Sunday, June 26, 2022
Google search engine
HomeTechnologyWhat’s an LRAD? Explaining the ‘Sonic Weapons’ Police use for Crowd Control...

What’s an LRAD? Explaining the ‘Sonic Weapons’ Police use for Crowd Control and Communication


We are 100% independently owned, free from corporate ownership and control. Help support a free press by donating to us.

At vaccine mandate protests in Canberra last week, police used powerful loud-hailing devices called Long-Range Acoustic Devices (LRADs) to address protesters.

While some protesters claimed they were injured by the “sonic weapon”, those reports are inconsistent with what an LRAD can really do.

However, the claims highlight the importance of understanding new policing and crowd-control technologies such as LRADs, and how they are used.

What’s an LRAD?

The LRAD is device that can put out a highly directional “beam” of incredibly loud sound, up to 160 decibels (dB).

To understand how loud 160dB is, it’s important to understand that volume, or “sound pressure level” (SPL), is not a linear measure: an increase of 10dB actually corresponds to a tenfold increase in SPL. A 20dB increase would be a 100-fold increase in SPL.

As a rough reference, standing directly behind a jet engine as it takes off is between 130-140dB, and a nearby gunshot rates at approximately 150db. Anything over 140dB will cause pain for most people, but even sounds over 120dB can cause permanent hearing damage from even short periods of exposure.

The history of the LRAD

The origin of the LRAD can be traced to an event in October 2000, when the USS Cole, an American guided missile destroyer, was bombed by a small boat loaded with explosives in a terrorist attack.

As the small vessel approached, naval personnel on board the USS Cole were unable to successfully hail it. By the time they were confident their messages could be heard, it was too late.

This incident resulted in numerous changes in naval policy, and it also led to the creation of the LRAD. Since that time, the technology has proliferated, aided by a dedicated effort from its creators to make the item a staple device for communication and increasingly for crowd control in military and civil settings.

The LRAD’s siren is one of its main deterrents. It is specially designed to be weighted to transmit sound loaded in the frequency range where human hearing is most sensitive, roughly 2,000–4,000 Hertz. This design simultaneously ensures maximum discomfort for the target subject and maximum efficiency of the device itself.

What makes the power of the LRAD significant is its capacity to cause long-term physiological damage to the body. In September 2009 a US woman named Karen Piper suffered permanent hearing damage when she was accidentally caught within an extended period of loud emissions from an LRAD operator.

This resulted in a successful lawsuit against the City of Pittsburgh that was significant and historic as it recognised that sound can be weaponised, and cause lasting bodily harm.

LRADs in Australia

Until very recently, the use of the LRAD in public settings in Australia has been largely nonexistent. Most use by police forces in Australia has been limited to disaster communication and for communication during events such as hostage situations.

In 2020, however, this pattern of usage began to shift. In June 2020, during the Black Lives Matters protests in New South Wales, police deployed the LRAD, in a move that significantly shifted the way the technology could be used in Australia.

Most recently, in response to the protesters gathered in Canberra and assembled on Parliament House’s lawn earlier this month, the LRAD was again deployed. In this case, it was used as a “loud hailer” for voice messages to be passed to those assembled for the vaccine mandate protests. It’s unclear exactly how loud the messages were, but there’s no evidence the devices were used in “siren mode”.

After its use, there were a series of posts and reports on various outlets regarding purported injuries from the use of the device. These speculative injuries are in no way consistent with how the device operates, or how it is reported to have been used.

There is no question that if used to its full potential, the LRAD can cause significant damage to auditory nerves. However, unlike what the protesters reported, beyond the auditory system, the device does not harm the body.

Invisible weapons

Many reports seem to conflate the LRAD, sometimes called a “sound cannon”, with other devices for crowd control such as the Active Denial System. Rather than sound, this uses millimetre-wave radiation to cause the nerve receptors in the upper layer of skin to feel an incredible heat via dielectric heating.

A quick scan of coverage and social media following the use of LRAD this past week reveals a lot of anxiety about its use in public settings. There is also plenty of misinformation and disinformation circulating about how it operates and what the LRAD technology is actually capable of doing.

More sound and energy-based control devices are on their way – one recent invention is the “speech jamming” Acoustic Hailing And Disruption (AHAD) device. It’s important to recognise the actual implications of these technologies, and to talk about how, when and where they are to be used.

Lawrence English, Adjunct Research Fellow, Griffith University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisment -
Google search engine

Most Popular

Recent Comments

Ivan M. Paton on Approval Of Remdesivir
Beth on Free and Fair?
Novus Ordo Seclorum on Victorian Change to Mandates
Novus Ordo Seclorum on Health care in crisis
Novus Ordo Seclorum on Health care in crisis
Burnthehousedown on Postal vote outrage
Shanthini Balasuriyar on Queensland CHO – a law unto himself
Billie Hutton on Convoy to Canberra Two
Lynn a freedom warrior on Convoy to Canberra Two
Elizabeth on Ruble on the rise
Yvonne Ford on Pfizer drug recall
Gene Trevor Wyngaard on NZ Scrap vaccine mandates
Frances Mahy on Russia Sanctions The U.S.A
Peter Coxhead on My Story, So Far
Theodora Zajaz on Novak Out Of U.S. Open.
Leonie Young on Probuild Buy-Out
Shelley Madden on Pfizer, Stranger than Fiction
Debra Mullins on AVN vs Brendan Murphy
Malcolm on The End Game
Sabina on What’s Next?
Drew Duncan on Belarus Under Threat
Robyn on What’s Next?
Sofia Rutteman on Here We Go Again, Part 2
Robert Burns on Ricardo Bosi Public Address
Kim Henry on Pfizer Whistleblower
Lee Y on Give Me Five
Linda Nemeth on Ricardo Bosi Public Address
Warwick Hibble on Ricardo Bosi Public Address
Lesley on The Data Is Ours
Patricia Poppeliers on Here We Go Again, Part 2
Dani Stevens on Trouble in Paradise
Dianedraytonbuckland on Facebook: Judge, Jury and Executioner
Michael Chere on Before You Inject Your Child
Kerry Taylor on Which one of us is blind?
Kathy Hirsch on First Nations Locked Down
Gloria Feather on Undermining The Indigenous.
Marie Millikin on Let us talk about intuition.
Lucienne Helm on Let us talk about intuition.
Susan Wilson on The real revolution
Jennifer Leonard on 2020 a year to forget
F J on Strange Times
Tracey Parsons on IBAC DAY 9
stacie rose on Which one of us is blind?
Uncertainty on My Story, So Far
Tracey on A Veteran’s Plea
Zaidee Lens Van Rijn on My Story, So Far
Alissandra Moon on The Rise of Medical Apartheid
Peggy Gothe on Mum, I don’t feel well
Keith Cashman on Mum, I don’t feel well
Melinda c Taylor on Mum, I don’t feel well
Vaughan Oke on Which one of us is blind?
Jane Ramsay on Choice vs Ultimatum
Brian K Wilson on Which one of us is blind?
Scott Dawson on Which one of us is blind?