Slashdot Mirror


Airborne Boeing Laser Blasts Ground Target

coondoggie writes "The airborne military laser which promises to destroy, damage or disable targets with little to no collateral damage has for the first time actually blown something up. Boeing and the US Air Force today said that on Aug. 30, a C-130H aircraft armed with Boeing's Advanced Tactical Laser (ATL) blasted a target test vehicle on the ground for the first time. Boeing has been developing the ATL since 2008 under an Air Force contract worth up to $30 million."

8 of 419 comments (clear)

  1. Pocket change! by richardkelleher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    30 Million is pretty small money for the DOD and for Boeing. There must be more money in this project somewhere.

  2. Re:Sigh by Microlith · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I suppose that would fall under the category of collateral damage, and they're probably expecting everyone within sight of the target to be, well, "The Enemy(tm)."

  3. Re:Sigh by MrMista_B · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The purpose of this tool is war. So, yes.

  4. Re:Sigh by Kjella · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The purpose of this tool is war. So, yes.

    We already have plenty weapons with lots of collateral damage and they're being used, that was never in dispute. The question was how can this be a weapon "with little to no collateral damage" if in fact the reflections do collateral damage. If we didn't care about colleteral we could just throw a nuke at it.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  5. Re:Sigh by mcrbids · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I was looking for a good place to crack a "Real Genius" joke. There's already a thread about popcorn... something about a "Real Genius" thought of that...

    A mirror surface will harden the target, but even the best mirrors do not reflect all light and a combat laser can still burn a hole in it very fast.

    Surprisingly, a mirror wouldn't work nearly as well as cheap glossy white paint.

    Mirrors reflect (typically) 60-70% of the light that hits them, turning the rest into heat. Cheap, glossy, exterior-grade white paint often reflects in excess of 90% of the light back.

    In other words, mirrors would turn about 4x as much of the light into heat as the white paint will. The difference is that mirrors reflect light without losing its coherency. White paint, on the other hand, just reflects the light in random directions.

    Worried about teh lazers? Paint your tin foil hat white!

    --
    I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
  6. Re:Sigh by Dhalka226 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Did you read your own links? From the second:

    It is prohibited to employ laser weapons specifically designed, as their sole combat function or as one of their combat functions, to cause permanent blindness to unenhanced vision, that is to the naked eye or to the eye with corrective eyesight devices.

    Causing blindness is not a combat function of this weaponry; it's a side-effect of the other side trying to subvert the weapon. They were also not specifically designed to have such an effect. Their goal is to blow shit up from the air, with a particular emphasis on fired projectiles but probably used for vehicles as well (as per this example). In most cases there won't even be anybody around to get blinded.

    A bullet through the eye can cause blindness too, that doesn't make it banned. Intent matters.

  7. Re:Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Close you missed the some key aspects of the article 5.

    "Where in occupied territory an individual protected person is detained as a spy or saboteur, or as a person under definite suspicion of activity hostile to the security of the Occupying Power, such person shall, in those cases where absolute military security so requires, be regarded as having forfeited rights of communication under the present Convention.

    In each case, such persons shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case may be."

    A protected person detained as a spy or saboteur. Non uniformed terrorists do not fall under the "protected person" definition. So they are not protected by the GC.

  8. Re:Sigh by Hubbell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Boo, Fuckity, Hoo. War is SUPPOSED to be inhumane, SUPPOSED to be degrading, SUPPOSED to be horrible.

    It is well that war is so terrible - otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee, Statement at the Battle of Fredericksburg (13th December 1862)
    US-Confederate general (1807 - 1870)


    All the people crying OMG WE HAVE INTERNATIONAL LAWS AGAINST DOING THIS AND THIS AND THIS are the kind of people who don't understand this fact. The more horrible war is, the less likely it will happen. The population of the west today just doesn't get that war is ugly, they've pacified themselves culturally to believe that war is NOT the ugly horrible thing it always was, and always will be, and seem to think that OMG A CIVILIAN DIED THIS IS AN OUTRAGEEEEEEEEEEEE is how you should respond to finding out 20 enemy fighters died...but 1 civilian did as well cause the enemy was hiding in a family's house. I don't really care that I'll get modded as flamebait/troll because this is the fact of life in western society. They've been pussified since WW2 and can't handle a real war. God forbid the chinese or russians ever decide to have a real war with another country, the citizenry of the west will collectively shit their pants and break down into tears at the 'atrocities' they'll hear about that happen in what a real war should/does look like.