Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Anti-Missile Laser Weapon Successfully Tested

Posted by timothy on from the how-fair-was-the-test dept.

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."

14 of 636 comments (clear)

  1. A few flaws by nacturation · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.
    1. Re:A few flaws by Makoss · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Supersonic != fast.

      Supersonic ~ 335m/s Light (Radar, etc.) ~ 300,000,000 m/s

      Consider the muzzle velocity of a .50cal bullet, ~3000 ft/sec. Consider a very close range shot from 300ft. You have 100ms to respond to the threat correct?

      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
  2. great... by arctan1701 · · Score: 5, Funny

    now all we need are the sharks...

    1. Re:great... by ajlitt · · Score: 5, Funny

      No, all we need is a giant foil pan full of popcorn.

  3. General question... by boomgopher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:General question... by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

  4. videos by doormat · · Score: 5, Informative

    are here.

    WMP or QT are availabe.

    --
    The Doormat

    If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
  5. Oh great.. by Malawar · · Score: 5, Funny

    So that's what happened to my missile.

  6. Domestic Use Soon? by Eponymous+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I wonder how long until these will be deployed domestically, around various government buildings (such as the White House, the US Capitol, or the Pentagon).

    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.
  7. Re:wow by superpulpsicle · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

  8. It upsets the balance of power by gotr00t · · Score: 5, Interesting
    As immoral and utilitarian the following may sound, it was the state of political affairs during the cold war, and continues to be this way.

    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.

  9. Re:Interesting quote from a Reuters article by pyrrhonist · · Score: 5, Funny
    It would be interesting to find out what those "hostile objects" were, and what exactly they mean by eliminated...

    They were rattlesnakes, and after being lightly fried, they were delicious. Then they were eliminated some time later.

    --
    Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
  10. Read the article by ksheff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
  11. This is the first real laser weapon by Animats · · Score: 5, Interesting
    This is the first real laser weapon. Unlike most of the stuff to come out of BMDO/MDA, this thing is expected to be useful. It's a joint US-Israeli effort, which gives it some reality.

    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.