[GEC]

Title seems bogus to me, but this could be a huge advantage for Special Forces.

It's nice to have a Death Star available when you need it.

10 mile range is pretty cool too.

[BenLurkin]

Very cool!

This is cool too . . .

[TChris]

The author of this article seems to misunderstand the very nature of war. Wars are won by breaking the enemy's will to fight. Quickly disabling some of his weapons is not the same thing.

The current war is chock full of examples. The terrorists fighting in Iraq don't have any high-tech stuff against which the ATL would be of much use. To our enemies there, having an overwhelming disadvantage in might, technology and manpower is still not reason enough to give up.

"Shock and awe" still wins wars where antiseptic surgical precision will not. Most conceivable fights in the future will still need boots on the ground.

The ATL will be a very nice tool in the arsenal, but I'm not holding my breath for any conflicts to be "over in minutes".

[orionblamblam]

Gotta be a little careful with scaling it up, though.

[g_suvorov]

I see only one problem here; lasers have to be trained constantly on a target to take effect. Won't that leave the C-130 a juicy target for anyone with a SAM?

[jwh_Denver]

LR

[MD_Willington_1976]

I like the "dazzle them like deer in the headlights" lazer pointer option, they stand around in a glazed over daze while a 500lb bomb lands smack on top of them...

[jbwbubba]

But we can only use it over large well known tourist attractions like in Independence Day.

Set Phasers to Extra-Crispy.

[marvlus]

For some reason, I'm thinking of the movie "Mars Attacks".

[neverdem]

bfl

[R. Scott]

Just a bit of a stretch. It will take out weapons systems – but if their fuel or ammo cooks off there will be collateral damage.

[A CA Guy]

We already have a 25 mile range on the Yoko Ono weapon. :)

[yarddog]

I have been seeing a C130 flying around doing odd manueuvers, probably flying a rough circle as it returns from the same direction several times.

The only thing unusual is they are usually seen at dusk instead of daytime.

[mseltzer]

Any thoughts on whether this would have an application in targeting hardened, underground facilities?

[adorno]

The U.S. military has been developing a gunship that could literally obliterate enemy ground targets with a laser beam.

Inevitably, any weapon the U.S. designs eventually ends up in enemy hands. Especially if we share the technology with our supposed allies who end up passing that technology on to our enemies.

But, if it's not passed on that way, their spies and our enemy within will see to it that the enemy gets the technology (like Bill Clinton passed traded our missile technology for campaing contributions). We do after all have people in the U.S. who believe that we have no business being a superpower and supposedly controlling the rest of the world.

[fso301]

a laser weapon mounted on a C-130H air transport that could destroy any weapon system without collateral damage.

No collateral damage can occur only if there was no fuel or ordinance aboard but then, what's the point in destroying it?

[RichInOC]

Couldn't they have called it Zap On Target?

[Tinman73]

Let's try it on the junk next to roadways in Iraq to explode IED's (hopefully while they are building them )

[DocRock]

"ABL was meant to mount a megawatt-class chemical laser on a Boeing 747-400 freighter aircraft."

Now the left can scream that we are using banned Chemical Weapons. I'll just smile.

[brooklin]

Have you seen this yet?

[darth]

This means total air superiority in any conflict with a well-armed foe. It also means we can blind the enemy at great ranges. Watch for the anti-war weenies to argue that while its OK to blow the enemy's guts out, burn him to death, or bury him alive, lasing his retinas is unfair.