Comments on: Laser Blaster Gunships Closer to Flight Test

By: Camp

Camp — Wed, 21 May 2008 18:47:43 +0000

For those who are curious…
http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1221397
“Parts of the COIL
1. Singlet delta oxygen generator (SOG)
The generator is composed of a singlet-delta oxygen energy vehicle which is excited molecules from the aqueus combination of (watch out, boys and girls, do not try this at home or your now bleached hair will also explode!) potassium hydroxide and peroxide — basic hydrogen peroside (BHF), and mixed with gas-phase chlorine (and do not put this in your swimming pools, you would-be Buster Crabbs, and Esther Williams.) This is a tremendous exothermic reaction, heating up the soup, and leaving only a residue of potassium chloride, (probably not a good table salt.) Now, here is where the iodine comes in, it is injected into the air flow upstream of the supersonic nozzle to make the lasing action possible because oxygen has too much stability in this generator. The dissociation of the iodine molecules into atoms allows rapid transfer of energy. But, there are still power losses that further research seeks to remedy utilizing direct injection of iodine atoms.
2. Supersonic Nozzle
The purpose of the supersonic nozzle is to reduce the temperature in the laser cavity by means of supersonic expansion. Typical gas temperatures from chemical reactions in the COIL reach 180 degrees, Kelvin and is the source of potential inefficiencies.
3. The laser cavity
This is the place where the reaction takes place using little over 1 percent of iodine is added to the oxygen. The passing excited iodine atoms through the cavity become stimulated — giving the lasing results.”

By: Jeff M

Jeff M — Wed, 21 May 2008 17:38:31 +0000

Chemicals: Deuterium and Fluoride, not so extremely toxic, the fluoride is pretty toxic, but it’s the same stuff they put in the water, the nitrogen trifluoride form they use is sortof like chlorine, same stuff you sanitize your pool with, irritates the lungs and stuff, I’d rather have a canister of nitrogen trifluoride drop on my house than a bomb though, so the argument that it’s unsafe carrying it over a city is not so convincing to me. The deuterium is not toxic at all, it is not radioactive, you already have deuterium in your body from natural sources. Even inhaling the pure deuterium gas would not have a significant effect.
Chemical lasers are at least 10 times more powerful than solid state lasers (more like 20 or 30 currently), that is mainly due to their ability to expel the ultra-hot lasing medium after each shot. Sure you could make a super powerful solid state laser but it would melt after half a second, at least with the current state of things. That is the key to creating powerful solid state lasers is cooling ability. Right now they are studying two approaches, one is a flat disk lasing medium, which creates a very wide beam (think width of the duct fan in the JSF) and condenses it down into a potent beam, the other approaches uses a long fiber optic lasing medium. Last I heard they had a solid state laser at 50kw, and the goal for practical applications is 100kw, which should be reached in the next few years, it is not such a huge technical hurdle to get there, and expect those solid state lasers to be 500kw in a decade or two. There is an experimental solid state laser mountain to a humvee used to burn roadside bombs but it is only a few kw, not enough for offensive operations.
I am curious though how well these lasers work on humans targets. Burning up bombs and heavy weapons makes sense, but I’m curious what happens when you shoot a human target. If it causes serious burns and leaves the victim in pain to die minutes later, I think it would be too inhumane to use lasers on humans. They would need to “explode” whatever they shoot at, otherwise it wouldn’t be good.

By: Ed

Ed — Wed, 21 May 2008 14:28:35 +0000

To fully understand the potential and drawbacks of lasers as weapons, you must first understand the medium itself. Lasers offer the single most accurate line of sight potential available. Since the point does not follow the limitations of ballistics due to gravity, the weapons follows a straight path.
First off this leads to the potential usage from direct fire weaponry. From a ground component perspective, this means that range will be limited to the horizon, and that means the higher you or the target is, the longer the range can be to score a hit.
This does not mean that it has an infinite range. The ranges are finite, light, even amplified as is the case with a laser, does scatter, and that means that a laser will lose its effectiveness after a certain distance. Proof of this can be seen easily, just pull out your standard red dot laser pointer and then as a comparison try the green dot laser pointers and note the large difference in distances the pointer is capable of reaching.
In simple terms this means that Air Defense and Air Attack roles will automatically gain the most benefit from this in a weaponized form. Currently the technology for a weaponized laser is large, bulky, requires massive amounts of power and hazardous chemicals to be able to produce a damaging beam at any acceptable range. This explains easily why the systems we are seeing are housed in 747s and C-130s. The C-130 does represent a leap in capability as the C-130 is much smaller than a 747.
However, it has been tested in smaller forms. A modified Avenger has been fitted with a laser and was succesfully tested against simulated unexploded ordnance and also a missile air frame, showing a possible air to air role.
The technology is shrinking and gaining more capability, but we are still at least a Generation away from anything small enough for shoulder fired weapon that a single rifle man can carry effectively into battle.
I think we should take this with a serious look at how far technology has come that we now are even thinking of an Air to Ground capability for this in a weaponized form.

By: Tim

Tim — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:36:16 +0000

Like everything, there’s a risk of failure and destruction. This is a step toward a new era of weaponry and hopefully it never gets into the wrong hands. I see potential for a really cool stelth fighter/bomber whose bombs make little to no noise– why not?
Get some!

By: murc

murc — Tue, 20 May 2008 22:17:13 +0000

congrats to boeing on the ground test firing.
BTW, whatever happened to the 747 ABL?
Are they EVER going to fire that thing at a target in the sky?!
FYI, I wish they would just stop spending money on chemical lasers…and spend all that money on solid state lasers, everyone with half a brain knows that THATS the future…not chem lasers.

By: Lewis

Lewis — Tue, 20 May 2008 19:59:19 +0000

I fail to see the usefulness of this. Of course these systems are going to be developed but their value is only for a limited time since by their very nature a ground based laser system would be much more powerful. Once the technology is reverse engineered or becomes common place I expect that these Gunships will be shot out of the sky with the very same type of laser that they are using.

By: Camp

Camp — Tue, 20 May 2008 17:45:07 +0000

James MacAvoy said, “Camp seems to believe that the C130 carrying the laser will be flying at treetop level. double Duh!“
Where did I say, it would be “flying at treetop level”?
This aircraft (supposedly) will fly at an altitude around 10,000ft. with a range of 5 miles. There are these things called SAMs & Air-to-Air missiles, you know.
“How It Works: The Flying Laser Cannon“
http://www.popsci.com/military-aviation-space/article/2008–03/how-it-works-airborne-laser-cannon
Smith said,“let me point out that laser technology has progressed far beyond the liquid chemical laser”. If that were the case, wouldn’t they be putting one on a C-130?
My point is this… When lasers no longer need toxic chemicals (or at least in minute quantity), then they will become much more practical over a battlefield & people. Until then, and if used, they’ll have to have a lot of restrictions to their flight & location. It’s also a valid question to ask, what is the risk assessment during a catastrophic failure.
Heck. Countries are gearing up to ban Cluster Bombs. How hard would it be to demagogue tanks of toxic chemicals, for a laser, flying over neighborhoods & citizens. Think about all the crap Israel would catch, if they started flying one over the West Bank.… You’d never stop hearing about it.
“Cluster Bomb Ban Debated in Dublin” 19 May 2008
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/news/2008/05/mil-080519-voa11.htm
.
.
.
On a side note.…
“German army officers allow top Taliban commander to escape … because they are not allowed to use lethal force“
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1020488/German-army-officers-allow-Taliban-commander-escape–allowed-use-lethal-force.html
“If the German soldiers had opened fire they could have ended up on a murder charge.“
“The Taliban commander was known as the Bagh-lan Bomber after masterminding an attack last year in Baghlan province in which 79 people died.“
“A German defence ministry official said the incident would not change Berlin’s policy of the “principle of proportionality”. He added: “A fugitive like the Baghlan bomber is not an aggressor and should not be shot unless in self-defence.””

By: James MacAvoy

James MacAvoy — Tue, 20 May 2008 15:53:57 +0000

Gee, Vstress, with our military deployed and fighting the enemy in several countries under a variety of conditions, you can’t think of even ONE target a laser might take out? You served in the military, right?

By: James MacAvoy

James MacAvoy — Tue, 20 May 2008 15:47:05 +0000

To address those who question the C130 as a firing platform for this new laser: Well, it is a new system that hasn’t been brought down to a size small enough to fit in a smaller aircraft. Duh. The chemicals that make up the laser possibly pose a danger for the crew, so the C130 gives the crew plenty of room to stay out of its way. Duh. The C130 continually proves to be an excellent firing platform, with over 40 years of experience, hardly ready for the scrapyard. Camp seems to believe that the C130 carrying the laser will be flying at treetop level. double Duh! Let’s give Boeing a chance to work the bugs out, absorb and rectify whatever problems they encounter, and try to act like you have seen the military bring out new technology before.

By: Vstress

Vstress — Tue, 20 May 2008 15:16:34 +0000

I seem to have missed what the intended target is…