Slashdot Log In
Anti-Missile Laser Weapon Successfully Tested
Posted by
timothy
on Sat May 08, 2004 10:41 PM
from the how-fair-was-the-test dept.
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."
Related Stories
[+]
Technology: Israelis Sue Government For Laser Cannons 736 comments
An anonymous reader writes "Residents of a southern Israeli town want a real-life laser cannon to protect them against Palestinian rocket attacks. And they're suing the national government, for failing to provide the ray gun defense.
The U.S.-Israeli Tactical High Energy Laser project was widely considered to be the most successful energy weapon ever built. But the toxic chemicals needed to generate THEL's megawatts of power made the thing a logistical nightmare. It was scrapped. Now, the residents of Sderot want it back. And they're taking Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to court to make it happen."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
A few flaws (Score:5, Funny)
"Do not look into laser with remaining eye."
Sorry, it had to be said.
ObSimpsons Quote (Score:4, Funny)
(from the one where Bart spots a comet headed towards springfield)
Parent
Re:A few flaws (Score:5, Interesting)
An inbound missile usually gives a few minutes (radar). With a sniper shot, the first indication is the bullet itself, since it's supersonic.
Parent
Re:A few flaws (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Parent
Re:A few flaws (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Parent
Re:A few flaws (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
great... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:great... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:great... (Score:3, Funny)
Dr. Dodd: Why is that toy on your head?
Chris Knight: Because if I wear it any place else, it chafes.
Tiring work (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Tiring work (Score:3, Funny)
General question... (Score:5, Insightful)
I've never understood the logic. Defensive weaponry helps reduce the threat of war.
Re:General question... (Score:3, Insightful)
Now, don't look at me like I'm a peacenik, I am all for the developement of weapon technology for the obvious combat advantage and the spinoff technologies. BUT, this technology is completely irrelevent to counter-terrorism. Even if a terrorist gro
Re:General question... (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Parent
Re:General question... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:General question... (Score:4, Insightful)
- William Pickering, Astronomer (1908)
"Airplanes suffers from so many technical faults that it is only a matter of time before any reasonable man realizes that they are useless!"
- Scientific American (1910)
"No flying machine will ever fly from New York to Paris."
- Orville Wright.
"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value."
- Marshal Ferdinand Foch [Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre] (circa 1911)
He was Supreme Commander of Allied forces, 1918
"Aviation is good for sport, but for the Army it is useless!"
- Marshal Ferdinand Foch
Parent
Re:General question... (Score:5, Informative)
One of those apparently sourceless quotes made all the more suspect by the attribution itself. The United States does not have a parliamentary system - the only "ministers" in the US are charged with church congregations. Second, the Department of Defense did not exist until 1947, and was not so named until 1949 - Newton D. Baker was Secretary of the War Department under Woodrow Wilson, from 1916 to 1921.
Yeah, I know - offtopic. Whatever.
Parent
Read the article (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. [iris.org.il]
They would also be useful in defending targets against rocket attacks like the ones that have occurred in Iraq.Parent
Re:General question... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:General question... (Score:4, Informative)
The next time you want to make a call on your cell phone, see your baby on an ultrasound monitor, or you need an MRI scan to detect the cancer in your body, Israel has done something nice for you.
Israel is not a money pit. It is an investment! It pays back dividends every day. On the battle field, on the farm, in the hospital, in the research lab, in the plane, at the computer, and much more. Every country of the world is being blessed by the things coming out of Israel, from agricultural innovations to medical equipment inventions to biotechnology and pharmaceuticals to telecommunications to intelligence on terrorist plans.
RTFA, for one. Israel benefits us in many ways, mostly with their brain power. We use a lot of their technology for our defense. U.S. troops were trained for urban combat by the IDF. Did you know that Saddam's Iraq used to have a nuclear reactor? It was destroyed by Israel in 1991. Ilan Ramon, the Israeli astronaut who died in the Columbia shuttle disaster, helped to destroy the reactor. The world should profusely thank Israel for sparing the world from having to deal with a North Korea in the Middle East. They did something very "nice for us."
Israel is the West's buffer zone in the war on terror. They were fighting the war for us before the Sleeping Giant realized that IslamoNazis were pulling it into a war. Israel is fighting at the front lines for America and Europe and the civilized world. They live at the front lines. Israel is the beacon of intelligence and enlightenment in a vast Islamic wasteland of medieval warlords and clan feuds. It is very much in our interest, for security reasons if for no other, to help Israel financially and otherwise.
Israel, the 100th smallest country, with less than 1/1000th of the world's population, can make claim to the following:
The cell phone was developed in Israel by Motorola, which has its largest development center in Israel.
Most of the Windows NT operating system was developed by Microsoft-Israel.
The Pentium MMX and Pentium M chip technologies were designed in Israel at Intel.
Voice mail technology was developed in Israel.
Both Microsoft and Cisco built their only R&D facilities outside the US in Israel.
The technology for AOL Instant Messenger was developed in 1996 by four young Israelis.
An Israeli company was the first to develop and install a large-scale solar-powered and fully functional electricity generating plant, in southern California's Mojave desert.
The first PC anti-virus software was developed in Israel in 1979. With more than 3,000 high-tech companies and start-ups, Israel has the highest concentration of hi-tech companies in the world (apart from the Silicon Valley).
In response to serious water shortages, Israeli engineers and agriculturalists developed a revolutionary drip irrigation system to minimize the amount of water used to grow crops.
Israel has the highest percentage in the world of home computers per capita.
Israel leads the world in the number of scientists and technicians in the workforce, with 145 per 10,000, as opposed to 85 in the U.S., over 70 in Japan, and less than 60 in Germany. With over 25% of its work force employed in technical professions. Israel places first in this category as well.
Israel has the highest ratio of university degrees to the population in the world.
Israel produces more scientific papers per capita than any other nation by a large margin - 109 per 10,000 people - as well as one of the highest per capita rates of patents filed.
In proportion to its population, Israel has the largest number of startup companies in the world. In absolute terms, Israel has the largest number of startup companies than any other country in the world, except the US (3,500 companies mostly in hi-tech).
Israel is ranked #2 in the wor
Parent
Re:General question... (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Parent
Re:General question... (Score:3, Interesting)
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
Re:General question... (Score:5, Insightful)
Right.... I don't know I personally would like to have the most updated hardware I can if I have to go into battle. You can carry sticks and stones if you want I want the most deadly equipment and as much of it as I can carry.
And to your second point.
No amount of money will help religious fever.
Remember anyone who tells you that tying a bomb to your chest and blowing up civilians will get you attended in the next world by a pack of virgins and they will give lots of money to your family is..
A Not your friend
B Probably lying on at least one count
C Certifiable
D Someone who is always happy to sacrifice someone
else
I don't know just my two bits
Parent
Re:General question... (Score:4, Insightful)
The underlying social problem is human nature! Greed, jealousy, avavice, have been problems since the dawn of man.
If I keep my "riches" you will hate me for having more than you.
If I give you some of my posessions, you will hate me for making you feel inferior.
If I destroy all my wealth and become like you you will hate me for wasting what I had.
If I help you to be like me, you will never like me until you have ground me under your boot heels.
So I may as well just live my life my way and keep you at arms length.
Q: Why do you think it is called a social ladder?
A: You look down, all you see are smiling faces, and you look up and all you see are assholes.
Parent
Re:General question... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's no big deal on its own, but as Dennis Leary once said, "We've got the bombs, okay people? Nuclear f*cking weapons!"
That changes things some.
I'm all for anything that actually improves our safety, but of
Re:General question... (Score:3, Insightful)
Imagine yo
It upsets the balance of power (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Parent
It's a tactical weapon, not strategic. (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Parent
Re:General question... (Score:5, Insightful)
We develop a laser that can shoot down ICBMs. In response potentially hostile nations (PHNs) begin spending money like a housewife on holiday to develop a weapon that (they hope) can penetrate the defense... Maybe... in the event of a war that may not happen. In the end game we've still got a laser capable of shooting down artillery, cruise missiles, and (I've not seen anyone else mention this yet) enemy aircraft. What do the PHNs have? Debt in the billions-to-trillions of dollars range that they probably can't afford that will play its part in collapsing their economy.
The best weapons platform you'll ever develop is the one that scares your enemy so much he spends himself into oblivion to counteract it. At the end of the day he's gone, and you haven't really had to do anything. It worked for Reagan with Star Wars, and by the sound of things it might just work again.
Parent
Uh Huh (Score:5, Funny)
Crispin
Re:Uh Huh (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Uh Huh (Score:5, Interesting)
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) [wikipedia.org].
Crispin
Parent
this is silly (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Parent
videos (Score:5, Informative)
WMP or QT are availabe.
Oh great.. (Score:5, Funny)
Dates. (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, by the way: FIRE THE FEAKIN LASER!!!
Domestic Use Soon? (Score:5, Interesting)
They will be touted as the perfect solution to a problem with heretofore only imperfect solutions [ceip.org] (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.
Re:Domestic Use Soon? (Score:5, Insightful)
It won't. This isn't a "missile defense system" per se, it is a tactical battefield weapon designed for force protection. To be used to defend troops and installations against short range tactical weapons like rockets, mortars, cruise missiles, etc. Not of much use in the continental US.
However, these lasers, and especially the larger, immobile THEL version, are perfect for Israel. Israeli communities and the IDF are constantly being harrassed by hit and run Katushka rocket, mortar, and guided missile threats from HAMAS and other Pal terrorists in the Territories, and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.
Parent
Invisible beams? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Invisible beams? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Invisible beams? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Mirrors? (Score:3, Insightful)
Accuracy (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
This is the first real laser weapon (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
I wonder... (Score:3, Funny)
As seen by Mastercard.... (Score:4, Funny)
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.
Re:wow (Score:5, Funny)
In the end the guy with the explosive beatup mercedes still wins.
Parent
Re:wow (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Parent
Re:wow (Score:3, Insightful)
You need different defense systems for different offensive systems.
This is for use againt missiles, mortar shells, and the like.
Re:Interesting quote from a Reuters article (Score:5, Funny)
They were rattlesnakes, and after being lightly fried, they were delicious. Then they were eliminated some time later.
Parent