DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Lasers and Ray Guns » Red Skies at Night, Ray Guns’ Delight?

Red Skies at Night, Ray Guns’ Delight?

Let’s say you’re an Air Force bigwig. You need to decide whether to invest in some shiny new directed energy weapon. Sure, “attack at the speed of light” sounds mighty good, but will the weapon actually work under the conditions youre interested in, or will it run into some obstacle like, the atmosphere?

ATLC-130-sunset.jpgYou can’t just test-fire a mockup because nothing similar exists yet, and, more importantly, because these things don’t really scale very neatly. The experiences of other DE programs have got you worried.

Well, now there’s a computer model to help you predict just how a high-energy laser (HEL) weapon will behave under real conditions. The High Energy Laser End-to-End Operational Simulation (HELEEOS), described in this upcoming paper, is the outcome of a multi-year, joint effort to create such a planning tool for use throughout the DOD and the military.

Why is this so important? Well, laser physics is not exactly an area in which most high-level decision-makers have a lot of technical intuition. And with all the different effects that go into the performance of a laser weapon from those inside the laser and its companion optical systems, to the bewildering menagerie of phenomena known collectively as “atmospheric effects,” to beam-target interaction effects it’s even hard for the pros to answer such a basic question as “how much range will we gain if we double the laser power?”

The potential for poor decision-making is apparent in the history of the Airborne Laser program. As long ago as 2004, a thorough (and not-unsympathetic) report by the American Physical Society concluded that the ABLs lethal range would be so short that intercepting an ICBM launched from central Iran, for example, could only be accomplished, at best, from one small area in southwestern Turkmenistan. Yet the program still survives.

In fact, the paper tacitly admits that all is not well within the HEL weapons community, stating that one of the primary purposes of HELEEOS is “the establishment of trust among military leaders.”

So, what does this computer program do? Basically, for a set of laser parameters (size, power, wavelength) and engagement geometry (distance from source to target, altitudes and velocities of source and target, and so on), HELEEOS estimates how long the laser would need to dwell on the target in order to achieve a certain probability of kill if a kill is even possible.

But there’s more and this is where HELEEOS gets really cool. In order to model the effect of the atmosphere, the simulation taps into a massive database of worldwide climate data and into detailed models of atmospheric phenomena. This lets the user tailor the simulation of the weapon’s performance to a particular location and time of year, and even to different weather conditions so you’ll know whether your new toy will work not just at Kirtland Air Force Base, but on a muggy night in Pyongyang or a dusty day in Kuwait.

(Of course, there’s a catch to this: the climate data is complete only for those corners of the world where the US military has friends so, for example, there’s an inconvenient Iran-shaped blank on the map.)

Now, here’s this week’s $64,000 question: will this new “investment strategy tool,” as the paper describes it, really close the realism-deficit in HEL planning? It might; on the other hand, it might just give any unscrupulous folks a powerful tool for figuring out just which figures they need to fudge. I’ve argued elsewhere that technology, however useful, will not solve the problem of insurgency warfare alone; the same can be said for the problem of poor acquisition practices.

– Haninah Levine

Share |

April 7th, 2006 | Lasers and Ray Guns, Money Money Money, Training and Sims | 31298 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/04/07/red-skies-at-night-ray-guns-delight/Red+Skies+at+Night%2C+Ray+Guns%27+Delight%3F2006-04-07+12%3A33%3A00matthew_tompkins You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Free Press in Kurdistan, Final Act | How AT&T Helped the NSA Snoop » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. elizzar says:
    April 7, 2006 at 10:31 am

    hi, very interesting. i guess my question would be, regardless of the use of this simulation, is it going to be cost-effective any time soon to implement and deploy such technology? from what i’ve read a better missile defence system would be provided by the naval one (aegis ships / missles etc?), but this isn’t ‘cool’ sound enough, hence tests are cut etc, talk is of airborne lasers and widely distributed gorund-based interceptors. surely the naval system bypasses a lot of these issues (gives mobility, avoids terrotorial complaints etc).

    Reply
  2. TrustButVerify says:
    April 7, 2006 at 11:06 am

    Could it be that the naval environment isn’t friendly to good DE weapons performance? I’m thinking of spray, fog, storms, all that business. Of course, that’s just an undereducated guess. Seems to me you’d have a good point, otherwise.

    Reply
  3. Haninah says:
    April 9, 2006 at 11:45 am

    @John:
    The point I was making is not that shooting down a missile from Turkmenistan isn’t good enough; it’s that our weapon is as good as useless if Turkmenistan decides not to let us use their airspace, or the Iranians decide to launch from a slightly less covenient position, or our airplane happens to be slightly out of that one sweet spot at the very moment when the missile goes up and the two-minute window is available, or the weather that day happens to be wrong…

    Reply
  4. Charles says:
    April 9, 2006 at 12:40 pm

    On the same note, supporting technologies and systems which lose much of their “competitive advantage” is rather wasteful. Just as nobody builds steam engines for vehicles today, you drop what isn’t so good and support the systems with the most potential.
    The simulator is an important step for laser physics; and it’s utility is not limited to the ABL program. It’s possible that ABL would work better at higher altitudes, due to lower gas particle concentrations.

    Reply
  5. noldsoulse says:
    May 12, 2007 at 7:31 pm

    how are you
    prompt who for you was engaged in a design ? I got to you from a search engine through a site
    live cam lesbian to fasts of vstrec
    h’ in ether if I to whom both may need or I in icq

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
    • And, the Vertical Landing
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
    • JFCOM’s JOE Whacks Defense Industry
    • New F-35B Hover Video
    • China’s Shipbuilding in a Regional Context
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
    Recent Comments
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      Every person posting here has made good points,...
      eyes_up
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
      Re: LAAR–just expand the UAV programs
      bjackson
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Good Morning Folks, LM to DoD: ” Stick...
      Byron Skinner
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
      As an European living in Germany I would have love to see...
      fightingirish
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Even if you reduced the buy to zero you’d still be...
      Blight
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Gees the price is on the roof already. Maybe we just...
      roland
    • Ft. Irwin, Where You At?
      I was the driver for BoB Gaygos, B Co 6/31st Commander....
      Ricky houltzhouser
    • Ft. Irwin, Where You At?
      Luis, I was Captain Gaydos, driver Sgt. Houltzhouser in...
      Ricky Houltzhouser
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
      If you really want to win the war permanently, it will...
      steven
    • Cover Your Computer Mics and WebCams
      Another question, how would I physically obstruct the...
      Curious
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage