Slashdot Mirror
Anti-Missile Laser Weapon Successfully Tested
xPertCodert writes "A latest attempt to build a futuristic laser weapon appears to be a success.
Joint Israeli-US developed laser destroyed a large caliber rocket in a latest New Mexico test. The press release also contains links to some interesting video and photo material, related to THEL (Tactical High Energy Lasers) defense systems."
Most of the pictures are dated 2000. I suspect that in four years since those pictures, the project has made significant advances. However, those results and pictures are likely classified.
Oh, by the way: FIRE THE FEAKIN LASER!!!
They will be touted as the perfect solution to a problem with heretofore only imperfect solutions (until, say, a passenger aircraft is accidentally shot down of course).
The biggest differences between this and previous missile defense systems are cost and multiple-use capability. You're not talking about using multi-million dollar missiles to shoot down incoming missiles, so you don't need to be so selective about when firing the thing off. And if you miss, you can try again ... and again.
As a defensive tool, these are, quite honestly, awesome. As an accident-waiting-to-happen in the hands of an overly-enthusiastic operator, they are, well, a little bit scary I guess.
It's hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
Because it is wasteful and will lead to another arms race.. So a U.S.-Isreal team develops. Now. someone will develop energy absorbing/reflecting/deflecting/whatever missiles. Then another defense system, then another missile to defeat it. Wash Rine, and Repeat, and we have another cold war.
Instead of using the money to develop new defense systems, they could have used the money to tackle the underlying social problems that cause the "bad men" to be mad at us in the first place. This way, we solve the underlying problem that facilitated the need to create the defense system. Its much more effective to plug the hole in the bottom of the boat, instead of just continuously bailing the water out.
Both Soviet Russia and the United States had comparable amounts of nuclear weapons, enough to destroy the other several times over by the late 1960's. What was preventing them from simply firing the missiles and ending the war forever was the fact that the other side could, and would retaliate. Even the Soviets were not willing to spend a significant amount of their population concentrated within urban areas for the chance of total victory.
When the Soviets announced development into an ABM (anti ballistic missile) system in the Stragetic Arms Limitatons Talks in 1969, it was not well recieved by the United States. The existance of such a system would mean that there would be no imperiative at hand for one side to annihilate the other and claim victory. The US, at this time, put research into such a technology as well, though notably less advanced than today's (it was called "setinel," and consisted of a pair of missiles designed to intercept), it was scrapped because it could not guarentee that major urban areas could be protected.
Such a situation still exists today. The number of nations that have nuclear weapons is higher than ever, not just the Soviet Union and a handful of other nations outside of the US. To think that the United States would never do such a thing like annihilate an entire population is to be naive. There were such plans during the Cold War to literally wipe Russia off the face of the planet. To other nations, this system poses a greater threat than nuclear proliferation, as it nullifies their political leverage in the world arena.
I have a question: From the video, it appears that the beam is invisible. The reasons for that are pretty obvious. I just wanted to ask, is it possible for a laser beam to get so hot that it causes the air inside of it to turn visibly vapourous? Just wondering if we'll ever see a beam like that so powerful it leaves con-trails like plains leave or something.
"Derp de derp."
I suggested bicycle strips because they have a fascinating property. They are made of zillions of little sphericle beads, with a refractive index of approximately 2.0. Such beads have the interesting property that light shining into them is reflected back directly at the source. For amusement, go get a laser pointer and point it at some bicycle strips, and you will notice that your hand holding the laser pointer is painted with laser light, regardless of the angle you hit the strip from.
So if I want to beat laser missle defenses, I go into the lab and make milspec beads with a refractive index of 2.0 in the right infrared range, and the lasers suddenly don't work so well.
Bonus: make the reflective layer 1 inch thick, and make it boil when heated, and you get ablative armor: it fogs the missle with a clound that blocks the laser. IIRC, idea due to Charles Sheffield (RIP).
Crispin
Terrorism is not the only threat out there. Not all countries are friendly with all other countries. China, for instance, may make a play for Taiwan at some point in the future.
North Korea may shoot another missile across Japan's bow.
I'd imagine both of those countries would like to have this type of defense.
IR and radar guided missiles were gimmicky at first, too. GPS was pie in the sky. The airplane istelf was considered to be of little military use at first.
OBTW, it's also for artillery size shells, not just ballistic missiles.
We're not talking about ICBMs here. This is aimed more at Katyusha batteries, a WWII truck-mounted launcher for 48 tube-launched unguided rockets. Those things had a range of about 5Km back in WWII. Their accuracy is poor, but they're cheap and can fire many rockets in the general direction of the target. Syria uses Katyusha batteries, and has been developing improved versions.
Patriot anti-missiles are too expensive to use against those things. The defenders would run out of Patriots long before the attackers ran out of Katyushas. So there's a real application for a laser weapon here. It won't stop all the incoming rockets, but cutting down a few thousand to a few hundred is a big win.
"To throw bombs from an airplane will do as much damage as throwing bags of flour. It will be my pleasure to stand on the bridge of any ship while it is attacked by airplanes." - Newton Baker, US minister of defense (1921)
Problem with small arms fire is the warning time frame.
An inbound missile usually gives a few minutes (radar). With a sniper shot, the first indication is the bullet itself, since it's supersonic.
The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
Supersonic != fast.
.50cal bullet, ~3000 ft/sec. Consider a very close range shot from 300ft. You have 100ms to respond to the threat correct?
Supersonic ~ 335m/s Light (Radar, etc.) ~ 300,000,000 m/s
Consider the muzzle velocity of a
100ms is a long time.
Normal RADAR has crappy resolution, this is a problem. 40GHz RADAR has ~7.5 mm wavelength, which is far too large for accuracy. The solution of course would be to move to a higher frequency detection method. Some of the research done in the 10^12Hz range might be promissing in another decade. Or something in the 10^14 to 10^15Hz range (IR, visible). Any of those would give the required accuracy to track a bullet sized object.
Processing time for tracking is negligable. Positioning and pointing of the beam shouldn't be to much of a problem either, not given ~100ms to do it (and if it is then one could just limit the angle of effect for a single system). The problem it seems would be outputting enough power to have a noticable effect on a non-volatile slug in that small of a timeframe.
Lots of problems sure, but not totally impossible to consider in the not so distant future.
Building a better backup.
Zettabyte Storage
To quote myself "The problem it seems would be outputting enough power to have a noticable effect on a non-volatile slug in that small of a timeframe. "
It was tacked on in the end there, easy to miss I suppose.
It's a point that a bullet is an inert kinetic kill weapon. In order for the system to be effective it would have to either vaporize the bullet, or vaporize enough of it to knock it significantly off course. I'd give you a better answer, but I don't feel like looking up the thermodynamic stats for lead. It's dense though, so it's probably going to be a pain in the ass.
Building a better backup.
Zettabyte Storage
No, it's not, it defends against short range rockets.
Even if a terrorist group gets ahold of a nuclear bomb, it would be easier and cheaper to sneak it into the US than to develope and build ICBMs.
In fact terrorist groups have these rockets, that's why previous tests were against katyusha rockets, used by the Hizbulla.
And even then, this system can only shoot down missiles as they are launched by flying over the enemy's territory. This means that the government has spent billions on a gimmicky star wars program that only works if we invade another country's airspace, a.k.a. an act of war.
IIRC, it's primarily a ground based system, to be used from the privacy of your own country. There is an airbourne version, which can be used after hostilities have begun. Or in peace-keeping missions, when an invasion isn't relevant.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.html