Pentagon stays the course with laser weapon

msnbc.msn.com ^ | March 22, 2006 | Jeremy Singer

[Terabitten]

I wonder what they have that isn't being made public.

I just want to know why so many of my friends are dead in Iraq from IEDs.

We can pour billions into an airborne laser system of dubious value, but we can't figure out how to stop an illiterate jihadist with a garage door opener.

[Paul Ross]

I agree, the countermeasures are just pure fiction at this point. The same Anti-SDI drivel that was dreamed-up off the cuff by the folks at the Federation of American Scientists who then gave their talking-point-spiels to Newsleak, Useless News & World Distort, and Slime Magazine...

Furthermore, tand more to the point I was lampooning, the notion that an effective countermeasure would also be CHEAP is just laughable.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

Nothing involving ballistic missiles is "cheap."

[dighton]

One engineer confronted with this notion at a conference said, “We can actually simulate that over at the ice rink. Have an iceskater do a spin, and I'll shoot her with a 12-gauge.”

Heaven help us, they gave an engineering degree to Tanya Harding.

[Paul Ross]

I just want to know why so many of my friends are dead in Iraq from IEDs.

The fact is because we haven't deployed troop vehicles which are resistant. Although the South Africans and Israelis already have designs which would meet the need.

Our forces are geared for open straight up warfare. Not guerilla insurgencies. Indeed, as Rummy says, we went to war with the arsenal we had. Not quite apt to this particular fight if we wanted zero casualties.

We did try to jam them for awhile, and likely still do, but the fact is that we haven't been dealing with

"illiterate jihadist(s) with a garage door opener. And they have been responding to these efforts and staying ahead of them.

We have been dealing with an intelligent and educated adversary. Who may be in contact with the military services of Syria, Iran and/or even China.

And he has been diffusing the relevant portions of his knowledge to the rest of the scum. Magnifying his impact.

[Terabitten]

The fact is because we haven't deployed troop vehicles which are resistant. Although the South Africans and Israelis already have designs which would meet the need.

That's a symptom. The real reason is because no one in DC cares about the grunts. It's not sexy to come up with better weapons and better protection for the infantryman - but it's way sexy to have airborne lasers to shoot missiles out of the sky. That's why we'll spend a gazillion dollars on the sexy stuff, but next to nothing for the guys who do the bleeding and the dying.

Remember, the cool stuff makes the Discovery Channel, but the lowly infantryman makes history.

[longtermmemmory]

The left will say it can never work and then immediatly call for proliferation control.

The clintons will try and sell this tech to china.

[Paul Ross]

Thought you might like this photo:

The caption on the placard that President Reagan holds reads: SDI could ruin a nuclear bomb's whole day.

I don't know who originated it, but this sounds like vintage Cap Weinberger, who passed away today, seated next to him.

[Paul Ross]

Some still do. But there could indeed be a real divide.

[Robert A Cook PE]

THEL is the Ground-based precursor of this system: It's more practical, more effective, more power/bigger beam (but has to intercept the inbound rockets as they fall towards a high-value target!) ...

Ground-based also has more fuel, bigger tanks than are simpler to reload for a second, third, or fourth missile, easier to support and build.

Limit here is that you have to already be airborne to hit the missile as it's climbing up: if you're that close then the enemy wouldn't shoot. He'd wait until your patrol area was extended or you went further away, then pull the truck-mounted missiles out of hiding and shoot.

If you can spot the trucks or missile launchers, take them out with regular (cheaper) air-to-ground missiles. We couldn't find launchers before, and can't find them now in Iraq when they're buried or in garages and buildings.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Atmospheric distortion is much less of a problem in real life: A missile flying in that is being targetted, unless it's aimed directly AT the laser, AND the laser isn't moving (an advantage of an air or ship-based system), is going to always be "sweeping" sideways to track and hit the missile.

So, the laser beam is constantly going through "fresh" un-heated air, not hot distorted air. Only on a firing range where the target is kept in one place, and the laser is kept in one place, is air distortion a significant problem.