USAF Readies Laser of Death

An anonymous reader submits: "From the SkyNet Terminator Death Beam Dept...The London Telegraph is carrying this article about U.S. military plans to outfit AC-130 Spectre gunships with a chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) which can be used against personnel and materiel for lethal and nonlethal missions."

Comments

Is this good or bad?

[hkhanna]

With the recent actions of Bush (ignoring the Geneva conventions), I'm not sure this is a good thing...

Peace

[gergnz]

Why must the US keep spending money on bigger guns?

Lets try peace! (or bigger pipes so I can have 1 Gb internet to my home!)

Re:Peace

[jwsmith80]

America's "acts of war" have brought the world a period of relative peace and stability unparalleled since the first caveman picked up a rock and bashed his neighbor over the head.

We're not perfect, but at least we are trying

"America's laser of death" is dying

[ideut]

We should all keep in mind this simple truth: America's laser of death is dying. You don't need to be Kreskin to predict America's laser of death's future. The hand writing is on the wall: America's laser of death faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for America's laser of death because America's laser of death is dying. Things are looking very bad for America's laser of death.

Well, I think this is very civilized

[ccmay]

Look for the usual lefty thumb-suckers to slam the big bad American meanies for developing Darth Vader technology. However, this machine is as unlike the Death Star as it is possible to be. The Death Star was about collective punishment, destroying whole planets. This device will let us single out particular bad guys who need killing, without all the collateral damage. I'm entirely supportive of this effort.

-ccm

Can You imagine....

[asink]

having a beowulf cluster of these?

Can it prepare popcorn?

[Visoblast]

If I need to heat popcorn for my battlion, can I use it to get the job done fast? All the popcorn ar once, of course. After all, what good is the laser if it can't?

Re:MIrrors?

[talonyx]

I think a layer of highly-reflective sequins on top of a conventional set of battle armor would be best.

After all, this weapon IS going to be used against soldiers, the majority of whom have gotten used to having their asses raped by fellow soldiers.

If they're going to be fabulous, let them dress the part!

Assasin

[t_allardyce]

This comment has been removed since it was clearly in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 871 (Threats Against The President) and / or Section 875 (Interstate Communications: Extortions / Threats). You can Read More Here. We're sorry to have to do this, and while we don't necessarily agree with this, it is still the law. When the Secret Service gets involved, we don't have many options. We appreciate your understanding in the matter. Please call (202) 406-5000 if you have any questions.

Re:Assasin

[SuiteSisterMary]

Well, if it does enough damage to kill somebody, it's going to leave a deep enough wound to do a nice target track.

Re:Assasin

[t_allardyce]

This comment has been removed since it was clearly in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 871 (Threats Against The President) and / or Section 875 (Interstate Communications: Extortions / Threats). You can Read More Here. We're sorry to have to do this, and while we don't necessarily agree with this, it is still the law. When the Secret Service gets involved, we don't have many options. We appreciate your understanding in the matter. Please call (202) 406-5000 if you have any questions.

Re:Assasin

[t_allardyce]

This comment has been removed since it was clearly in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 871 (Threats Against The President) and / or Section 875 (Interstate Communications: Extortions / Threats). You can Read More Here. We're sorry to have to do this, and while we don't necessarily agree with this, it is still the law. When the Secret Service gets involved, we don't have many options. We appreciate your understanding in the matter. Please call (202) 406-5000 if you have any questions.

Re:Assasin

[SuiteSisterMary]

Actually, the good thing about laser weaponry would probably be a) no ballistics and b) no physical evidence on the victim or the killer. Gunpower weapons leave marks that indicate distance of the shot, as well as putting powder marks on the shooter. A laser, though, well, all you could guess was a power/distance ratio. I'll also point out that most rifles kill through hyperkinetic shock, not by the damage the actual bullet does. A laser shot would pretty much need to hit an instant kill area; brain, spine or heart. Otherwise, you're just burning (possibly self-cauterizing) holes through people.

Re:Only for physical targets, not people

[Tackhead]

> I think the biggest casuality of of 9/11 was America's sense of measure - the empire is now like a wounded beast, with rage clouding its reason. The U.S. likes to see itself as a Christian nation, but it appears to me it is much more closer to the spirit of the Old Testament ("An eye of an eye") than that of the New.

Ahem? They blew up what was arguably the most sacred icon of American capitalism and murdered 3000 civilians in an unprovoked attack, and you think what we did in Afghanistan was "an eye for an eye?"

Our response has been extremely restrained in both tone and intensity, and IMNSHO, that decision has been extremely wise.

If we were fighting this war with "An eye for an eye" as our doctrine, the commensurate response (both in terms of symbolism and needless civilian casualties) would have been to reduce Mecca to little more than a smudge in the middle of a 20-mile-wide glowing green glass plate.

> After all, even the most sophisticated lasers (or Missile Defense System) would have been useless to avert the WTC tragedy.

In a word, bullshit.

The ABM system we had in the 1960s would have been sufficient to take out any of those aircraft. As a last-ditch line of defence, analog computers and vaccuum tubes were able to put a telephone pole-sized missile at Mach 3 through the front windshield of incoming Soviet bombers. Accuracy was measured in feet at ranges of over 100 miles.

(The only point I'll concede in your argument is that, on 9/11, whether a battery commander would have been authorized to fire on a commercial airliner in time to prevent said airliner from reaching its target, is an open issue.)

Thankfully, passenger resistance stopped Flight 93 from reaching its target. Likewise, passenger resistance stopped the shoe-bomber from succeeding in his mission. The conclusion I draw from this is that an alert cvilian populace, prepared to take action on its own, has done a shitload more to secure air travel than anything else -- aside, of course, from the vital national interest served having our stuff stolen, and female significant others getting felt up, by high-school dropouts (but they're dropouts with badges!) every time we travel by air.

None of which has much to do with big-ass lasers, other than to say that, well, big-ass lasers are fucking cool, and if there's one thing that kicks more ass than a C-130 Spectre, it's a Spooky with a gigawatt laser. (Shit, that's just about the only weapon the Spectre doesn't carry yet ;-)