Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Sci-Fi Weapons to Join US Arsenal? 601

marct22 writes to tell us CNet is reporting that the next weapons coming out of the US arsenal could be stepping right off the pages of science fiction to be there. From the article: "By the end of this year, the Air Force plans to conduct a first, fully loaded test flight of its Airborne Laser, a jumbo jet packed with gear designed to shoot down enemy missiles half a world away, at the speed of light. The ABL also packs a megawatt-class punch--it's not exactly your garden-variety laser pointer."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sci-Fi Weapons to Join US Arsenal?

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @09:38PM (#15110399)
    If you emit X Joules of energy in over one second, you have X Watts. If you emit X Joules over one microsecond, you have X MegaWatts. The difficulty is not in getting the MegaWatts up, but keeping the laser trained on the same spot for long enough to penetrate the skin of a remote missile and cause it to malfunction catastrophically.
  • by dteichman2 ( 841599 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @09:40PM (#15110406) Homepage
    ...unless you have so many megawatts that you instantly destroy the laser...
  • by MoFoQ ( 584566 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @09:43PM (#15110422)
    Hmmm...a big laser pointer....and a big plane....

    Does Homeland Security (and FAA) know?

    Hope they don't point at other pilots or ppl on the ground....(though don't think there's anything in the law that says that pilots can't use laser pointers and point them towards ppl on the ground...the vice versa is prohibited.)
  • by Toxicgonzo ( 904975 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @09:46PM (#15110433)
    We all know the real reason America is winning the war in Iraq.

    http://tinyurl.com/r2t8q [tinyurl.com]

    But on a more serious note, check out this video footage of new age technology

    http://media2.foxnews.com/040606/040606_fr_tobin_3 00.swf [foxnews.com]
  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @09:49PM (#15110445) Homepage
    True, this is more like "they finally got that thing working"? The ABL dates back to the 1980s. These things are starting to look useful, though, now that everybody is throwing low-rent rockets around battlefields. This provides a way to thin them out, without using an expensive Patriot to take out a cheap rocket. The smaller model in the C-130 is likely to be more useful than the big one in the 747.
  • by tfoss ( 203340 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @09:51PM (#15110454)
    Have we really slummed low enough that we are using cheesy 80's movies [imdb.com] as inspiration for national defense?

    Seriously, where's the giant bowl of popcorn?

    -Ted

  • Re:Warning (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Raul654 ( 453029 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @09:52PM (#15110469) Homepage
    Someone I knew once worked at GE, building phased array radar for the navy. She told me a couple of very funny stories. A guy was inspecting a prototype for a new array model in a closed room, and accidentally fired it off. As you might expect, the radio waves bounced off the wall 5 feet away, came straight back, and blew out the system. Needless to say, there were some very pissed engineers.

    Then, they would go out to the boonies in New Jersey to test it. The Navy testing grounds is this large, flat, empty area in central Jersey. The thing was, birds (pelicans or gulls, I think) would swoop down right above the radar while it was being tested at full power. Needless to say, they made a rather disturbing sizzling sound as they dropped.
  • Oh my gosh (Score:5, Interesting)

    by suv4x4 ( 956391 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @10:13PM (#15110566)
    I don't want to put the blame on anyone but when few years ago US was 'freeing' Jugoslavia flying off from bases based over here (Bulgaria), it was happening that from time to time they accidentally were dropping their radioactive bombs over houses in our capital city (I'm not kidding).

    I just hope this new weapon doesn't make it too easy to destroy wrong targets when your aim is kinda off, given the power and distancees we're talking about.

    Not that I blame anyone. But I don't want a hole through my house (or me).
  • by M0b1u5 ( 569472 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @10:17PM (#15110588) Homepage
    Well, I'm all for megawatt class lasers - as this means the technology is about 1/1000th of the way towards using lasers for something useful: Beamed Laser Launching of hardware into space.

    Liek Myrabo of http://www.lightcrafttechnologies.com/ [lightcraft...logies.com] has been developing beamed power launch technology for some years now. In my correspondence with him, he has estimated that a 1-ton payload can be launched into low earth orbit using a 1-Gigawatt class pulsed laser cannon.

    This ground-based launcher is the ultimate tool, and if you build a ring of them around your country, you can be pretty well assured of having utter domination of not just the sky above you, but the skies above everywhere. The first to deploy the network wins the game!

    There is almost no end of uses for this array of gigawatt laser cannons:

    1) Beamed Laser launcher, with total cost to orbit of just cents per kilo.

    2) Inbound missile melter, extraordinaire.

    3) Extreme Bug-eyed alien tamer. Unfriendly invaders might think twice before tangling with a species capable of focusing better than 100 Gigawatts of energy at inbound bogies.

    4) Surgical Strike weapon par excellence. Reflected back to earth via large space-based mirrors allows you to wave the thing in a decreasing spiral which will turn your neighbours house to molten slag, but barely singe your fence.

    5) Galaxies' brightest Search and Rescue spotlight: defocused in orbit, and reflected to earth to illuminate areas currently under search and rescue operations.

    6) Illuminate work sites on the moon during the long luna night. Defocused to make a nice night light back on earth.

    7) Interplanetary messaging system: embed knowledge into the beam, and send it to likely looking planets. Long term payoff - unknown.

    8) Asteroid deflection device: light pressure alone is enough to deflect an inbound near earth object. Just 2cm/s velocity change is enough to deflect most inbounds.

    9) Interstallar probe launcher: lightsail driven robot craft accelerated to a decent %age of light speed in fairly short order.

    I'm sure there are other uses too - but these would seem to be the obvious ones.

  • by MBAFK ( 769131 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @10:23PM (#15110623)
    Your micky taking hints at part of a good question. The article does not explain how reinforcing the casing or rotating the missile so it takes longer to heat effect the performance of the laser. How does this implementation overcome these countermeasures? - I assume it already takes them into account.

    What increases the protection of the missile most effectively? I realise this is probably all top secret, 'mums the word old chap' etc.

  • by quantax ( 12175 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @10:31PM (#15110654) Homepage
    Actually, one could argue that technology could have, atleast temporarily, forstalled the inevitable loss of the war for Hitler. Two great examples, the Tiger Tank & the Messerschmitt Me 262 Jet. Both were better than anything else the Allies had at the time in their respective weapon classes, but both were then micromanaged by Hitler such that they lost their purpose. The tiger went from being one of the fastest tanks in the war to being the most heavily armored tank in the war with a giant gun, so much so that its ability to manuever in the Russian geography was terrible. They essentially turned into semi-mobile artillary placements. The Messerschmitt suffered the same fate; it was faster and more manueverable than anything else the Allies had but then Hitler said make it a bomber, eliminating its manueverability & range in favor of dropping more powerful munitions. In both cases, Hitler decided to micromanage these projects, ignored his own scientists and subsequently created weapons that were ineffective at what they were originally designed to do in the first place.

    As far as your comment on comparing politicians to Hitler, personally, I think this really debases just about any debate since a) most people really don't fully grasp what Hitler did when he was in power, so any metaphor they make is incomplete and quite likely bears no resemblence to what happened under Hitler, and b) theres tons of more moderate and applicable examples than Hitler to be used as reference that do not carry a fuckload of emotional baggage like Hitler & the Nazis do. Its merely used since even the slowest kid in the class knows that Nazis = Bad, and as such, panders to the lowest common denominator. If you think your audience is stupid, sure use the Nazi's, since everyone knows they're bad, but otherwise, show your audience some respect and get a bit of nuanced thinking in there.
  • by geekbeater ( 967717 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @10:43PM (#15110706)
    Yeah, well the implications are much more impressive. The acquisition, tracking and targeting system will be most impressive if it works well enough to fully utilize the lasers potential. But what may be most intriguing is how this could be used on stationary targets... say... Saddam's bunkers, (pastense) or perhaps... North Korean and Iranian nuclear potentials. And don't be so naive to think that the chicoms don't want to be on level ground with us strategically...they've been doing some major muscle flexing in the pacific rim as of late... the end of the USSR does not mean the end of potential threats to our way of life (translation, loss of ability for geeks to hang out at /.)
  • by galgon ( 675813 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @10:59PM (#15110763)
    Whose going to build their nuclear weapon onto a missile delivery system if they know we can shoot it down? Not being able to shoot them down was the reason we put nukes on missiles in the first place.

    Perhaps you are not seeing the big picture. With this system, the threat of a world-ending nuclear war has just ended. Also on a somewhat scary note: the US would be able to nuke any country with little fear of reprisal. In theory the US just became the only country capable of using nuclear missiles.

    Sure there will always be the chance of suitcase bombs and such. However, the worst that would happen would be a small-scale coordinated attack taking out a few large cities. Yes, that would be horrible, but it is still much better than destroying the whole world.
  • by _mythdraug_ ( 27158 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @11:21PM (#15110839)

    Yep. I noticed this in the last month on a government website that maps NOTAMs [nifc.gov].

    It is quite common for there at the national scale map, to see a purple dot. This purple dot indicates that there is scheduled laser activity in the area. Frequently a laser light show. The NOTAMs advise altitude and range for which precaution is advised.

    Then suddenly broad sections (that can only be assumed to be flightlines) stretching from Texas, down the Gulf of Mexico (just off the Mexican coast) to the Yucatan penensula and over to Florida. These NOTAMS frequently advised precaution of several thousand feet "below the aircraft" and "above the aircraft" and for a range that makes the "light show" type NOTAM seem laughable.

  • by StarkRG ( 888216 ) <starkrgNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @11:23PM (#15110843)
    I think what the anonymous poster was saying was stupid was when you said it'd be going slower than the speed of light. It would be going the speed of light, it'd just have longer to travel.

    If two peoplle are on the banks of a lake 50miles wide and one travels 100mph over the lake directly to the other side, and the other travels 100mph around the lake, they both traveled at the same speed but one gets there before the other.

    BTW, if it were a perfectly circular lake what would the average speed toward the opposite point be for the person who went around? (hint: find the circumfrence, halve it, find out how long it'd take the guy to travel that distance and divide that by 50mph)
  • Re:Oh my gosh (Score:3, Interesting)

    by LittleLebowskiUrbanA ( 619114 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @11:30PM (#15110861) Homepage Journal
    Exactly what radioactive bombs were they dropping?
  • by ScrewMaster ( 602015 ) on Tuesday April 11, 2006 @11:34PM (#15110892)
    You have a rather unique view of history.

    The presumption on your part is that America had some sort of intrinsic responsibility to spend billions of dollars that it didn't really have on a war effort to save millions of Europeans who are now largely ungrateful, that corrupted our society and has caused us nothing but grief since. Up 'til the time of World War II, America was a relatively insular nation. We didn't want to be in that war, tried hard to stay out of it (see: Lend Lease) and yes we got into it when Japan foolishly attacked Pearl Harbor (which was a military base, in case you've forgotten.) Like it or not, we expended vast resources to put the lid back on when you Europeans raised yet another demagogic dictator and were yet again unable to handle him. So watch it with the snide remarks. They're not much appreciated at all. If the United States hadn't stepped in when it did, the results would have been very different. The remnants of the British Empire were no longer up to the task, and the rest of Europe combined couldn't stand up to the Axis. Yes, a lot of Russians died in that war ... but a lot of other Allied personnel died as well, and ask yourself just how far Hitler and Japan would have gone if the Allies hadn't gone after them.

    By the way, here's a picture of the Arizona resort [navy.mil] to which you were referring.

    Jawohl!
  • by Metex ( 302736 ) on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @12:06AM (#15111102) Homepage
    ehh probably a femto secound pulse 10^-15...
    Assume a 400m/s gust hits the plane...
    400 m/s * 1s/10^15 fs = 4*10^-13 m/fs
    a 4*10^-13m displacement during the beams lifetime caused by that 400m/s gust of wind... wind isnt really the issue here nor is unexpected movement.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @12:46AM (#15111318)

    Well, I'm all for megawatt class lasers - as this means the technology is about 1/1000th of the way towards using lasers for something useful:

    Protecting our ground forces against TBMs carrying chemical or bio weapons is "something useful". Or is your definition of "something useful" restricted to sci-fi items of interest to middle-class caucasians and items of interest to lower-class minorities who make up our armed services don't count?

  • by drachton ( 673697 ) on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @01:12AM (#15111427)
    To imply that joining the Allies was not objectively in the best interest of the US is, to put it bluntly, bullshit. The US didn't join the war to help Europe out of the goodness of its heart (otherwise they'd have joined the fray at once, not years later). There exists *no* scenario where a Third Reich-dominated Eurasia was a good thing for the US, and considering the German technological lead in several fields with important military applications, it's not hard to imagine how such an alternate history might end badly for the US.
  • by monoqlith ( 610041 ) on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @01:15AM (#15111438)
    These weapons may have been useful and valuable in the cold war era to cancel an airborne nuclear threat from our of our communist rivals. In this day and age, when nuclear weapons and other explosives are less likely to be airborne and more likely to arrive in a shipping container on one of our ports, doesn't it seem like we're going even further down the path of excessive militarization?? The military-industrial complex accounts for 30% of government spending, and it's because we keep launching projects like these airborne missile defense lasers that the upward trend continues. I agree that it's important to have technology in defense , but pouring all these resources into military technology that doesn't make a whole lot of strategic sense when we could be putting money into, say, education and health care, and actual national security concerns - doesn't it make you stop for a second and think?

    On the other hand, at least the airborne defense lasers fulfill the actual premise of a "defense budget" - it is meant to defend us, and not to invade or destroy other countries, though I could see its purpose being perverted there as well.
  • by TheLink ( 130905 ) on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @01:20AM (#15111459) Journal
    Well, I figure a megawatt laser that can blow up a missile hundreds of miles away, could be used to take out inconvenient leaders.

    If you can ionize air with that beam, you can pass it by a thundercloud on the way to the target and make it look like it was a normal lightning bolt, and thus an "act of God".

    Even if the tech is not good enough to hit a fast moving missile, it should be able to easily hit someone walking about or even standing about in a public area - you could even aim it manually.

    Perhaps this is what the tech was actually intended for in the first place. But of course that can't be since assassination is a no-no right? ;).
  • I'm amazed at the hypocrisy of people. On September 11th 2001, the US was attacked. They could have taken the standard terrorist approach and hit back. They could have launched a nuclear strike at Afghanistan. But they didn't. Bush asked the Taliban to co-operate, and they failed to, so they got hit then. And then various anti-war groups complained about it, as though there was an alternative.

    But when a terrorist blows up some people, the finger is always pointed back at the evil western powers who obviously drove them to it.

    "Treat people with respect and they will treat you with respect as well". Ask Neville "I have in my hand a piece of paper" Chamberlain about this. Sometimes, people are not reasonable, and you have to kick them in the ass.

    Personally, I thought that the Iraq war would be a mistake, and sadly, I feel proven right. That said, what do you think the people blowing up US troops want? In your worldview, once the troops leave, there will be peace and the people doing this will stand down and get involved in a democratic, political proces. Because after all, they are victims of US aggression, and not aiming for a power-grab.

  • Re:It's being done (Score:2, Interesting)

    by isorox ( 205688 ) on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @05:11AM (#15112122) Homepage Journal
    We are already bouncing ground based targeting lasers off of satelites.

    Hitting a mirror on the moon with a fixed ground based laser was done in the 60s. Hitting it when you are on a plane with a velocity changing almost randomly in 3 dimensions isn't easy
  • by Baracat ( 966816 ) on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @05:48AM (#15112242)
    > ... to say nothing of a moving target, a moving source, and a moving relay.

    I think its not so dificult... Do you know how a tank works? Its a moving target, moving source and a balistic trajectory... Almost the same problem. Solution? Gyroscope. In a tank, when you lock a target, whatever movement makes the tank, it keep pointed to this target locked.

    With laser in a plane or whatever, it's just have to adjust those thing faster and more precise.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @06:22AM (#15112319)
    "...America had some sort of intrinsic responsibility to spend billions of dollars that it didn't really have on a war effort to save millions of Europeans..."

    America never did this. It is a very greedy nation, as, in the limit, all are. If it spends billions of dollars it is for it's own self-interest.

    "..we got into it when Japan foolishly attacked Pearl Harbor ...you Europeans raised yet another demagogic dictator..."

    You can't have it both ways. If we raised the German menace by trying to appease Hitler then you unquestionably caused the Japanese threat with your 'starve-them' commodity and oil policies.

    "If the United States hadn't stepped in when it did, the results would have been very different."

    Not actually so different. Europe would have collapsed, the British Empire would have fought Germany to a standstill, and Russia would have taken the spoils. In fact, after El-Alamein the British had Germany surrounded, though still in possession of a lot of raw material. But I am assuming that Germany could have survived the usual British blockade weapon about as well as Napoleon did.

    The reason the Americans came in was to deny all of Germany and France to the communists. For America's sake, not for Europe's.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @08:23AM (#15112677)
    Oh please get over yourself... Yehhaaaa America saves the day. Most historians agree that Russia would have finished Germany even if America had not joined in. Although by the sounds of it the school history books over there have their own spin too them. And of course most europeans are ungrateful, it is estimated apx. 20 million europeans lost their lives in that conflict before America decided to join in. America lost only apx. 295,000 in the whole thing. And you want thanks??? climb back in your box cowboy, you may of hastened the endgame but you never saved the day.
  • by CmdrGravy ( 645153 ) on Wednesday April 12, 2006 @10:22AM (#15113352) Homepage
    The British Empire was well up to the task of dealing with Germany by the time the Americans joined in, Germany could not have invaded the UK mainland and was no longer much of a threat to the her other territories in Africa and India. Britain could probably not have invaded mainland Europe so the end result would have been a standoff between Britain & Germany.

    In the meantime Russia would be still be winning on the Eastern front and would eventually beat Germany and take over Europe at which point both the future of both the US and the UK would be very different especially since it would the Russia and not the US making use of all the German developments in rocket science etc.

The moon is made of green cheese. -- John Heywood

Working...