Airborne Laser Kicks Missile Ass [Weapons]

Hmm, I'm sure I could make a nice animation of me shooting down a missile with my Chinese repeating crossbow.

It can hunt down and kill evil-doer's missiles from amazing distances

Yeh if it is in the air at the time flying in the right direction.

Isn't there anything better to spend money on?

I gots to get me one of those!

don't give the comuters in L.A. any ideas for options on their cars.

Having worked on laser defense systems in the early 70's, I'd like to see more about this as it becomes available.

laser defense systems .

Ain't that just dark glasses?

Been following this and other US laser system developments for a while. Here is some more info from a reliable military source (with writers that don't write like a 16 year old kid) <cringe>.

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003704.html

Estimated $1.5 billion per plane. What a bargain. I still prefer the ground based systems (we just don't have the capability for scaling up the power and miniaturising the current technology). Perhaps a new way of thinking is necessary . Oh well, I guess I will just have to wait and see what developments occur in future.

For more information read one of the latest Dale Brown books, you will get more up to date and realistic information than reading the Gizmodo and Sci Fi Tech sites <cringe> .

Thanks for the article. I wonder if the chemical laser is the same as the one that I was involved with years ago. It seems not since the article said that it would be safe for the Japanese to have the planes based there.

That's one way to defend yourself I guess. Maybe a welder's helmet would be better.

Whether it works well or not right now, I would rather see the government spend more money on defense systems like this than dump more resources into redundant and (in my humble opinion) useless govt. agencies like "Dept. of Homeland Security". As I told a fellow college student back in '02, we already had an agency whose job that was...the FBI, and what makes anyone think (especially in hindsight) that a new beuarocracy will do any better of a job? Besides, just because the cold war isn't on the front page anymore and the USSR doesn't exist doesn't mean that we should just forget that we aren't the only country out there with the capability of lobbing missiles halfway around the world. On this topic, I think any defense is better than none and worthwhile.

Do you think you are more likely to get killed by a missile, a terrorist bomb or an auto accident?

An auto accident, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't like a little protection from the other two. I think it's easier to protect against missiles than terrorists, I won't insult you by feeblishly explaining why. It is all a matter of perception, just because we don't have people threatening us with missiles right now doesn't mean that they won't in the future, why not start planning now for that possibility (it has happened before...). I understand your point of how we are more likely to die, but there are certain things in life that are just inherrantly dangerous--like crossing the street. I don't want the govt to step in and try to "protect" me in every aspect of my life, that never seems to turn out too well for the "protected". I do however, like the idea that they could possibly protect us against the possible weapons of the next "World War".

I think it's easier to protect against missiles than terrorists.

Maybe, but that's crazy logic!

Hey it's reall easy to protect against killer whales...but that doesn't mean you should put your money there....

Although I can sell you a nice KrisDel^TM Killer whale repelling T shirt for $150!

Del

The fact of the matter is that nobotdy has ever threatened the US with the use of Killer Whales...I do remember this country though...I'm just saying that I don't have a problem with the govt. spending money to try to protect us from missiles. War keeps getting more and more impersonal, where we fire missiles from bombers that are hundreds of miles away, pilots don't even have to be able to see the targets...is it that far fetched that we might need missile (ICBM, SLBM, cruise)defense? My problem with spending money on "terrorist protection" is that it isn't done well. I'm not saying we shouldn't spend money on anti-terrorism, but maybe we could spend it more wisely than we do. The govt. spends millions if not billions each year on truly useless stuff, but then again I'm sure it is useful to someone. I also think this technology is a step in a direction that may prove to be usefull in other technological facets, who knows...? You're obviously entitled to your opinion--as am I--and as I said before, I can see your point. I'm just not ready to berate the govt. for this particular spending spree...

meow

Could you visit the UK and tell our leaders that plans for new ID cards are utter ******. For some reason, the Muppet's think this will make us all safer. Yeah, right, so I can pick one up for £50 in Denmark like I currently do a passport. Failing that I could just board a bus in Calais and just walk right on in. ( Handy tip for tourists - if you forget your passport, just land in France, they'll help ya get here.). Rest assured though, we monitor all mobile phone calls - so they can be sold for advertising ! Shh. don't tell anyone.

UK is watching you ! ( albeit with fuzzy film that is not monitored live, and a Cray would strugle to make sense of).

It seems like another example of re-inventing a wheel that already works as well as it can. It never ceases ot amaze me to see how govt. can take an idea that is already in place, call it something else and tell us all how it will somehow make our lives all that easier and safer...As for the cameras...that sounds kind of like a precursor to the system used in "Minority Report" starring everyone's favorite Scientologist!

I think we're on the same wavelength Jim - some of this crap is just there to make us 'feel' safer. It does chuff all to prevent crime of any sort. In that context I'm with you on spending money on hard ordnance. This isn't the 20'th Century. The thing thing that disturbs me is innocent people being logged in a computer as 'sus'. The UK has it's fair share of innocent victims - people shot just because they looked wrong, or were in the 'wrong place at the wrong time'. Maybe this is the price of 21st Century life and democracy. I don't know, but it scares the **** out of me. We live in strange times. Like it or not, these kind of systems exist and get used.

Agreed.

"Do you think you are more likely to get killed by a missile, a terrorist bomb or an auto accident?"

Yes but how many people die from each...

If the statistics apply to 'you' they also apply to everyone...

So

Yes but how many people die from each...

Auto accident...most.

Terrorism...next

Missile fewest.

Even if you average it out to include all the nuclear wepons ever used...it's still auto accidents on top.

I'd be willing to bet there are a few Iraqui's that would dissagree with you...it is largely a matter of perspective. In the US we have been "fortunate" enough to kill each other as opposed to having a foreign power shoot missiles at us. If you ask Japan how they felt when North Korea shot a missile over their country a couple years back, I'm sure that they would opt for the luxury of a $1.5billion plane that could possibly help defend them against such an agressive act. The US didn't take terrorism seriously (and I'd argue that we still don't in a lot of ways) until 9/11, do we want to wait until we have someone shooting missiles at us before we decide it would be worthwhile being able to shoot them down? Missiles may not kill more people than cars in the US, but they do have the potential to do far more damage. With the military spread so thinly and our foreign policy ticking off pretty much every other country in the world, it could just be a matter of time before we are at a "world war" with the rest of the world (or a large enough part of it that we couldn't win).

Some people have this idea that we are invincible, we are not (a lesson from 9/11). We also don't have the resources that we once did, do you remember the "shock and awe campaign" where we exhausted our entire arsenal of conventional cruise missiles in 3 DAYS!?! What kind of a super power can use all their missiles up in 3 days? I'm no conspiracy theorist, but if a country like China or North Korea wanted to attack us...they could. And to anyone who would argue that China is our ally, need I remind you that US soldiers fought against Chinese soldiers in the Korean War...? Now I'm ranting...sorry, I get carried away sometimes. Just remember, my quote reflects the way I actually feel...I could be wrong.

You digress for my original point which was merely ...'because it's easy' isn't a good reason.

But ...if you want to discus military campaigns.

Yes the Korean war..how long did that last? Yet it ended up with a border pretty much where it started !

Iraq's non existent weapons of mass destruction....

'Shock and awe' ..what PR idiot thought up that ridiculous name? Which is guaranteed to inflame terrorists and civilians who died in the attacks...which didn't actually kill Saddam anyhow, but destroyed infrastructure which was needed after the war...

Another fine mess.