_gun.jpg


1958 Chicago Commando Machine Gun
Commando Machine Gun Gallery, Chicago Coin, 1958, self contained electrically operated coin operated machine guns, large and comes in banks of three to fifteen guns, shoots steel balls, adjustable from 130 to 525 shots per play, gun is really big, large shooting gallery type device. For three guns it takes 9 feet of counter space, for ten guns over 22 feet, and for 15 guns 33 feet. Also available in a four gun trailer set up for carnivals.

 

Banta

Active member
Messages
44
Reactions
161
Those death ray guns might have been a psyop to see if people would accept the existence of a superweapon (atomic bombs). They also might be real at the same time. Land of confusion.

I mean you get sentences like "details of construction are a closely guarded secret" followed up with acknowledging that only the public knows the outcome of the experiments. I would reckon that half of the advantage of any new weaponry is that your enemy doesn't know that you possess it. The sections that Korben posted read like advertisements/propaganda to me.

Again, doesn't mean they aren't real... Could also be that similar technology has long existed and this helps misdirect. They also kind of sound like just souped up microwave ovens. I almost think I could kill a snake at a distance right now if I ripped open mine.

If I had to guess though, humans aren't as smart as we like to present ourselves (or possibly even as we used to be, see our buildings) and most "evil genius doomsday" weapons are a bluff. The mechanisms for destruction (like the California fires and other seeming DE weapons) may just be natural or dependent on uncontrollable natural phenomenon.

In other words, I greater doubt our ability to make almost godlike technology than our cleverness to deceive others into believing that we did. I am concerned that our greatest asset is the ability to convey stories as reality.
 
Last edited:

in cahoots

Well-known member
Messages
102
Reactions
497
Those death ray guns might have been a psyop to see if people would accept the existence of a superweapon (atomic bombs). They also might be real at the same time. Land of confusion.

I mean you get sentences like "details of construction are a closely guarded secret" followed up with acknowledging that only the public knows the outcome of the experiments. I would reckon that half of the advantage of any new weaponry is that your enemy doesn't know that you possess it. The sections that Korben posted read like advertisements/propaganda to me.

Again, doesn't mean they aren't real... Could also be that similar technology has long existed and this helps misdirect. They also kind of sound like just souped up microwave ovens. I almost think I could kill a snake at a distance right now if I ripped open mine.

If I had to guess though, humans aren't as smart as we like to present ourselves (or possibly even as we used to be, see our buildings) and most "evil genius doomsday" weapons are a bluff. The mechanisms for destruction (like the California fires and other seeming DE weapons) may just be natural or dependent on uncontrollable natural phenomenon.

In other words, I greater doubt our ability to make almost godlike technology than our cleverness to deceive others into believing that we did. I am concerned that our greatest asset is the ability to convey stories as reality.
I appreciate your temperance, Banta. At the heart of SH.org is epistemology - the wacky word for "how we know things". The SH project begins from where our observations are inconsistent with the stories we are told by other fallible people - and then looking and seeing that our entire history and lifestyle is fallible-cum-fallible, fools teaching fools teaching fools by the generation. Human knowledge doesn't appear to be cumulative as we would infer, but persistently destroyed, bastardzied, reoriented, concealed, translated, warped, aggrandized, silenced, etc. To claim to ever know anything outside of direct experience is kind of facetious to me at this point, and even then we have the painfully likely simulation theory to discomfort us.

Add to this modern media/propaganda machine and it gets harder to find the toys in the cereal boxes. Apart from our time-honoured game of broken telephone, we are now fairly acutely aware that we've been blasted with consent-manufacturing papers and articles for the past 100 years or more. We'd be right never to relax the suspicion that we're being advertised to, that our opinions are being shaped.

But even just off of the excellent body of research in this article we have strong reason to suspect existence of a death ray. We see reports from as far back as when it wouldn't be politically useful to spread word about a death ray, and from various places throughout Europe and America. The practical outcomes of death-ray/energy weapon technology are demonstrated in the Hutchison effect and Dr Judith Wood's "where did the towers go?" 9.11 theory. And then there is the inexplicable coral castle built by 1 man using no visible machinery. As you say - the idea of a death ray is not exactly outlandish anymore, we can see videos of dudes doing exactly what you describe by channeling microwave ovens into a projecting disc - so doesn't that make it that much more likely that it exists in some highly sophisticated form within the military? We've already got sonicboom strike-breaking sub-woofers that instantly strike the eardrum's pain threshold, crippling crowds of people at a time.

I mean, how do you tell lies when you have to? I'm more inclined to believe our manufactured narrative is 10% of the whole truth, rather than 200% of it.
 

Banta

Active member
Messages
44
Reactions
161
I appreciate your temperance, Banta. At the heart of SH.org is epistemology - the wacky word for "how we know things". The SH project begins from where our observations are inconsistent with the stories we are told by other fallible people - and then looking and seeing that our entire history and lifestyle is fallible-cum-fallible, fools teaching fools teaching fools by the generation. Human knowledge doesn't appear to be cumulative as we would infer, but persistently destroyed, bastardzied, reoriented, concealed, translated, warped, aggrandized, silenced, etc. To claim to ever know anything outside of direct experience is kind of facetious to me at this point, and even then we have the painfully likely simulation theory to discomfort us.

Add to this modern media/propaganda machine and it gets harder to find the toys in the cereal boxes. Apart from our time-honoured game of broken telephone, we are now fairly acutely aware that we've been blasted with consent-manufacturing papers and articles for the past 100 years or more. We'd be right never to relax the suspicion that we're being advertised to, that our opinions are being shaped.

But even just off of the excellent body of research in this article we have strong reason to suspect existence of a death ray. We see reports from as far back as when it wouldn't be politically useful to spread word about a death ray, and from various places throughout Europe and America. The practical outcomes of death-ray/energy weapon technology are demonstrated in the Hutchison effect and Dr Judith Wood's "where did the towers go?" 9.11 theory. And then there is the inexplicable coral castle built by 1 man using no visible machinery. As you say - the idea of a death ray is not exactly outlandish anymore, we can see videos of dudes doing exactly what you describe by channeling microwave ovens into a projecting disc - so doesn't that make it that much more likely that it exists in some highly sophisticated form within the military? We've already got sonicboom strike-breaking sub-woofers that instantly strike the eardrum's pain threshold, crippling crowds of people at a time.

I mean, how do you tell lies when you have to? I'm more inclined to believe our manufactured narrative is 10% of the whole truth, rather than 200% of it.
I knew someone was gonna bring up 9/11! I do not know what to make of Dr. Judy Wood... Or 9/11 in general. I was a bit put off by claims of exotic technology (holograms and the like) for years, as I thought it undermined the overall skeptic case, but Wood's work was fairly convincing. But that is the real problem... Some people searching for truth in these matters can see planes flying into the towers and think it's proof there weren't even any planes and others can totally think that those were definitely real planes, and neither person believes the official story. And that event happened within most people's lifetime!

It is a difficult balancing act because fear is what drives most of this. Overstating one's capabilities helps breed compliance and the psychological aspect of this is as powerful as any weaponry. I disagree that there would have ever been a time where stating that in the media wouldn't have been politically useful to some faction of power towards another. Especially in the US 20s and 30s!

It's just we live in a world where Elon Musk promises underground Hyperloop and we end up with a really nice paved road for electric cars. And say what you will about Musk, his grandstanding is the rule, not the exception.

That said, ask me tomorrow... Haha.

Edit: Thinking about this more, it seems obvious that military organizations have attempted to weaponize microwaves, but the question to me is whether it's been developed enough to be a more efficient weapon than a conventional military artillery. Sure you could fry someone's brains but at what distance, how many people at the same time, etc... Is it to the level where it exceeds bombs? Or is it more of a curiosity, even still? Is it something that's better as a sniper's tool for various intelligence targets?
 
Last edited:

Red Bird

Well-known member
Messages
471
Reactions
1,115
I just saw this thread- haven’t read all yet. Man. Don’t pictures of some of those weapons look like fasces? Even a pic of units that look like the natural insect hives that conduct EM’s.
In my mind it’s getting pretty conclusive that waves are what they’ve been working on and hiding. Even now most don’t know the extent they are being used now, and for what. Many, many things we talk about here lead back to this.
It would be interesting to trace these inventors back and see what happened to them.
 
OP
KorbenDallas

KorbenDallas

Negotiator
Messages
4,215
Reactions
16,800
I would like to know who this Beningfield was, and what happened to his machine gun. Funny, but apparently we have no clue how this weapon worked.
  • Beningfield’s stubbornness ultimately meant that, despite impressing every official who saw the Siva in action, the device was destined to failure. To this day it is not exactly known how the Siva operated, but gunsmith and firearms expert William Greener, who was generally dismissive of the weapon, wrote in 1846 that the Siva probably generated propulsive gases through the decomposition of water via galvanic batteries.
  • The Siva was demonstrated by Beningfield before the Ordnance Committee in 1845, rapidly firing lead balls down a 35-yard range. All those who saw it were amazed and puzzled by the weapon, including Arthur Wellesley, the Duke of Wellington. After a wholly successful demonstration, the Ordnance Committee officials approached Beningfield about the workings of his weapon, but he was reluctant to co-operate with them, refusing to allow anyone to inspect the weapon. He never told anyone how it worked, other than saying that it used electricity. He never even patented the design, because this would require him to describe the workings of the weapon in detail.
  • Source
kd_separator.jpg


1866 Electric Rifle
electric_rifle_1.jpg

Source
The rifle was chambered for special cartridges that had negative and positive connections and were ignited by an electrical spark, generated by a coiled potash battery stored in the butt.

Le_Baron_&_Delmas_rifle.jpg

Source +1

The Le Baron & Delmas rifle was patented in 1866. It was built as a physical prototype and demonstrated in tests but failed to receive any funding, and thus languished as a concept.

The rifle was chambered for specially-designed magnetic cartridges. Housed in the weapon's stock was a potassium-ion battery connected to an induction coil. The coil led to the chamber and upon pulling the trigger, the battery would generate an electrical charge which would travel up the coil and ignite the chambered bullet. The system was innovative but did not seem to offer any direct advantage over a conventional hammer or striker, and was decidedly more expensive and technically complex to produce.

 

Red Bird

Well-known member
Messages
471
Reactions
1,115
Since you showed ‘toy’ guns I will report that when I searched Siva gun benninfield it seems what comes up is a what gamers call a pulse or rail gun for a certain game.
SIVA
SIVA.jpg
SIVA is a form of self-replicating nanotechnology developed by Clovis Bray during the Golden Age. Originally designed to assist in the construction of extrasolar colonies, it was used by the Warmind Rasputin as a weapon against the Iron Lords, and later by the Splicers of the Fallen House of Devils.

http://www.angelfire.com/fl2/quantum/images/Railgun.doc
Rail Guns and Electromagnetic Launchers - December 2017 - Silicon Chip Online

————————————————

I know the emphasis here is history but there is growing proof these are widely used now, in fact your neighbor could be shooting you and you wouldn’t know (as reported by many, but not believed because people don’t think these weapons exist). How long, on whom, etc. have these been used? There are reports of lifelong experimentation on individuals and their families.
Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) - Global Market Outlook (2017-2023). Although you can make them yourself..

According to Stratistics MRC, the Global Directed Energy Weapons (DEW) market is expected to grow from $8.12 billion in 2016 to reach $41.97 billion by 2023 with a CAGR of 26.4%. Rising demand for non-lethal deterrents and growing demand for the use of naval weapons in naval forces across the world are some of the major factors favoring the market growth. On the other hand huge development costs, strict industry regulations and lack of testing facilities are restricting the market growth.

Based on product type, lethal weapons segment has observed highest growth rate as these weapons are commonly used by police, military and defence. By high energy laser systems, fiber laser segment leads the market globally and the growth of this segment is attributed to the rising demand for laser technologies and microwave-based weapons. Asia Pacific is expected to witness huge growth rate and the growth of this region is owed to the use of directed energy weapons
.

https://stop007crimes.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/patent-list.pdf

Philadelphians debate whether parks and rec centers should use anti-personnel weapons that indiscriminately target children
Is the real question whether it’s good to target children or that they used quietly anywhere. See what they do?

In Philadelphia, 30 city parks and rec facilities have deployed these anti-personnel weapons under the rubric of deterring "loitering" and "vandalism" (20 other US cities have also deployed these weapons, according to Vancouver-based manufacturer Moving Sound Technologies).

The use of these weapons has sparked a public debate, with Philadelphia City Council member Helen Gym decrying the use of "sonic weapons" in an city that is "trying to address gun violence and safe spaces for young people." Gym decries "ideas that are funded by taxpayer dollars to turn young people away from the very places that were created for them."

Part of the debate was sparked by older people whose high-range hearing is still intact; one 27-year-old woman says that she'd had a constant headache since a nearby park installed the weapons.
 
Last edited:

Top