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."
The test went fairly well, but it wasn't without incident. After reviewing the field test, the project lead recommended adding the following warning label:
:)
"Do not look into laser with remaining eye."
Sorry, it had to be said.
Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
now all we need are the sharks...
I'm glad they figured out how to balance the phase variance in the polaric energy they had to run through the deflector array to fire up the phaser arrays. Ver admirable work, but it's no match for my Klingon Disrupters!
Why do peace-types protest defense systems like this so much?
I've never understood the logic. Defensive weaponry helps reduce the threat of war.
Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
Crispin
why some small towns have suddenly disappeared outside the test area.
are here.
WMP or QT are availabe.
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
So that's what happened to my missile.
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.
Well, I guess we WILL get to see a $10 million missile fired at a $10 tent protected by another $10 million laser.
In the end the guy with the explosive beatup mercedes still wins.
...this means world peace for our and all following generations, right?
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.
It isn't. Neither is an F-16, does that mean an F-16 is worthless? The weapon isn't meant to counter car bombers, obviously.
This is a tactical battlefield weapon meant for force protection. The article concerns the mobile THEL laser.
The larger, immobile THEL theoretically will be able to shoot down *mortar shells*. It has already been tested to successfully shoot down Katyushka small caliber rockets. These are revolutionary weapons systems.
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 feel so safe. This is being built right across the street from where I live.
Oh yes, I feel safer already! My neighborhood is not a terrorist target at all now. F%^&kin press releases!
http://www.livejournal.com/users/cixel
Couldn't you just coat or plate the missles with laser quality mirroring to get past the laser defense?
) Human Kind Vs Human Creation
) It'd be interesting to see how many humans would survive to serve us.
This is a tactical defensive weapon for use on a battlefield, not strategic defense. This is a mobile system meant to protect against small rockets like Katyusha class weapons. To understand why Israel is involved, you only have to look at the map on this page.
They would also be useful in defending targets against rocket attacks like the ones that have occurred in Iraq.the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Oh, grow the hell up. I lived during the Cold War 2 freaking miles from the Pentagon. Nothing like having a couple dozen multimegaton thermonukes aimed in the general vicinity of your apartment.
Geeze, kids today just don't have what it takes, anymore!
By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
The coolest thing about a laser weapon, IMHO, is not the power or range or even its technology..it's the accuracy.
Aiming is the same as hitting with an energy weapon in most scenarios, the lightspeed lag only becoming a factor at high speed/long range, light an orbital target. Even then, a computer-aided targeting system should be able to compensate.
Imagine if such a weapon system were mounted in a vehicle (I think I read something about a prototype of a different laser in a 737) where just having the target in the crosshairs is enough to guarantee its destruction. Gives a new perspective to sniping. Should also reduce civilian casualties.
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.
Thats like saying that because a handgun cant be effectively used against airborne targets, its useless.
You need different defense systems for different offensive systems.
This is for use againt missiles, mortar shells, and the like.
When will the US learn that trying to remove the "mutual" from mutually assured destruction will earn the hostility of any number of military powers the world over?
You are being very inconsistent in your statement.
The other guys are 'hostile', but it's the US's fault. hmmmm.
As to the MAD part, MAD is presently kind of irrelvant. US, Britain, France, & Russia have nukes and the long range, accurate delivery systems. And currently, we are all more or less friendly. and building down the nuke inventories.
Having a nuke, say Pakistan or Israel, is far different from being able to hit a particular spot on the globe with it.
I'm glad I live in a country that's not run by a power mad dictator with a hard-on for World War III.
too bad development on this was started long before Bush became president. Kind of blows a hole in your 'power mad dictator' theory.
If the missle was kindly feeding the defense system it's GPS coordinates, like the last missile defense test that hit the news.
include $sig;
1;
That's really swell for Isreal, but what about North Korea raining down fiery death from above with ballistic missiles that can hit Alaska? Also, I'd like to know how the laser would operate in more realistic conditions, like say, with multiple rockets... what's the firing rate? The way our money's being spent, we'll all be eating dog in a couple of years...
So picture this... Ground forces are stationed outside a small city (to protect the civilians). An incoming missile is detected and they shoot it down as it approaches with the laser. Unfortunately, the missile was a delivery system for chem/bio material and they just caused it to be release in the air above a populated city.
That'll make a good press release! But at least the troops were safe.
Come play Moral Decay!
Not so much for a ground based laser, it just keeps going and picks off Hubble, or the ISS or (God No!) Fox. But mounted to an aircraft, if it either misses or punches right through the target object, anything within range before the beam hits it's dispersion threshhold could be toast. Homes, office buildings, people spontaneously combusting, yada yada... You get the idea. The tinfoil hat just don't cut it anymore I guess. Eep. jm2c
"The other guys are 'hostile', but it's the US's fault. hmmmm."
When will people learn that being righteous is not always a good enough reason to do something. Pissing off someone with nukes and reasons to use them is a bad thing. Being right wont matter when you're dead.
"As to the MAD part, MAD is presently kind of irrelvant. US, Britain, France, & Russia have nukes and the long range, accurate delivery systems. And currently, we are all more or less friendly. and building down the nuke inventories."
MAD is irrelevant, eh? What about china? What about power shifts in unstable countries,like Russia. Some intelligence even says North Korea has ICBMs capable of hitting the west coast. even if they dont, you should never bet your security on the delusional hope that the other side will never make any progress in their weapons systems.
Oh and its a good thing we're building down those inventories, now we'll only be able to kill each other 2 or 3 times over, and not 6 or 7.
The THEL was not developed with anti-nuclear capabilities in mind. It's designed to protect cities, troop movements, bases, etc from cruise missiles, artillery shells, and the like.
Now, the Airborne Laser was developed as SDI, but it only covers an area of a 100 mile circle around which it's deployed. That's not going to generally help against a large country...but instead was designed for actions against megalomanical 3rd world dictatorships, like say, North Korea.
"Aim missile away from face"
(from the one where Bart spots a comet headed towards springfield)
My other sig is funny!
Did any of the missles have radio beacons or other tracking devices as in previous test? Until missle or laser defense systems can shoot down a missle without onboard beacons to help with aim the damn things seems prety useless to me.
http://www.st.northropgrumman.com/media/SiteFiles/ mediagallery/video/MTHEL_m.wmv
And see who is the punk that's gonna say no to my sales presentations. :)
...I see Bush on TV...
...addressing the nation...
lasers....
satellites...
Oh wait, my bad. That was Reagan! Or was it?
Why can't all fpga/microcontroller manufacturers just release free optimizing compilers???
I wonder if the missile used in this test had a finishing that easily absorbs the laser energy. If it would be made of a highly reflective material, almost all energy would be reflected, and it would not be affected.
Screw large caliber rockets. I wanna laser that can blast an asteroid at a great enough distance so that it's remnants burn to dust in the atmosphere, or elude our orbits totally.
Preferably mounted on a large shark that won't eat LL CoolJ if given the chance.
Actually, lasers are really an "old" technology now. There is very little room for minaturization. Lasers require a LOT of power to do the damage this current breed does, and they require one-use fuel canisters of exotic gasses for each shot. The energy required to make a laser an offensive weapon is unbelieveably high. You can't sweep one of these across a battlefield because the fuel charge will last only a few seconds as it lases. The power comes from a storage device like a capacitor, and there is a recharge period for re-use.
The arms escalation that would result will likely be better missles, smaller missles, smarter missles. Reflective coatings and decoys are a better investment. You will probably see more types of terrain-hugging missles with longer ranges and cheaper production costs. The only way to defeat an anti-ballistic system like this is to be able to send an overwhelming number of cheap, hard-to-hit cruise-type missles. A crude $5000 cruise missle is the best weapon. For a million dollars you can send 200 at your enemy en-masse. Try shooting down 200 targets that are only 3-400 feet off the ground and moving erratically. If all you need are 10 to get through, you have a very good chance of success.
You are correct that this will lead to an arms race, but I think you are wrong in the direction it will take. These types of defense systems will be passe' in 10 years because it is too easy to counter them with non-ballistic alternatives.
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright
Existing THEL is about six buildings, and that is not quite a mobile platform.
THEL description
Mobile THEL prototype is not close yet (2007 optimists telling ) and will take about three trucks. Looks like existing THEL could be useful only for static defence positions in Isreal and South Korea.
It depends how you define "winning".
700 american soldiers have lost (their lives) in iraq, but america hasnt lost.. yet.
No side really wins in war - but the objective can fail. In iraq and other occupation situations the occupying army will always fail their objective of occupying, look at vietnam and israel. Israel is only still standing because of the regular injections from the US and look at the meagre resources of those who are against them.
Bush and Blair ate my sig!
Has the success of this test been verified by any third parties? The US Military tends to declare every test a success, regardless of the actual results. Sometimes the tests are rigged to create an illusion of success and other times they just simply lie.
Cost of developing anti-missile laser? $50 billion
Cost of building anti-missile laser? $10 million
Cost of deploying anti-missile laser? $15 million
Cost of mirror fitted to missile? $1.99
Effect of reflected laser on defending forces? priceless.
A reflective tin foil hat...
Just because you disagree with me does not make it flamebait or a troll you retards. I hope you're meta-modded appropriately.
Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
I thought slashdot was full of nerds? What kind of nerds don't understand simple physics?
These lasers emit energy in the megawatt region. A mirror takes photons - absorbs them - and then reemits them. There aren't many mirrors that can absorb 10 million watts of energy.
In fact, that very problem is what makes laser weaponry so damn expensive and difficult to do. They need very heavy, exotic and expensive mirror systems to focus and aim the laser energy without being destroyed by the laser themselves. You can't just go down to home depot and buy a big mirror. You can't just coat a missile in some silly bike reflectors or shiny foil.
Even if you were to somehow invent a reflective coating that could handle megawatts of energy - and still be light enough to just paint on a missile - you'd have to deal with the coating becoming marred in flight, as anything the laser comes in contact with (ie, birdshit or what have you) its going to superheat to thousands of degrees and burn right through and destroy the missile.
-
Phalanx only works if you are in range of the target. In other words, they are great if you want to stop 4-5 missles and you know the target (like a ship). They don't work on large area targets. If you want to defend a building or ship, they work fine. If you want to protect a city (say Los Angeles) you would need to place one Phalanx every 3-4 miles along the coast. Further, the system can track a maximum of 64 targets for each turret, so numbers would win again.
The cheap, plentiful cruise missle is the most effective non-developed vehicle out there, it is only a matter or time till some smart government figures that out.
"Curiosity killed the cat, but for a while I was a suspect."- Steven Wright